when i first registered to vote, i signed on as a republican. admittedly, i didn't agree with all of their policies, but felt at the time that they best represented the majority of my views. over the next few years, it seemed that the party platforms, on the local, state, and national changed in ways i didn't like. i then found myself more in line with the democratic party on many issues. hey, maybe i changed. this isn't the important part of the story. even though i found myself out of line with the g.o.p., i stayed registered with them through the 2000 campaign. if i remember correctly, i voted for mc cain in the presidential primary. he'd already lost, but still, i wanted to vote for the guy i felt would do the best job. which brings me to the meat of my rant, i hate it that california is essentially worthless in the primary system. this makes no sense considering that we are the most populus state. in the 2000 census, we had 13 million more people than the #2 state, texas, and 15 million more than the #3, new york. i'm not saying that we should be the first primary, or be the only one that counts, but it should count. i'd think you'd want the most populus state backing your candidate.
which brings me to a frustrating story i saw today. the democratic party is switching up it's presidential nominating calendar. okay, that's fine. but they're pushing nevada and south carolina up to near the top. and california remains stuck in nowheresville. the plan is to appeal to some groups. f groups, how about a freakin state, especially one that contains those groups in big numbers?
so, i fear that california will be stuck without a voice again. the party will nominate a candidate that can't win it all. of course, being a largely democratic state, we'll still vote for this sad sack. and be pissed that jeb or george p or even one of the twins is the new president. (i don't actually think any of those people would win.)
4 comments:
I think you are right about party platforms changing. Former Republican platforms included: Small federal government, protect individual liberties, emphasize local governmental control.
All of those have now gone by the wayside. See: Increased federal spending, patriot act, No Child Left Behind Act.
The Rep show no hint of their party platform, anyone who still thinks that is living in lala land.
I always wondered, why NH and Iowa?
OK, you talking about California being "stuck without a voice" cracked me up. As someone who has spent a fair amount of time in "fly-over country," let me tell you that California has clout in spades.
So this one aspect of national politics doesn't feature California as prominently as you'd like. Lots of states have LOTS more trouble getting recognition.
I'm just saying.
i understand that everyone wants an equal or prominent voice. i'm just saying, doesn't it make sense to have the most populus state have a trend setting voice? especially in the democrat arena. the party is expecting to win this state and it's electoral votes. why not solidify, or better yet, galvanize ca. dem's by giving them a real voice in the process instead of just a rubber stamp.
Post a Comment