03 January 2008

 

Iowa

I've already said that I'd prefer Obama for our next President, but I think the outcome of tonight's Iowa caucuses that would be best for the nation, best for the party (that's the Democratic party: Jefferson, Jackson, etc., y'all), would be what's functionally a three-way tie between Obama, Edwards, and Clinton. In that order.

We need more debate, more discussion of the issues, a longer time to see who's better to lead the nation. Not less.

If the DNC appointed me nomination king, I'd order the delegate-selection process to start with the smaller number of delegate states and end with the larger number of delegate states. Florida, Texas, New York, and California would be proscribed from any kind of delegate selecting caucusing, convention, or primary until no more than 75 and no less than 30 days prior to the convention. The fifteen states with the fewest delegates—e.g., Iowa, New Hampshire, Alaska, Wyoming, Delaware, etc.—would be required to have their delegate selection done by 1 February; the states with the next fifteen largest by the end of March; the states with the next ten largest by the end of April; the next ten, excepting the big four, by the end of May; and those four as described above. (Maybe it's inconsistent: I'm not going to get my calendar out right now. But with the conventions usually in late July and early August, I bet it could work.)

I think we, as citizens, are better served by a nominating process that takes a longer, not a shorter time, to pick the nominee. I'd rather this drag out until June, at least. For those at CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, Time, and Newsweek who want to declare a winner tonight, I say phooey.

Labels: , , , ,


Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?