Isn't California's primary move from June to Feb a great sign for democrats?

Question

Details:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_el_pr/california_primary

Oh and please don't say anything about Arnold being a republican, as I think he's recovered from that affliction now! lol!

Answer 1

It is a great move for California. The state with the highest population should have a choice in choosing its parties nominee.
There are republicans in California and they will have a voice in choosing their nominee too.

I for a national primary, that way every state has a say.

Answer 2

Maybe not for either party!

Other states are moving primaries up so that Iowa and New Hampshire are not so "all important."

But they have accomplished just the opposite.

The primaries used to take four to six months, and give candidates time to grow and become known - or screw up. Now, whoever has the most money and organization EARLY and wins these two states will probably just sweep the 20 or so primaries scheduled for the next month. There can only be two or three candidates with that much money and organization, and the "front-loaded" process will discourage others from getting into the race. Plus, what are the nominees to do in the four to six months after they are selected and the time of the conventions, not to mention the general campaign?

Where there used to be a contest or two every week for a few months, now it's just three races - Iowa, Hew Hampshire, and "everything else," with Nevada and South Carolina in there somewhere. There is NO way the candidates will be able to do the "retail campaigning" in person as they used to.

I think it's a bad idea for the American electorate!

Answer 3

Why is that suppose to be such a great move, or sign. Sounds to me like its going to cost extra money, then again I guess we can always just tax people more to pay for it. Wow so if all those states move to that date how important will it be that California moved it to that date, not very important at all. I see a day when half the states in the union will hold their primaries on Feb 5, and then the great state of California will seek to move theirs to January to become once again a state on the front of the primary movement. Whatever just a waste of 60-90 million dollars.

Answer 4

If you think being a democrat is good for America- which I do not unless you want to live in a socialist country. No the primary will not help or hurt either democrat or republican. Nor will it help them. It just gives the state of Calif. more say in the outcome of the primaries. The problem with democrats is they are simplistic and look at the world the way a kitten looks at a ball of string- no brains and helpless.

Answer 5

This is really a bad thing for both parties. People will get so feed up with the mud slinging so early, that when the election comes around nobody will remember why they are voting for the person they want.

The only reason that Ca wanted to move their primary up was for the money. Since so much money is donated from members of that state, they wanted more advertising money to be spent in the state.

This will only turn into a popularity contest for name only, not for qualification.

Answer 6

It's a slap in the face to politicians with smaller amounts of money who can't afford to spread their names to all the states at once. Before, nominees who didn't have much chance of winning the nomination at least had a chance for the whole country to hear their message, get a rallying cry of some sort and force the bigger politicians that get the nomination to pick up their message and run with it to get things accomplished.

This is all a ploy to make certain no one else has a chance to oppose people like Hillary Clinton. Which is ironic, considering that if they had done this for the 1992 elections, Bill Clinton would never have been able to have time to mount his support and get the nomination himself.

Answer 7

If there's any advantage to having early primaries, then both parties and all states will make moves to January and February. What then will be the advantage? It'll just be that much longer we'll have to watch and hear all those damn political advertisements.

Answer 8

Considering that almsot every state in the union is changing to Feb, I don't think it makes much difference. By election time, I think th ewhole country will be doing it on the same day.

Answer 9

I think it's great for Republicans. This means that the super liberal Californians will make sure a super lib makes it through the primary. Which means more people in the center will vote Republican. Thanks Arnold!

Answer 10

Ca moved their widespread as much as be greater important interior the technique. looks like some people indexed under are falling for the exchange slogans being spouted off persistently back, lol. lots of folk are paying for into this thought-approximately exchange devoid of thinking the effect of this variation. Do you people even comprehend basically how some distance left liberal Obama and Clinton and Edwards are???? Is the exchange you want larger taxes and open borders???? Clinton has already pronounced she could notably lots improve the tax expenditures on actual all of us. The exchange we want is farther to the mind-blowing, not the left. people want to declare that Bush replaced into this some distance precise republican extremists. Ha ha ha. Bush replaced into greater left on relatives themes and spending then maximum dems obtainable. He replaced into left on open borders. He replaced into left on gvt borrowing and increasing notably lots all the products of gvt and gvt courses. We dont want greater exchange to the left. we want gvt to start slashing those ridiculous bloated and crimson meat laced courses and charges so as that we are able to diminish taxes much greater and stimulate the financial equipment. We dont want a president that doesnt take terrorism heavily. We dont want a president which will basically invite each and every unlawful to return and stay and leech off the U. S. taxpayer. We dont want a democrat. we want a real conservative republican this is fiscally in charge. do you be responsive to how screwed our financial equipment would be if a liberal dem gets in with a lib congress and starts off trekking the taxes on all of us, esp companies and homeowners with larger capital features taxes?