Main | Unions not as dependable as one might think>>

Main | Some Democrats seeking fairer seniority system>>

Main | New Greenwald Film Promises To Be A Real Eye-opene...>>

Main | DNC finally takes a stand on election integrity>>

Main | A partial perscription for success>>

Main | George W. Bush's Greatest Hits>>

Main | Possible Democratic party rule change>>

Main | George W. Bush just doesn't understand why Iraqis ...>>

Main | Court smacks Bush again!>>

Main | Two racist statements: two different responses>>

Sunday, September 03, 2006 | 9:27 PM

Posted by

A few days ago, I wrote about a calendar change in the Democrats' primary schedule. David Broder this week had a different perspective.
Whatever New Hampshire does, the country will be forced to witness the huge field of candidates flashing by in perpetual motion during the December holidays and the frantic first weeks of January, not standing still anywhere long enough to be measured for the job they are trying to win.
He does have a little bit of a point there - putting new states in front may have had unintended consequences for the overall calendar. A lot of the editorial goes too far though.
This Democratic version of affirmative action leaves a lot to be desired. Unions are a major source of Democratic votes and money. Maybe Rhode Island should be rewarded for being a stronghold of union activity at a time when labor elsewhere is beleaguered. And gays vote Democratic; shouldn't the states that are home to San Francisco and Key West be allowed to vote early? And if Jewish contributors keep the party solvent, shouldn't New York be up there with the other pacesetters?
Umm, yes?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home