Michigan's Proposed Jan 15 Primary To Push NH Even Earlier

Boston Globe:

Michigan appears poised to crash the party of early states seeking to influence the 2008 presidential nominating process, leapfrogging the other interlopers, Florida and South Carolina, and further scrambling the electoral calendar.

If leaders of Michigan's political parties reach agreement, as early as tomorrow, on joint Jan. 15 primaries, New Hampshire and Iowa, the traditional leadoff states, would be forced to set earlier contests to preserve their coveted status.

Read the whole story: Boston Globe

Comments

[StopThePlanet]

08:36 PM on 08/21/2007

Lets be in an endless election cycle. Like we aren't burnt out enough from this endless lying and attacking. And in the end, they don't do anything they promised the public they would do.

[daniel155]

03:04 PM on 08/21/2007

Let us stop the primary madness and just have them all one day. It would generate more voter interest and higher turnout.

The whole process needs to be shortened. What is bad is that after February 5 the nominees will be known and we will have campaigning between the two presumptive nominees for nine months!

How about a first Tuesday in May national primary, conventions in mid June, and general elections in mid-September, maybe the second Tuesday after Labor Day.

[InofTouch]

02:58 PM on 08/21/2007

This a good time to start having a National Primary...that way everyone is in a level playing field cause in my state where already late to make a pick and the choice for a candidate is already made. So my vote because usless.

[chinohillster]

01:46 PM on 08/21/2007

Hmmm...one advantage of having primaries on _Christmas Day_ (even for those who don't celebrate it) is that many people would actually have the day off to go and vote!

(I've noticed that other countries tend to have their Election Days on weekends - in the US, even though there are laws stating that employers must allow employees time off to vote, many people fear jeopardizing their jobs, and try to fit voting in before or after work, if they can)

[splastershoes]

01:18 PM on 08/21/2007

This entire situation indicates exactly how ridiculous our primary system is. The little states want to retain some semblance of influence in the elections, so they leap frog each other. How childish. How could you honestly pass a state law requiring your state to be the first primary held? Isn't this entire idea a tad ludicrous? What if, wyoming just got the idea to pass the same exact law tomorrow? Or North Dakota? Or Rhode Island? Two state laws in direct conflict with each other. Wouldn't that end up in the Supreme Court? This is a clear example of why EVERY primary needs to be held on the same day. Push it back up to February or maybe even March. SHORTEN the election cycle, not lengthen it. This is, in part, a reason why politicians are afraid to pass controversial laws. Who gave New Hampshire and Iowa the "right" to hold their primaries first anyway? Was this a god given right? If not, how could they protest another small state wanting the same prestige? Complete childish lunacy...

[NewRiver]

12:50 PM on 08/21/2007

Let's just cut the crap and have the Primaries for 2012 all on the same day...January 22, 2009.

That way, the candidates for '12 can just get it over with already, then take a vacation and give us all a break for awhile before starting all the meaningless talking points.

What a joke this process is turning into.

[GiveMeStrength]

12:31 PM on 08/21/2007

In an effort to maintain its status as the first primary state, state officials in New Hampshire has announced that they are moving the date of their primary up to next Tuesday!

Heil Bush!

[Macready]

10:50 AM on 08/21/2007

this is all way too early and seems too much like "bread and circuses" to keep the plebs occupied . . . the candidates should be spending more time at their desks . .. it is time to impeach . ..