Yvonne Abraham had a great rant in the Boston Globe this
weekend about the key role New Hampshire has traditionally played in the
presidential primaries. I hope I can capture the essence, but if not please
read the original article.
There is a constant debate about whether it is a good idea
to have two small and unique states such as Iowa and New Hampshire with such as
important role in the primaries. Winning
in one of these two states can snowball into more media attention, more big
money contributions, jumps in the polls, which then leads to wins in the next
few states, more media attention, more big money, higher poll numbers, and so
on. On the other hand, losing in these
states can do the same thing in reverse.
But Yvonne has a good point in favor. Historically, New Hampshire has required
candidates to go small town by small town, meeting with individuals and very
small groups who were relentless in interrogating them on their positions. They would press and press until they got the
real scoop on the candidate. They cut
through the bullshit pretty effectively.
You could never have this in California, Texas, or New York – just too
many people and neighborhoods. A small
state like New Hampshire is perfect for this.
But I did say it was a rant, didn’t I? She laments that they
have abandoned this key role. They have
allowed candidates like Donald Trump to jet in, bluster in his unique demogogic
way, and jet out. No interrogation. No
real scoop. Now, they are doing the
opposite of their traditional role. A
candidate can spend just a little money to convince some key influencers and
win the state. They get that snowball effect at bargain basement prices. This makes it easy for a candidate to fake
his or her way to the nomination with a good façade.
So to paraphrase Yvonne – Shame on you New Hampshire!!! You have a key role to play in the primaries.
Get on it before it’s too late !!
