Another Presidential Election Molded by Our Nations' Fringe Elements

I was speaking with a friend last night, as we watched the Florida primary results.

Now, less than a month into 2008, each party's race is down to only two contenders. As a New Jersey resident, once again, most of my choices have been taken away from my by a weird fringe element of other US voters.

Why religious-oriented hayseeds and ethanol-barons from Iowa? Why one of the smallest, by population, states in the union, New Hampshire? A state, much of whose income is derived by residents who work in a neighboring state.

Michigan? A once-great, now threadbare state of auto workers looking for aid from the other 49?.

South Carolina? What's so special about that state? More religiosity, distinctly regional cultural values, and probably not a representative ethnic mix.

Florida? C'mon. Retiree-loaded, as well as heavily populated with ex- and current military personnel.

In truth, what state or states are appropriate as early primary states? None.

My friend and I bemoaned that, while living in a heavily-populated state, we've been disenfranchised by some extremists in states we rarely even visit. I don't think we even get in on "super Tuesday." Maybe the second one- I don't really even know. Or care, now.

In fact, here's some statistics to ponder. From the 2000 US Census, which listed US total population as 281 million,

Iowa 3MM
NH 1
Michigan 10
South Carolina 4
Florida 16
Total 34 million

That means five states, with a total of just 12% of our total population, are responsible for eliminating some 60% of each party's Presidential hopefuls.

How is this fair to anyone? To candidates, or voters? It means 88 out of every 100 voters don't get to choose from the original, declared full slate of their party's Presidential candidates in each election.

Isn't it time both parties moved to a single-day, omni-state primary system? What the hell is so special about Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina? Aren't the first two now simply using the quadrennial election as an excuse to boost their economies?

Let's be fair and strip them of this baseless privilege. Let's push our parties to simply designate one, nation-wide primary day. Just like the first Tuesday of every fourth November is the single date for our country's general elections for President.

Instead of silly media-stoked 'momentum' plays by candidates, they'd actually have to disseminate their single, unchanged positions and characteristics to voters for a single date of destiny.

Makes quite a bit more sense to me than the current system, in which we allow a few self-anointed, extreme bellwethers to dictate to the rest of us what candidates among whom we may choose for our party's Presidential nomination.