2007-09-12 06:08:05 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
If we did, we might as well have them all on the same day and stop this bickering over who is first.
2007-09-12 06:30:54 · answer #1 · answered by blindcuriosity 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It seems like everyone wants to be a deciding factor in the primaries. Winning Iowa and New Hampshire are not as important now as they once were. A lot can happen between February and November.
2007-09-12 06:18:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No the argument over who would be first would never end.
I would like to see all of the primaries held on the same day.
That way no one state would be overly influential in deciding who we get to vote for as President.
2007-09-12 06:12:20 · answer #3 · answered by Crystal Blue Persuasion 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think its terrible. The fact that NOW we are having debate and primaries for an election that is more then a year away is ridiculous!!
2007-09-12 06:11:36 · answer #4 · answered by TyranusXX 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
...the question is why are they doing it...are things really that bad that they hav to move up daylight savings...and move all the primaries...what exactly did Bush and Cheney create that would cause such..."change."
2007-09-12 06:14:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know that we need to move them up but all should be on the same day.
2007-09-12 08:03:18 · answer #6 · answered by doxie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is bad for the parties, bad for the voters, and bad for the candidates. It is just bad in general.
It is just because certain states want to feel they are important... what BS.
2007-09-12 06:28:33 · answer #7 · answered by Wundt 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. This gives people less time to act.
2007-09-12 06:13:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋