if retail politics is dead, then there's no reason to give privileged positions during the primary/caucus season to low-population states like new hampshire and iowa.
the only coherent justification i have ever heard for giving the residents of those states more of a say in the choosing of the president than anyone else is that their small towns and low population keeps up ye olde style retail politics. you know, where candidates can do stuff like dress in overalls and eat pork rinds with regular salt-of-the-earth country folk. sure, it's a stupid over-idealized caricature of what the "real" america is, of questionable relevance to a much more diverse and urban country. but i could at least buy the idea that candidates talking one-on-one with ordinary people might be a good thing.
so if candidates have found a way to avoid the pork rinds and stick to scripted events safely within their campaign bubble, then why the hell are we still kissing up to NH and IA?
the only coherent justification i have ever heard for giving the residents of those states more of a say in the choosing of the president than anyone else is that their small towns and low population keeps up ye olde style retail politics. you know, where candidates can do stuff like dress in overalls and eat pork rinds with regular salt-of-the-earth country folk. sure, it's a stupid over-idealized caricature of what the "real" america is, of questionable relevance to a much more diverse and urban country. but i could at least buy the idea that candidates talking one-on-one with ordinary people might be a good thing.
so if candidates have found a way to avoid the pork rinds and stick to scripted events safely within their campaign bubble, then why the hell are we still kissing up to NH and IA?
