The Iowa Caucus Was Less Than a Month Ago

[Guaranteed]

Yes. Believe it or not, it's been less than a month. And we already "have our nominee."

[Padraig18]

1. Excuse me while I go puke!

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

[Guaranteed]

3. Yeah.

I'm not pleased either. I think we have a case of pre-mature nomination. HA!

Alright, pre-mature coronation?

[boxster]

5. Or maybe...

premature capitulation?

[Guaranteed]

7. LOL

That's a good one.

[eileen_d]

2. Who is it? (eom)

[Langis]

4. Who else?

Edwards =).

[Guaranteed]

6. Oh come on.

:eyes:

[janx]

8. That's what I tried to point out in another thread.

There is far too much pressure to get the primaries wrapped up early--so much so, in fact, that democracy itself is being thwarted by the Democratic party.

The huge media influence makes it so much worse.

Someone around here had a very good recommendation: Why not hold the primaries on a single day? Let the candidates campaign for a sufficient amount of time and then vote? It would lessen media influence and make the process fairer for everyone. People would be voting on things that mattered.

[Padraig18]

9. After watching this year's clusterfuck, I'd agree to that!

:thumbsup:

[krkaufman]

17. Single day primary wouldn't work

A single day primary wouldn't work much better. In fact, it wouldn't work at all, IMO.

Grassroots/outsider/low-budget campaigns wouldn't have the $$ to campaign nationwide, allowing those campaigns with big $$ contributors to crush all opposition. Also, insufficient vetting of the candidates would take place with a single-day primary/caucus.

We really just need to restructure the process to minimize the effect of the media steamroller, and make it easier for candidates to meet with the people in ALL the states. This year's "7 states in 6 days" bullshit after New Hampshire was ridiculous, and we saw how less than thrilled some Michiganders were when candidates were unable to get up there to campaign.

Try this on for size: link

[janx]

20. No, the candidates could campaign for as long or short a time

as they chose to, before the primary voting started.

I just don't like the string-along voting because it allows the media to do all of the vetting. In addition, we need some more campaign laws.

There has been a lot of dirty campaigning with very little accountability.

[polpilot]

10. Thank you DLC. Thank you Mr. 'Where should I stand next' Clark.

Dean '04..Anti-Iraqi War...Anti-DLC..Anti-Establishment

[retyred]

19. Finger pointing 101?

retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

[IndianaGreen]

11. An excellent analysis of the Iowa results from WSWS

Kerry, Edwards lead in first contest of Democratic presidential campaign
By Patrick Martin
21 January 2004

In analyzing an event such as the Iowa caucuses, it is always necessary to keep in mind that the Democratic Party is one of the two main political institutions of American capitalism. It serves the interests of the financial oligarchy, and the ruling elite is deeply concerned with the selection of the candidate who may well, if circumstances warrant it, replace George Bush in the White House.

For all the attempts by the Republican Party and the media to present Bush’s reelection as an inevitability, there are serious divisions within the American ruling class, and fears that the recklessness of the Bush administration, in both foreign and domestic policy, has set the stage for disaster. A debacle in Iraq or Afghanistan, or a major financial crisis at home, could lead to a rapid collapse in political support for a government that was installed, not through the popular vote, but through the undemocratic intervention of the Supreme Court.

All the more reason for care in selecting the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. Before entrusting any individual with the executive power of the American government for the next four years, the ruling elite puts them through their paces. This involves a process of political competition among the candidates and manipulation of public opinion through the mass media, which is not an exact science and has many uncertainties. But notwithstanding such complexities, in the final analysis the ruling elite will choose the presidential candidate of the Democratic Party. Iowa was the first step in that decision.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/iowa-j21.shtml

[KFC]

12. Yes. And I think we can all agree that Kerry is a fine choice.

Bush is toast.

[Padraig18]

14. I think hardly 'all' of us would agree with that assesment.

In fact, you'd be hard pressed to get a bare majority to agree to that, IMO.

[Capn Sunshine]

13. No fat lady yet

Howard Dean could yet pull off a miracle, or Edwards could surge like Clinton is suggesting so strongly...

[janx]

15. Clinton is suggesting this? Where? n/t

[Padraig18]

16. 'Buyer's remorse'.

The longer the primaries go on, historically, the more likely the chance that a challenger could succeed. The best argument yet for not 'winding it up', IMO.

[retyred]

18. Time flies when your having fun

Just 5 short weeks ago, kerry was DOA, now he's our guy, who'd a thunk it?


retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book