tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post6950570345984678368..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: R-E-F-O-R-MJosh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-33482659873010352402008-01-23T12:58:00.000-05:002008-01-23T12:58:00.000-05:00I concur, but I think that at least one race will ...I concur, but I think that at least one race will go into March or beyond.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-90117654562881997512008-01-23T12:44:00.000-05:002008-01-23T12:44:00.000-05:00Yeah, but that's trickier for a state legislature....Yeah, but that's trickier for a state legislature. Moving earlier is an easy concept (possibly hard to pull off). Guessing where that breaking point (when the nominee is essentially decided) is from one cycle to the next is not. <BR/><BR/>I hesitate to say this for fear of being wrong, but 2008 will end up being a unique election (in a lot of ways) and it may be that the system returns to the Super Tuesday model in subsequent years. Meanwhile, those of us who follow these things wait impatiently for another "2008 election."<BR/><BR/>I should note that this year may not deviate too much from that Super Tuesday model. It may be that we come out of February 5 knowing who the nominees for both parties are. However, this time we've seen more signs than in recent years that the race could actually stretch beyond that point.Josh Putnamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-88074277235817524792008-01-23T08:04:00.000-05:002008-01-23T08:04:00.000-05:00Well said. I concur. On the other hand, if Ohio, T...Well said. I concur. On the other hand, if Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania end up deciding one or both of the nominees, there may be a rush to Backloading.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-89946605284605129222008-01-22T20:54:00.000-05:002008-01-22T20:54:00.000-05:00As much as I'd like to see some reform from a self...As much as I'd like to see some reform from a selfish academic perspective, the system, as you said, has worked "much better this year than anyone could have ever believed." I think Americans take issue with Iowa and New Hampshire going first to some extent because of the perception of the runaway recklessness of collective state legislative action. What people have seen is that there are a bunch of states that have moved up and not the tit for tat process of movement over the course of three and a half years.<BR/><BR/>But because things have worked out the way they have this time around, reform will be less likely. What the CQ articles does is highlight the idea that the parties can do what they want but they still have to deal with state legislatures. <BR/><BR/>Let's say the GOP passes one of these plans. Then, somehow, a Republican wins in November. Well, states with Democratic majorities in the state legislature are still going to be motivated to move up and have some influence on who the party's nominee is. Are those GOP rules going to make any difference? No, not unless the DNC passes something similar. And that's the problem with reform: it will ultimately become an issue of states' rights. <BR/><BR/>And that opens up a whole other can of worms.Josh Putnamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-1742509261311386832008-01-21T21:32:00.000-05:002008-01-21T21:32:00.000-05:00Great summary. I hope that one of these plans is a...Great summary. I hope that one of these plans is adopted. I must admit, however, that the system is working much better this year than anyone could have ever believed going in to it.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.com