This morning I opined that all US states should hold their primaries simultaneously to avoid the ouster of certain candidates from poll rosters before the rest of the country has had a say. Not doing this is disenfranchisement of sorts, as each political party endorses a candidate early on and that person turns into the party representative, never mind those of us who turn out to vote after, say, February 15th.
This remark brought on objections on the order of touting American electoral law, fairness to large vs. small states, historical traditional blah blah blah …
Coincidence struck again, although with a different twist on the matter, in the form of Primary Colors by Steve Cobble of Alternet.
Democrats cannot continue to have two almost-all-white states Iowa and New Hampshire determine their presidential nominees. The next nominee must be able to activate and inspire a multi-racial, multi-cultural base.
I hadn’t thought about it that way, but it seems to make sense. Then again, if America is becoming more diverse, does this say that the melting pot hasn’t reached a high enough temperature in states such as Iowa and New Hampshire? I’m not aware of the racial demographics of these particular states, but can safely say that I haven’t run across many black, Hispanic or Asian folks in the hearts of Americana and New England.
