Americans frustrated by influence wielded by Iowa, New Hampshire (AP&Yahoo poll

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — All eyes may be on Iowa and New Hampshire, but many of them are rolling.

Despite efforts to evict the two states from the front of the presidential calendar, both managed to hang on for another election cycle that culminates with the Iowa caucuses on Thursday and the New Hampshire primary on Jan. 8. As a year of media attention reaches its crescendo, voters in other states are saying enough is enough.

According to national survey conducted for The Associated Press and Yahoo News, just over half of all voters said New Hampshire and Iowa have an extraordinary amount of influence over who wins the two nominations.

"They have way too much — WAY too much — say," said Kevin Thomas of Tacoma, Wash. "California's a big state and they don't have any say, and Iowa's not even half the size of California. It really makes me as a voter wonder what's going on."

Fewer than one in five voters said they favor the current system that allows Iowa and New Hampshire to hold the first contests, while nearly 80 percent would rather see other states get their chance at the front of the line.

"I think they should take turns, maybe take it to a small state like Rhode Island that doesn't have a whole lot of voting power," Thomas said.

Both states have been criticized as unrepresentative of the country given their size and lack of racial diversity. Iowa — population 3 million — is 95 percent white; New Hampshire — population 1.3 million — is 96 percent white. Democrats tried to inject more diversity into the process by adding early contests in Nevada and South Carolina, but Iowa and New Hampshire moved even earlier.

The system became so scrambled last year that New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner was prepared to move the primary into December to keep ahead of other states that scheduled their own early primaries and caucuses. If anything, the front-loaded calendar made Iowa and New Hampshire more important.

Gardner and other defenders of New Hampshire say the country — and the candidates — are well-served because the primary requires close contact with voters, not just a big advertising budget and name recognition.

He wasn't surprised by the poll results and negative reaction toward the early states given that most of the country knows nothing about the primary's history or the state's uniquely inquisitive and democratic culture.

New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat who has not endorsed any candidate, argues that New Hampshire's retail politics cannot be duplicated anywhere else in the country.

"We have made it possible for the so-called unknown candidates to make their case without having millions of dollars in the bank. And in turn, we demand that candidates move beyond the rope line and scripted town hall meetings, and directly answer the hard questions from voters," he said. "As a result, the voters, the candidates and the political process all benefit from the New Hampshire primary."

Unsurprisingly, every one of the 21 Iowans who participated in the AP-Yahoo survey think their state and New Hampshire have just the right amount of influence over the presidential selection process. Not so in New Hampshire.

There, two of the five participants said the two states don't have enough power.

I think all political advertising should be banned prior to 180 days before the GENERAL ELECTION.
I think campaign fund raising should not commence prior to 365 days before a GENERAL ELECTION.

The abuse of the political election cycle takes too much time from senators and governors away from their jobs.
THEY SHOULD NOT RECIEVE A SALARY IF THEY ARE ACTIVELY CAMPAIGNING AWAY FROM THEIR ELECTED POSITION.

An election cycle should not be a 4 years and recycle event. There is too much emphasis on early primarys and caucus’s and the media is directly to blame for inciting the candidates to run way before the public is ready to be forced into making decisions about the future leader, when the candidates have unfinished work in their primary job they were elected to.

I am sick of the perpetual election cycle. And I see why many voters are not participants because they feel like they have no choice, the selection process is rigged, the media has too much influence on which candidates are successful and get coverage.

Yeah there are a lot of problems with the MSM Presidential draft selection committee. If candidates have to throw millions of dollars at potential voters to convince us how badly they want the job, we are ignoring the candidates who are fiscally responsible and running on merit rather than a checkbook.

Fred Thompson is the only candidate who shows fiscal restraint in his candidacy. And I believe that translates into the kind of leader he can be, fiscally responsible, and conservative in his leadership.

Every other candidate is spending their childrens inheritance before they even get a paycheck. Where does that kind of approach show a will or an ability to balance the federal budget and reign in spending???

The focus on the election process is totally screwed up.
And people are allowing themselves to be manipulated by the process. Wake up people!!

If anyone is sick of hearing about Iowa, a few of us Iowans are equally sick of this cycle's plague of political locusts.

I can certainly sympathize, I'm sure many more Iowans feel the same way that you do. However, as long as the kind of money that pours into Iowa from the pols, their entourages, and from the hordes of media types each election cycle continues not much will change. This is a cash cow for the hotel/motel, restaurant, catering firm, limo service, & car rental businesses ... to name just a few who benefit.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.