However, I'll pose the same question that we hear every four years: Is this any way to choose a president?
A small number of Iowa voters will center on a candidate, who will have a ton of momentum heading into Tuesday's New Hampshire primary. For those who finish down in the pack, they will see campaign contributions dry up. Some will likely exit the race before the month is through.
As I write this, Rick Perry is going back to Texas to "reassess" (translation: exit) his campaign, and Michele Bachmann is denying reports she's about to quit.
Two little states have a major role in selecting the nominee, and that's wrong. We need a national primary, or at least a series of regional primaries. Too few have too much power.
Of course, a win in Iowa does not guarantee you the nomination. Ask Mike Huckabee.
I will admit that today's blog is a waste of time. Election reform will never happen. Iowa and New Hampshire don't want to give up the power, and I really don't blame them. Influence is nice.
Governor Ed Rendell floated a plan to hold the Pennsylvania primary earlier in the year. By the time we go to the polls, the race will likely be over. A lot of people, including myself, had problems with Rendell's plan. First, voters shouldn't have to deal with potential snow storms. The real answers is for more states to vote later in the spring-- not while Christmas decorations are still up.
