Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Glares t1_iyogbn0 wrote

I wouldn't mind if everyone voted on the same day and no state had greater influence, though apparently that's not an option.

54

NewPhoenix77 t1_iyogxli wrote

This. Unfortunately, many voters want to be on the winning side more than they want to vote for the best candidates. If it’s all on the same day, there is no “influence”.

11

crourke13 t1_iyoilsf wrote

I wish for this too. But the argument against is that candidates will not be able to campaign in nearly as many places. By spreading the primaries out, candidates can shift their focus over time.

6

NewPhoenix77 t1_iyojbpl wrote

Makes sense. I do feel bad for anyone voting after Super Tuesday. Likely they are voting for someone who is their second or third choice.

6

Glares t1_iyojwe9 wrote

Counterpoint: Candidates go where there are tight races. They are not using the extra time to speak to every American in all areas, they are going to Florida for the 25th time because that may help them win.

6

crourke13 t1_iyom6aq wrote

True. I guess that is the difference between theory and practice. I posted what was intended to happen. Your counterpoint is what actually happens.

3

dj_narwhal t1_iyphwhj wrote

There is too much money to be made advertising in each state when they stagger the primaries, and it gives the DNC/RNC a chance to meddle when things are not going their way.

3