Kv603 t1_isox8ng wrote on October 17, 2022 at 4:43 PM

Reply to comment by Darwins_Dog in How do you Granite Staters feel about having the first primary in the nation in your state every 4 years? by BoringAccountName78

> If one-on-one time is that important, we should have the first primary in NY or CA that way more people get to be in the same room and see a speech in person.

That'd give a larger total count of people, but a smaller percentage of the voters eligible to vote in that state's primary getting "one-on-one time"

> I find it weird that people in NH put so much stock into meeting the candidates. The majority of US voters don't have this opportunity, yet they still have to decide who to vote for.

A room can only hold so many, and a candidate can only shake a certain number of hands per hour -- volume doesn't add up to more people "meeting" the candidate.

Darwins_Dog t1_isp4pv0 wrote on October 17, 2022 at 5:34 PM

My point is that meeting the candidate is ultimately meaningless. <1% of voters live in NH most of them will not even meet a candidate. A vanishingly small percentage of national voters ever get the opportunity. It's at best a neat story.

If meeting a candidate is important (which I contend it is not), it shouldn't be reserved for just NH. More people should have the opportunity (regardless of proportion) because it's important. If proportion of the state is the key, why not Wyoming first?

I haven't seen any evidence of any special insights from retail politics. Seems like we're about 50/50 choosing the actual nominees.