What’s So Special about Iowa and New Hampshire?
Why do two states that account for a total of 11 electoral votes hold so much power over the nominating process? That's just one of the many things muddling Burt Prelutsky's mind.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
There are any number of things that don’t seem to bother the rest of you that manage to keep me awake nights. One of these is the Olympics. Why, I find myself wondering, does the world every four years turn its entire attention to athletic events it will then totally ignore for the next four years? I make no bones about the fact that I have no interest in the whole shebang, but how is it that the rest of you don’t suddenly start devoting the same attention to 12-year-old gymnasts, discus throwers and synchronized swimmers that I do to baseball if you find these and sundry matters so darn enthralling?
Next, why is it that you can’t wait to gorge yourself on roast turkey every Thanksgiving but don’t even think about having it on any of the other 364 days of the year? I am even willing to bet that no condemned man ever ordered it for his last meal unless, of course, he was slated to meet his maker on the fourth Thursday in November.
This brings us, inevitably, to politics. Of course with the presidential campaign being well under way, everything these days brings us inevitably to politics. But what I specifically have in mind are Iowa and New Hampshire. Now, please understand I have no problem with either place. I once even spent a pleasant week in and around Des Moines. But how was it decided that those two improbable states would be given so much importance? I understand that for reasons I can’t quite fathom they get to kick off the primary season, but so what? To me it makes about as much sense as inflating the importance of winning the coin toss at the start of a football game.
The plain facts are these: The Hawkeye State doesn’t even have a primary election, but merely a caucus at which a few hundred people get to root for their favorite candidate; while the Granite State is so small that in 2004, Bush and Kerry divvied up a mere 671,000 votes. Shoot, you get bigger turnouts than that in mayoral elections in a slew of American cities.
But if you listen to the various pundits, you would think that instead of Iowa and New Hampshire, it was California and New York or at least Florida and Texas that were up for grabs. In the general election, those two states will account for a total of 11 electoral votes. That would mean that even if one of the presidential candidates swept both of them, he or, God forbid, she would still have to rack up another 259 votes before collecting the keys to the White House.
Two other things keep gnawing at me. How is it that people who drive around with bumper stickers that read “War is Not the Answer” aren’t the least bit embarrassed to be seen in public? Of course, as most of us realize, there are many occasions when war is exactly the right answer. There are also, I grant you, many occasions when it isn’t, as, for instance, when the question is “Who portrayed Dr. Watson to Basil Rathbone’s Sherlock Holmes?” or “Which team won the 2002 Super Bowl?” (Because I don’t wish to cause any of you sleepless nights, the correct answers are Nigel Bruce and the New England Patriots, 20-17 over the St. Louis Rams.)
And, finally, with Barack Obama and John Edwards constantly bashing her, how is it that Hillary Clinton hasn’t yet complained about the vast left-wing conspiracy?
Television writer Burt Prelutsky is the author of Conservatives Are From Mars, Liberals Are From San Francisco (101 Reasons Why I’m Happy I Left the Left).
| Comment |  Digg This |
 del.icio.us |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
6 Comments
Herr Morgenholz:“War is not the Answer”. I love those. Answers are easy; it’s the questions that are hard. And people with these bumper stickers don’t bother with the question, nor do they give an answer except in the negative. Liberal intellectual rigor at its finest.
Dec 29, 2007 - 6:35 am Fred Beloit:A caucus is to an election as a window is to a microscope. A poll about a caucus is to an election as a shoe is to a microscope. We need to jam that shoe into the head pundit’s you know what to set an example. Let’s make this the last year for such nonsense.
Dec 29, 2007 - 6:49 am Curly Smith:Burt asks “But how was it decided that those two improbable states would be given so much importance?”
Then answers his own question with “In the general election, those two states will account for a total of 11 electoral votes.”
In other words, it’s cheap to campaign. If you have a campaign budget of $12.95 then you can talk to each resident of both states 173 times. If your message doesn’t “resonate” with the voters after that much face time then you don’t have a resonating message.
The system has three additional advantages:
- The states are small enough that the goofball candidates can’t really damage the parties because nobody in the other 48 states pays any attention to anything but the result.
- The small states provide an additional benefit as the winning candidates get to try different approaches and fine-tune their message before any real public scrutiny occurs. Again, nobody in the other 48 states pays any attention to anything but the result.
- The system discourages 3rd party candidates because visiting each potential voter 173 times takes a lot of organization. 3rd party candidates may appear later but showing up 8 months after everybody else just guarantees a loss (see Thompson, Fred).
Dec 29, 2007 - 10:11 am Xanthippe:I’ve wondered the same things.
I do not understand why primaries don’t all occur on the same day across the country.
It’d be awesome.
Candidates don’t need to actually show up anywhere, thanks to the miracles of television and video.
(My car reads “Bumperstickers are not the answer” as well as “Mario/Luigi 08″).
Dec 29, 2007 - 6:38 pm Phineas Worthington:Thanks Burt for the laugh from the first line to the last.
With regards to roast turkey, one is so tired of leftovers that it takes a year to want to eat turkey again. Turkey fatigue if you will.
Election fatigue is what I suffer from now. And the election hasn’t even begun.
Insomnia and the thought of loose Pakistani nukes keeps me up at night.
Thanks for lightening the mood.
Dec 31, 2007 - 2:20 am Assistant Village Idiot:As a NH resident, I am familiar with the complaints, and believe I understand them. But my constant refrain is “what cure do you propose that isn’t worse than the disease?” Nationwide primaries on the same day? 45 states can say goodbye to ever seeing a candidate live. Those in smaller towns even in those states will see candidates only on TV or in campaign photos.
I admit the idea of a caucus makes no sense to me, but Iowa does retain the advantage of close quarters. Rotating primaries might make sense, but no one seems to want to press for it.
Dec 31, 2007 - 12:32 pm