Are there any really bad reasons to move our primary up to February?

[Bunny]

I was listening to the local right wing blowhard yesterday afternoon. He was discussing this with a professor who is opposed to moving the primary.

The main reason given was the weather - there can be terrible storms in February and how will people get out to vote? How will the poll workers, most of whom are elderly, get to the polls? I had to laugh! Although this could indeed happen, I'm pretty sure that other northern tier states (hint: New Hampshire fer cryin' out loud!)have primaries in January and February and somehow they manage to survive. :eyes:

I just thought that was ridiculous argument, honestly. And if it is such a worry, can't the elderly voters just do an absentee ballot? In fact, why don't we change our voting altogether and have everyone mail in their vote? I think they do this in Oregon and it seems to work out okay.

My point is, I'm tired of tiny little places like NH and Iowa basically deciding everything. In '04, Kerry was a done deal before our primary rolled around, and while I like and admire Kerry, he was not my first choice. I really resented that the decision had been made two months in advance of our primary.

Any comments?

[dropkickpa]

1. Considering that it ALWAYS seems to be

raining or cold or snowing during each and every voting event in my neighborhood (which has a very high elderly population), I have only once noticed a drop in attendance, and that was during an insane thunderstorm (tons of lightning, etc etc). And, the drop was only during the worst of storm itself, once it had blown over the polls were mobbed.

My mother is a poll worker and has a hard time getting around in bad weather, but nothing stops her from getting there and doing the work, nor any of the other ladies. I think, if my neighborhood is anything to go by, Pennsylvanians are damn sure going to get out there and vote no matter what the weather. Seriously, c'mon, we are just as likely to get a blizzard in April as we are in February, especially in western PA.

I am not too happy to only have one candidate to choose in the primaries, what's the point of having them at all if we get no choice in the matter?

[tigereye]

2. what is so weird is California moving their primary up

worried they don't have enough power? :rofl:

as for us, I think moving all these primaries up just condemns us all to even more endless campaigning, etc.

[tigereye]

3. what is so weird is California moving their primary up

worried they don't have enough power? :rofl:

as for us, I think moving all these primaries up just condemns us all to even more endless campaigning, etc.

[MH1]

4. Are there any really bad reasons for moving ALL the primaries to May?

sheesh.

As a pollworker, I hate the idea of a February primary. More chance of bad weather hurting turnout. Shorter daylight hours. Plus, it really sucks to be me under those conditions. So, I can just imagine how older pollworkers feel about it.

I think the early primaries are a terrible idea in general. People who care about facts can get the facts in a lot less time. All the extended campaign does is allow special interests to buy media time to bombard people with negative advertising that mostly doesn't even pertain to the qualifications for the job.

Here's another question: will the primary be in February (or March as they have set it currently) for presidential years, but May for all others? If so, THAT will confuse a lot of people. (A lot of people are easily confused.)

[Bunny]

5. Well, moving all primaries to May just isn't going to happen. Period.

So why should we be put in the position of having no say as to who will win our party's nomination? We're a key state with a lot of electoral votes, yet the nominee is already chosen by the time our primary rolls around.

And if we're so worried about weather, why don't we just do mail-in voting? Other states have done it, it cannot be that hard.

[demodonkey]

6. Shortens time for state legislature before they have to start petitioning to...

run again.

Makes it harder for challengers with no "war chest" because they will have to petition and raise money to run during the holiday season when people are less interested in politics.

Will cost the state and counties money to re-tool their schedules.

This list is not all-inclusive -- I reserve the right to revise when I think of more.

[JPZenger]

7. Many School District tax referendums

I read that some people are afraid that an early primary would screw up the referendum schedule for voters to decide whether to shift taxes from property taxes to income taxes. Those questions will be on the ballot in many areas.

I am upset that the primary election will be over in only 3 weeks. A majority of the states are scheduling their primaries within 3 weeks of New Hampshire's date.

A 2 month primary season is beneficial to get candidates more seasoned and to let voters understand more about the candidates.

A more logical system is needed. The candidates would prefer regional primaries, because it would reduce travel times and allow more targeted buys of TV and radio time. Many TV markets cover more than one state. One option that has been discussed would be rotate the states from year to year that get the early primary dates.

Some Dems have expressed concerns that most early primaries and caucuses are of very white states (Iowa, N. Hampshire and Nevada). For the GOP, ultrareichwingers in South Carolina have a disporportionate impact upon their nominee.

[Cosmocat]

8. Yep ...

I am running for a county office right now, first time, and I have to say I think it is a horrible idea ...

As is, the petition signing period was from February 12 to March 6 ... I have to tell you, getting out in that time frame to get signatures isn't fun ... You move the actual primary back to February, and you are going after signatures in November, maybe not quite as bad, but still winter weather AND as noted, in the holiday period ...

It breaks up the primary campaign with the actual holiday ... It even FURTHER extends the election cyle, with a never ending period between the primary and general ...

My senator is the sponsor of this bill ... I don't love him or hate him, but it reaks of showboating ... This is one of those things were it is a response to something, and you are creating more/different problems to try to get in line with something that is a problem to begin with ...

[Bunny]

9. I fully understand your reasons, but so many other states are able

to pull this off without too much ado, from what I can tell. So why is it so monumentally difficult for PA to do it? There will be some transition pains, sure, but isn't that something we can just try to weather in order to reach the goal?

[Cosmocat]

10. The weather is one thing ...

It just expands the election cycle unreasonably, and as noted, puts a real crimp on new comers trying to beat incumbants ... Again, the runnup to a February primary is christmas and New Years ... If you are a newcomer trying to break in, people just are NOT going to want to be talking politics during Christmas, then you have the new years ... Basically, you have one month, from mid January to February, to make your case ...

THEN, you have a dead period from February to the general in November ... Expanding that general election period ...

I don't know ...

Again, I think the early primaries ARE the problem ... Moving to be part of the problem, even if the problem is not going away just does not seem to make sense ...