Comments on: Senate Rules Committee Hearing on Presidential Primary Timing Bill http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:34:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=9351 By: Darryl W. Perry http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-124359 Darryl W. Perry Fri, 21 Sep 2007 04:28:04 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/#comment-124359 Why can't the Republicrats just use conventions the same way the "minor" parties do; without using tax-payer funded primaries? Why can’t the Republicrats just use conventions the same way the “minor” parties do; without using tax-payer funded primaries?

]]> By: Tom Yager http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-124154 Tom Yager Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:14:24 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/#comment-124154 The "tradition" of Iowa going first didn't start until 1972 and not all traditions are good ideas anyway. Only 21% of Americans want Iowa to always go first and 22% want New Hampshire to always go first. The media frenzy surrounding Iowa and New Hampshire gives these states vastly disproportionate power. Candidates who do not finish in the top three or perrform poorly in the media's "expectations game" are effectively crossed off the ballot in states that hold their primaries later. The later a state has its primary, the more its voters are disenfranchised. The “tradition” of Iowa going first didn’t start until 1972 and not all traditions are good ideas anyway. Only 21% of Americans want Iowa to always go first and 22% want New Hampshire to always go first.

The media frenzy surrounding Iowa and New Hampshire gives these states vastly disproportionate power. Candidates who do not finish in the top three or perrform poorly in the media’s “expectations game” are effectively crossed off the ballot in states that hold their primaries later. The later a state has its primary, the more its voters are disenfranchised.

]]> By: Michael http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-123983 Michael Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:55:19 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/#comment-123983 It's not afraid or offending. It's recognizing the American political tradition of having Iowa and New Hampshire go first!! It’s not afraid or offending. It’s recognizing the American political tradition of having Iowa and New Hampshire go first!!

]]> By: Tom Yager http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-123423 Tom Yager Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:25:43 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/09/19/senate-rules-committee-hearing-on-presidential-primary-timing-bill/#comment-123423 S1905 is a bad bill. It enshrines Iowa and New Hampshire's self-appointed stranglehold on the nomination process in Federal law. Why is everyone so afraid of offending these two states? S1905 is a bad bill. It enshrines Iowa and New Hampshire’s self-appointed stranglehold on the nomination process in Federal law. Why is everyone so afraid of offending these two states?

]]>