Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kabar

I’ve been saying for as long as I’ve been here that Iowa and New Hampshire have no business weighing so heavily in the primary process. Both states have had the privilege for far too long and should be stripped of it.

But there is a big difference between the two. Iowa is a sucker for anyone who turns on the preacher charm. New Hampshire is a sucker for anyone who, for all intents and purposes, belongs in the democrat party.


26 posted on 02/04/2016 10:04:03 AM PST by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (The greatest trick the Soviets ever pulled was convincing the world they didn't exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

The idea to have these small states first is to give candidates who don’t have a lot of money to compete at the outset. What states would be better?


32 posted on 02/04/2016 10:15:10 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson