I'm already sick of the whole thing. This process has been going on for a year already, and we still have 10 months more to go. Iowa's caucuses are being treated like a coronation. The Boston Globe had an inch-high headline announcing the winners, in a contest that produces 1% of the delegates, and has been wrong half the time. There have been 13 interesting Iowa caucuses (where more than one candidate was running) since 1972, and they have chosen the eventual nominee only 7 times. In three cases, it was the third-place finisher who was nominated.
Why do we give in to this craving for quantitative results? I want to hear a news outlet pledge to never report poll numbers. I would listen to them exclusively!
The whole focus on early primaries seems completely out of whack to me, where a small handful of small states get to make big choices for everyone. And the circus this year of each state moving their primaries up in a game of political chicken underscores the inanity of the system. I'd like a state other than New Hampshire to pass a state law requiring their primary to be the earliest, then let the Supreme Court figure out what to do with two mutually contradictory state laws.
I'm intrigued by Giuliani simply sitting out the early states, focusing on ones which provide more delegates. I'm for anything that breaks us out of the Barbie and Ken two-party rut we've gotten ourselves into.