A Saner Approach to Primaries Needed

When Dick Gephardt eked out a win in the 1988 Iowa caucuses, no one was under the illusion that the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination was over. Nor was it over in 1992 when Iowans chose favorite son Sen. Tom Harkin and Paul Tsongas won in New Hampshire, both defeating eventual nominee Bill Clinton.  John McCain found that a lopsided New Hampshire win was not enough to survive the awaiting Bush 2000 machine.

But in 2004, John Kerry went from single digits to a surprise win in Iowa in what seemed like the blink of an eye, and by the time voters had rubbed their eyes and refocused, Kerry was already the presumptive nominee. His Iowa glow carried into a win in New Hampshire, and the campaign was effectively over long before the alleged “super Tuesday

The most important job interview: Presidential primaries ideally are a national vetting process in which voters within the parties can take a careful look at  their potential standard bearers via speeches, debates, and personal interaction. They want a good sense of a candidate’s grasp of the issues, ability to handle adversity, and even their regional strengths.  They also can take this chance to fully debate the potential future direction of their party, which is more “in play