the South Carolina primary
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 09:23:58 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  the South Carolina primary
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: the South Carolina primary  (Read 891 times)
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 02, 2006, 12:38:50 PM »

I haven't really been following the jockeying among states to determine the 2008 presidential primary pecking order.  As I understand it, the calendar is still in flux.  States are still moving around their primary dates.  But one thing I still see crop up in the media occasionally is the conventional wisdom that South Carolina is an important early primary state.  This was definitely true before 2004, when it always came third after Iowa and NH.  But, as I'm sure you all recall, by 2004 six other states moved up their primary to the same day as SC, and SC had no special status any greater than the other six states that voted that day.

As far as I know, SC doesn't have the same sort of exemption in the DNC or RNC rules that IA and NH get, so I would assume that there will be other states voting on the same day as SC (for both the GOP and the Dems).  Or is that not the case?
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,024
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2006, 08:28:55 AM »


Imagine if in our national elections, one or two states were allowed to vote on that Monday, and their election results were announced on Tuesday.  It would kill the integrity of the system.

I think all the states should hold their primaries the same day.  It would be a non-influenced "election" to see who each state thinks should be their representatives for the various tickets.  Those that win a state automatically makes it into the second round of politicing, while the losers simply bow out and not waste anyone elses money.  That way, one state doesn't slant the primaries for all the other states.  Of course, if you want to the next level, everyone who makes it through the primaries are eligible for the Presidential debates.  It would have been interesting to see Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Bush all on the stage at once trying to out-do each other.  Cheesy
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2006, 09:55:36 AM »


Imagine if in our national elections, one or two states were allowed to vote on that Monday, and their election results were announced on Tuesday.  It would kill the integrity of the system.

I think all the states should hold their primaries the same day.  It would be a non-influenced "election" to see who each state thinks should be their representatives for the various tickets.  Those that win a state automatically makes it into the second round of politicing, while the losers simply bow out and not waste anyone elses money.  That way, one state doesn't slant the primaries for all the other states.  Of course, if you want to the next level, everyone who makes it through the primaries are eligible for the Presidential debates.  It would have been interesting to see Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Bush all on the stage at once trying to out-do each other.  Cheesy
Gives me an idea...
I'd always felt that moving all the state's presidential primaries to the same date removes all the fun from the game...
so howabout this ... if no candidate wins a majority of delegates at this national primary, all the primaries are repeated with only those candidates standing that won a state? And if that doesn't produce a winner you could start eliminating those who won fewest states... you could have a primary season just as long as now, but without the unfair IA/NH advantage!
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,024
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2006, 08:38:55 AM »


Imagine if in our national elections, one or two states were allowed to vote on that Monday, and their election results were announced on Tuesday.  It would kill the integrity of the system.

I think all the states should hold their primaries the same day.  It would be a non-influenced "election" to see who each state thinks should be their representatives for the various tickets.  Those that win a state automatically makes it into the second round of politicing, while the losers simply bow out and not waste anyone elses money.  That way, one state doesn't slant the primaries for all the other states.  Of course, if you want to the next level, everyone who makes it through the primaries are eligible for the Presidential debates.  It would have been interesting to see Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Bush all on the stage at once trying to out-do each other.  Cheesy
Gives me an idea...
I'd always felt that moving all the state's presidential primaries to the same date removes all the fun from the game...
so howabout this ... if no candidate wins a majority of delegates at this national primary, all the primaries are repeated with only those candidates standing that won a state? And if that doesn't produce a winner you could start eliminating those who won fewest states... you could have a primary season just as long as now, but without the unfair IA/NH advantage!

hehehe . . . or better . . . make them all perform on American Idol or Dancing with the Stars.  Wink
Logged
SCDem07
Rookie
**
Posts: 36


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2006, 09:48:08 PM »

I believe my home state's primary is pivotal.  I believe that the mixture of old style Southern Dems as well as our traditional Democratic voters will result in SC's selection of a highly electable Democratic candidate, such as John Edwards last year.  SC is a good gauge for how Democratic candidates would do w/ Blue Dog Democrats and moderately liberal Democrats.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2006, 10:34:16 PM »


Imagine if in our national elections, one or two states were allowed to vote on that Monday, and their election results were announced on Tuesday.  It would kill the integrity of the system.

I think all the states should hold their primaries the same day.  It would be a non-influenced "election" to see who each state thinks should be their representatives for the various tickets.  Those that win a state automatically makes it into the second round of politicing, while the losers simply bow out and not waste anyone elses money.  That way, one state doesn't slant the primaries for all the other states.  Of course, if you want to the next level, everyone who makes it through the primaries are eligible for the Presidential debates.  It would have been interesting to see Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Bush all on the stage at once trying to out-do each other.  Cheesy

I agree; holding all primaries on the same day, and at a relatively late date (say, the first Tuesday in June) would be a lot better than the current system.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2006, 06:32:24 PM »

I believe my home state's primary is pivotal.  I believe that the mixture of old style Southern Dems as well as our traditional Democratic voters will result in SC's selection of a highly electable Democratic candidate, such as John Edwards last year.  SC is a good gauge for how Democratic candidates would do w/ Blue Dog Democrats and moderately liberal Democrats.

But how does that make it "pivotal"?  "Pivotal" suggests that it'll have an outsized influence on who wins the nomination, not that it'll vote for the most electable candidate.  And with all due respect to SC, aren't there any number of Southern and Western states that have a similar proportion of moderate Dems?  Couldn't you make the same case for, say, Oklahoma, which voted on the same day as SC in 2004?
Logged
SCDem07
Rookie
**
Posts: 36


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2006, 09:16:11 PM »

Maybe it doesn't make it pivotal, but it's at least a good indicator of which Democrat would have the most success nationwide.  Ah, semantics.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.219 seconds with 14 queries.