The Insane Acceleration Of The Presidential Primary Season

Iowa. South Carolina. New Hampshire.

They’re all jockeying to find a way to enhance their influence on the 2008 Presidential race.

But now, it’s just getting insane:

South Carolina is poised to hold its Republican presidential primary earlier than Feb. 2, 2008, likely in mid-January, a move that is expected to push New Hampshire and Iowa to follow suit.

Such shifts could mean the first GOP nominating contest could take place in December of 2007, in just four months.

South Carolina GOP Chairman Katon Dawson will announce the earlier date Thursday during a joint news conference with New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner in Concord, N.H.

“We’re going to protect this battleground,” Dawson said of South Carolina’s historic first-in-the-South primary status.

He and his aides declined to disclose the date.

But several Republican officials with knowledge of probable scenarios say the most likely option is for South Carolina to hold its primary on Jan. 19, a change they say would lead New Hampshire to schedule its first-in-the-nation primary on Jan. 7 or 8, and Iowa to hold its leadoff caucuses as early as mid-December, perhaps on the 17th.

Quite honestly, it’s only August 2007 and I am already sick of the 2008 Presidential race. I don’t want to hear about another debate, unless, of course, it’s drunkblogged by Stephen Green, I don’t want to see another campaign commercial, I don’t want to see an Obama Girl, or a Romney Girl, or a Hillary Lesbian.

And if the primary season for 2008 starts before Christmas 2007, well, then, I think I may just have to send my write-in vote for “None of the above” a little bit early.

Seriously, though, I never thought I’d say this, but I think the idea of regional primaries is something we need to think about. Let’s start them in February of a Presidential election year and spread them out over a two or three month period (or longer if necessary). One regional primary for the Northeast, one for the Southeast, one for the Midwest, one for the Far West/West Coast.

It would seem to make a heck of a lot more sense than what we’re doing now.

Originally posted at Below The Beltway

  • Jeff Molby

    Seriously, though, I never thought I’d say this, but I think the idea of regional primaries is something we need to think about.

    Or… we could finally switch to an election method that doesn’t have the vote-splitting problem and thereby eliminate the colossal hack that is the primaries.

  • Andy

    The combination of the winner-take-all ballot and the financing restrictions that created the two party system gave us precisely what we have now. It’s amazing to me that few people seem to get the connection to Federalism. If my state’s idea of Republicanism was the same as your state’s, why would I care who’s primary was first? Take power and money out of the Fed’s hands and no one will care. We’ve made the stakes too high for states to ignore.

  • Ken H
  • Doh-San

    Why not just move all the primaries to the day after the first Tuesday in November and have done with it? :-)

  • TanGeng

    This is madness. All these small states jockeying for media attention and influence. I think once this election is over, the two parties will reform their rules and prevent this from happening again.

    But some states are right. NH and Iowa do exert undue influence on the presidential election, and I like it way.