I don’t understand why the whole country kowtows to Iowa. I mean really, they have just 1% of the nation’s population with 2.9 million people, of which 150,000 – 200,000 will likely turn out. Every four years we get this same nonsense with huge expenditures of time and money for a state with very few actual electoral votes.
Sorry for going off topic here, but this is a stupid system. Logic dictates a system of primaries that are grouped by region; New England, Mid-Atlantic, Southwest, you get the idea. Just divvy the country up into 10 or so regions and have regional primaries a few weeks apart. The candidates and staffs can then travel much more easily from place to place, see the most numbers of people, and financial resources can be pooled with the regional ad purchases. The order of the contests is chosen by simply picking the regions out of a hat. This isn’t rocket science.
America doesn’t benefit from all the sound and fury coming out of one small farm state. I’ve got nothing against corn and wheat, but the idiotic system skews the political promises to the detriment of all. Except, of course, Iowans, who benefit from the political tourism and the promises. But let’s face it, all urban areas, who have much different concerns and vastly larger populations, get the shaft.
There is no rationale reason for the politicians to continue this. The importance of Iowa (and New Hampshire after that) is merely a self-fulfilling prophecy. It’s important because it is first, not because it is actually important. That is a dumb way to run a nominating process.
OK, so having now opened the political can of worms, which I avoid unless it deals directly with the issues of this blog, let me prognosticate on what we will see on election day 2008.
Reps: McCain/Romney
Dems: Obama/Biden
Indep: Bloomberg/ Gary Hart (who correctly predicted an attack like September 11 and tried to warn)
As much as this New Yorker would like to see Clinton v. Giuliani v. Bloomberg, neither Hillary nor Rudy will get their party nominations.