From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>However, because NH's population is only 1.2 million, in a
>relatively small but variable geographic area (~80 miles wide by
>~250 tall), with only a handful of TV stations, any candidate with
>a few hundred thousand bucks can gain significant exposure early
>on (and because many other areas of the country are watching via
>TV news, those candidates get lots of free exposure nationwide,
>rather than having to pay for it). Failing to do this limits your
>choices in Illinois as well as ours, because having primaries all
>the same day guarrantees that only one or two candidates could
>cough up the funds to compete at that level, at most. If that
>system had been in place last year, there would have been no need
>of a primary, as only Bush would have had the funds to get
>exposure in every state. Starting in smaller states first allows
>candidates that are not bought and paid for by the multinationals
>to gain exposure and gives people real choice.
As I already pointed out, here in Illinois we did NOT get a choice,
or at least a very poor one.
There is no reason that all the candidates can't be allowed to
participate in a debate or question or answer type session under
Universal access requirements.
Then the Borda style primary, followed by the conventions, then
The current system is okay for New Hampshire, it seriously degrades
every day after that. In other words it sucks for the rest of us.
Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
Adler Planetarium www.adlerplanetarium.org
Life Extension Foundation, www.lef.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:21 MDT