On the day of the Iowa Caucuses, I would like to hear your opinions in favour, or against the process. It has always troubled me that such a small state (just over 3 million people), with such a homogeneous population (91% white people) plays such an important role in determining who the nominee for president will be of each party. The time and money spent in Iowa is unthinkable, and a win or loss in that state’s caucuses can literally begin or end a campaign. A win in Iowa cements you as a legitimate contender for the presidency. But why? I know somebody has to kick off the primary season, but why not have a handful of states (maybe 15 or 20) go first? This way, no one state can play such an important role in determining who is the presumptive nominee.
Obviously, there are several examples of a candidate winning in Iowa and not becoming the nominee (right, Mr. Huckabee). But in most cases, the winner in Iowa becomes the legitimate frontrunner and is difficult to unseat, even if the impact of Iowa at the subsequent national convention is minimal.
I think there should be 5 primaries. Take the 50 states, divide them into 5 primaries (of 10 states each). Put as diverse a group as possible in each primary group, and shorten the season to 5 months (1 month to campaign in each group). Boom! Done. Wouldn’t that be a wonderfully simple, uncomplicated, and perfect system? I hope you can note the sarcasm.
In all seriousness, I do think there should be some reformatting of the selection process. Money and organization end up trumping ideas and leadership. But, I doubt that will happen at all, if ever, so let’s move on.
Wow, it has been quite a while since a new post was put up. What a terrible blogger I have become. School has been quite busy, and I seem to have convinced myself that is the reason I have not been posting. Yet I am about two weeks into a quiet period of very few tests and assignments, and yet no new post. I hate to admit it, but I think I might be losing inspiration. Everything I can think to write about seems old and repetitive. Much of the buzz in the U.S. right now (and what I personally find most interesting) is the GOP race for the 2012 nomination. All these crazy Republicans running around the country, making gaffes and looking ridiculous. I considered writing unbiased, substantial pieces on each of them, but quickly squashed that idea when I realized I really can’t stand any of them.
Up here in Canada, there isn’t much that is interesting me. The Conservatives are ramming through legislation with their new majority government. We have a new female premier in Alberta (which now gives us three female provincial leaders!) but even that hasn’t been enough to motivate me into authoring a post.
Over in Europe, there continues to be one calamity after another. I have stayed away from European issues, as I don’t know that part of the world as well, and quite simply, I don’t find it nearly as interesting. And since this is my blog, I can decided what to post.
But there was one story that oddly enough, prompted me back to the keyboard. CNN put up a story about former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman’s ‘Secret Weapons’. This was interesting, because Huntsman (unless every other candidate ahead of him in the polls self destructs) has no chance of winning the nomination. But that hasn’t stopped his (fame seeking?) daughters from jumping onto twitter and other social media sites to promote their Dad’s campaign. As the article notes, family involvement in a political campaign is nothing new. In fact, it is almost expected that when your parent or spouse runs for a political office, you generally help them out. However, it appears that the Huntsman girls are really committed to this, and believe they can help their Dad win.
I give them credit for helping out their father, but I highly doubt these girls will help to push him up in the polls. Perhaps they want to turn this new found fame into a t.v. deal on E! It doesn’t hurt that they are attractive looking girls. To contrast, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has five sons, who are helping with his campaign, although they don’t appear to be as organized and committed as the Huntsman daughters. Nevertheless, for some reason I found this story interesting. The link to the CNN article is below. What do you think? Will their involvement help their Dad’s campaign? How important is the role that families play in an individual’s candidacy?
Also, I want to know what other stories I should post about. I refuse to let this slump that I am in stop new posts from going up. What topics would you like to read about. Do you care about the GOP debates and candidates? Are you interested in the 2012 election, even though it is still roughly one year away? What about issues in Canada? Is there anything of significance going on right now? I also quite miss the Flashback Friday posts. They were without question my favourite posts to write, and hopefully they will make a return in the near future.
Thanks to everyone who has been visiting each day, only to see the same old, stale content. I really do appreciate it.