Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Opinion

USN Current Issue

The Primary Experiment

By Mortimer B. Zuckerman
Posted 4/29/07
Page 2 of 2

If perchance no decisive result emerges from February 5, the states voting later could become the new kingmakers. Further, a fragmented result on February 5 and thereafter could even lead to a brokered convention in the summer-back to the smoke-filled rooms of the '20s!

Many believe this new system is political madness. The National Association of Secretaries of State, whose members oversee elections, has proposed that Iowa and New Hampshire go first, followed by four regional primaries every month, from March through June, with the regions to rotate their positions every four years. The purpose is to spread the primaries out and give the people a longer chance to review the candidates and to avoid the boredom of a candidate being selected nine months before the election.

The opposite view is that the megaprimary means that the candidates would be tested by much broader electorates in the major states, with their higher ratios of urban, diversified voters more representative of the country at large than, say, Iowa or New Hampshire. A man of little experience and talent, such as Jimmy Carter, would no longer emerge as his party's nominee because of success in the January Iowa primary. Again, in 2004, John Kerry effectively won the nomination with his victory over Howard Dean. And we are set to avoid the effect of the February New Hampshire primary of 2000, which ended the campaign between Al Gore and Bill Bradley, and the South Carolina primary, which ended the battle between George W. Bush and John McCain.

Everything is up in the air. The only thing that can be said for sure is that nobody can safely predict how the new process will affect the outcome.

advertisement

advertisement

Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.