States Forcing Front Loading Of Presidential Primaries - A Proven Disaster

The Presidential Primary shenanigans have started. Again.

Florida has decided they want to push the selection process up in an effort to become the deciding factor in the GOP primary process. Never mind that front loading the primaries hasn't worked out so well for either party. Never mind that campaigns in larger states tend to be totally media driven and that average voter rarely has a chance to meet the candidates. Never mind that the best candidate won't necessarily be the one who's selected.

How many times have we seen states jump the gun, pushing the start of the primary season up by months? As it stands, both Iowa and New Hampshire will have to put their respective caucuses and primaries up to early January rather than February. And New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner has stated he'll move the New Hampshire Primaries up to December if he has to in order to stay within New Hampshire election law.

Both the DNC and RNC have stated they won't seat all of the convention delegates from any state that holds their primaries ahead of the schedules set by both parties. That isn't good enough. They shouldn't seat any of them, period. After states start losing their delegates because of their decision to go against their party leadership in this regard, they'll stop all of this nonsense.

The original schedules from decades ago worked quite well and allowed candidates to stretch out their campaigns (and their campaign funds) between March and June. By front-loading the primaries only candidates with a large campaign war chest wile be able to afford to run campaigns in all of the states in such a short period of time (the three months running from January through March). The so-called Super-Primaries, those where a multitude of states run their primaries on the same date, have had the same effect, causing candidates to spread themselves thin because they have campaign in all of those states at the same time. That means less well-funded candidates won't be able to compete effectively against those with the money to burn.

Another negative side effect: with the presumptive candidate all but nominated by April the long campaign to November begins and by the time the election actually takes place just about everyone is sick and tired of it all. The seemingly 'perpetual campaign' gets old real fast. It wouldn't surprise me if a number of voters are so turned off by the time election day arrives they don't bother to vote because they're so sick of the unending media blitzes.