Posted on 09/30/2011 11:02:14 AM PDT by pgyanke
TALLAHASSEE — State leaders on Friday set Florida's 2012 presidential primary for Jan. 31, bucking national party rules and ensuring that several other states will leapfrog Florida and set earlier elections.
The move was intended to ensure that America's biggest battleground state has a major voice in picking the Republican nomination, much as it did in 2008 when Florida's late January primary effectively clinched the nomination for John McCain.
"It is more important for states such as Florida not to be on the back end, but to be on the front end of these primaries," said former state Sen. Al Lawson of Tallahassee, a member of the primary committee who initially called for Florida to set its primary for Jan. 3.
(Excerpt) Read more at tampabay.com ...
Don't know if we have to excerpt this one... but better safe than sorry.
Good. No reason for FL to take a back seat to IA and NH. States with substantial populations and diverse economies and demographics deserve their say.
I don’t trust to click on it.
The big question, is, are they okay with reducing their delegation by 50% in exchange for the violation? or are they going to somehow fight that as well?
That will move the early states, Iowa, NH, SC, NV to Dec.
Politics and Christmas don’t go together well.
This is good news. Why let the a northern or mid west state be first. It’s about time to stop letting the GOP control a state’s decision when to have their primary!!!
This isn’t a good move...
While I understand Florida wants to separate itself from Super Tuesday, all this does is force out under-funded candidates early, who can’t compete in such a high-cost state.
This is the exact same mistake we made in 2008. Why are we doing it again?
It’s not the GOP, the States of Iowa and New Hampshire have laws on the books that each party must hold their caucus (IA)/primary (NH) before any other State’s caucus or Primary.
Again, not a GOP issue, but an issue that these States require.
Good grief...sounds like Iowa and NH need to revise their laws. So what will these states do now? What happens with the military ballots now. Aren’t they close to being printed?
“It’s about time to stop letting the GOP control a state’s decision when to have their primary!!!”
You do realize that the national committee is made up of committee members selected by the states, don’t you?
Sad to say, but the underfunded candidates should be forced out early. I like Bachmann, Santorum and even Newt, but at this point all they are is dilluting the anti-Romney vote. I’m not a big fan of Perry - he doesn’t seem to have the intellectual firepower needed - but he seems to be the most realistic, electable alternative to Romney right now.
I’ve never understood why those laws were honored. Those states are effectively reaching beyond their own jurisdictions. What would happen if other states passed laws that their primaries must be held before those of IA and NH?
“It’s not the GOP, the States of Iowa and New Hampshire have laws on the books that each party must hold their caucus (IA)/primary (NH) before any other State’s caucus or Primary.
Again, not a GOP issue, but an issue that these States require.”
I did not know that. Do you know if that law has ever been tested?
LOL
Why not have ALL States have their primaries on the same date, to eliminate the crap of playing games?
I was told it was the state of Iowa and NH has laws that require them to hold their primary before any other state. It wasn’t the GOP. Sorry, I thought the GOP had made the rules for when to hold primaries.
Iowa and NH serve a valuable purpose. They allow candidates with little money to make a splash early. Iowa and NH and I suppose SC will not move their caucuses/primaries up to go before Florida. My guess is Iowa kicks things off in early January like they did four years ago.
A break with tradition?
Upsetting the apple cart?
How about, in your face.
Yeah, me too. Now I’m hearing it was some state commission in Fla. requiring BOTH parties to hold the Fla primary election Jan 31, not the state GOP. I can’t seem to get the full accurate info either.
First, Iowa and New Hampshire will be required by their State laws to move their events forward in the calendar.
Second, this is not an election required by State law. Each party has it’s own rules for who and when people will vote. The Iowa caucus will have no absentee or overseas military vote, because that’s not how a caucus works. New Hampshire may, or may not, depending on the way State Law works concerning party elections.
These laws are very well known and understood in all election circles, so Florida knew that it was accelerating the pace by making this move.
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.