New York Times Editorial - Democrats' new calendar
New York Times Editorial - Democrats' new calendar
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: August 23, 2006
Democratic Party leaders deserve some credit for inviting diversity into their presidential nominating process by inserting two states into the early mix so often dominated by the overwhelmingly white and rural voters of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's hardly enough reform, but it was healthy for the party to add Nevada, with its large Hispanic representation, and South Carolina, with a heavily black constituency in the heart of red-state America.
Peeved New Hampshire Democrats, claiming a regal right to dominate the limelight, already vow to ignore the new calendar and hold their first-in-the-nation primary as early as they please - maybe even in December 2007. In truth, New Hampshire would still hold the first direct-vote primary on Jan. 22, eight days after Iowa's usual town-hall-style caucus, with a Nevada caucus inserted between the two events. South Carolina would hold the second primary about a week after New Hampshire.
But a baker's dozen early candidates already are fawning in New Hampshire's direction, hinting they'll ignore the national party's threatened sanction - a marginal loss of convention delegates - and violate the campaign calendar.
No one can foresee the unintended consequences of this first calendar change in 30 years. Democrats once thought that a multistate "super Tuesday" primary was the way to head off the deep-freeze rush to judgment invited by the narrow Iowa and New Hampshire contests. The two states' claim to homespun "retail politicking" is increasingly a media conceit. Even with the change, the party may compound the calendar rush by having the first four states go to bat in a 15-day period. The race could still be settled by the end of January.
Voters across America - so often totally ignored by juggernaut nominees - deserve a more thoughtfully paced calendar. We hope the new bit of upfront diversity works toward that end. Who knows, voters might keep the race open through a lively primary season that lasts somewhere beyond Groundhog Day.
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: August 23, 2006
Democratic Party leaders deserve some credit for inviting diversity into their presidential nominating process by inserting two states into the early mix so often dominated by the overwhelmingly white and rural voters of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's hardly enough reform, but it was healthy for the party to add Nevada, with its large Hispanic representation, and South Carolina, with a heavily black constituency in the heart of red-state America.
Peeved New Hampshire Democrats, claiming a regal right to dominate the limelight, already vow to ignore the new calendar and hold their first-in-the-nation primary as early as they please - maybe even in December 2007. In truth, New Hampshire would still hold the first direct-vote primary on Jan. 22, eight days after Iowa's usual town-hall-style caucus, with a Nevada caucus inserted between the two events. South Carolina would hold the second primary about a week after New Hampshire.
But a baker's dozen early candidates already are fawning in New Hampshire's direction, hinting they'll ignore the national party's threatened sanction - a marginal loss of convention delegates - and violate the campaign calendar.
No one can foresee the unintended consequences of this first calendar change in 30 years. Democrats once thought that a multistate "super Tuesday" primary was the way to head off the deep-freeze rush to judgment invited by the narrow Iowa and New Hampshire contests. The two states' claim to homespun "retail politicking" is increasingly a media conceit. Even with the change, the party may compound the calendar rush by having the first four states go to bat in a 15-day period. The race could still be settled by the end of January.
Voters across America - so often totally ignored by juggernaut nominees - deserve a more thoughtfully paced calendar. We hope the new bit of upfront diversity works toward that end. Who knows, voters might keep the race open through a lively primary season that lasts somewhere beyond Groundhog Day.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 6:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home