Why does Iowa get to go first? Why is it that the political parties seemingly move heaven and earth to keep Iowa first in the presidential primary contest, even when other states try to change the calendar? Why does Iowa get this out-of-scale importance, when in fact it has only "been first" since 1972? Why is the Iowa Straw Poll--a pay-to-play contest--given such media attention, when it produces such non-conclusive results, and in fact shines the spotlight on how crazy Iowa primary caucusers are? The Republican straw poll--itself only a "thing" since 1979--has selected a non-incumbent primary winner twice, and a general election winner once. Meanwhile, it has produced nutbar results (Michele Bachmann, Pat Robertson) twice. Even the first-in-the-nation caucus has been a rather mixed bag when picking the general election victor.
So, what's the deal? Why Iowa? Even residents (and I speak as an in-law to a large Iowa family) are sick to death of the "honor." Might this be the year that Iowa's key role in presidential elections starts to unravel?
So, what's the deal? Why Iowa? Even residents (and I speak as an in-law to a large Iowa family) are sick to death of the "honor." Might this be the year that Iowa's key role in presidential elections starts to unravel?
Well, someone has to go first. What I hate is that the candidates suck up to the corn industry with their ethanol promises when ethanol has been horrible to consumers, both int he car and the price of corn.
ReplyDeleteWho would you suggest go first?
I'd suggest a lottery system, some kind of drawing names from a hat kind of thing. Or a rotating system, where every four years, a different region votes first, maybe from something akin to the Circuit Court district map. Instead of a "Super Tuesday," you get 10 regional primary/caucus elections.
Delete