What's with Iowa & New Hampshire?

[Pistol Pete]

How did these two states rank as some sort of crystal balls for the rest of the country as far as electing Presidents go?
In Iowa you've got a near total rural area comprised of farmers who are too busy trying to keep their boys from porking the livestock (I've been there and have pictures of them for sale) and New Hampshire is an out-of-the-way-almost-Canadian Yankee abyss who's motto is "Live Free Or Die", but is so full of liberals as to make that motto, moot.
As far as I can tell, they're feeding troughs for voters so ignorant they can't decide for themselves who to vote for and just go with who those state caucuses picked. (like that actually means anything)
Who thought up this scam?

[wrecker05]

In the 1992 Iowa caucus Clinton received 2.8 % of the vote, probably because Tom Harkin (76.4%)was running also.


New Hampshire 1992 Clinton finished second with 24.8% to Tsongas 33.2%.

This is just the beginning.

[RicardoHead]

I've wondered the same thing, Pete.

Iowa, a bunch of inbred farmers, and New Hampshire with a populace that basically mirrors a Klan meeting sans the racism, and the media try to act like the primaries may as well be over. Hell, they acted like it was over before it ever began.

It's all BS.

[gopsdragon]

Actually, you all should be grateful that it's those states and not CA. The idea is great actually.

A caucus allows for far more in depth discussion and should replace a plain old primary. Here in California every idiot gets his info from a commercial and knows nothing of the issue. No wonder we're all f****d up.

In the case of NH, even though it's a primary, at least the idea is the state is smaller and the people can be reached by the candidate and then people can make their decisions based on something more than the boob toob.

P.S.-Pete, your thinking of Vermont - not NH.

[RicardoHead]

I hear ya Dragon, and actually I'm aware that it has to start somewhere, however the things I object to with the process are:

1) that it always starts with the same states, and that these states even try to legislate that it must begin with them. That's bullshit, and even though we here in Cal are f***ed up (I admit) we should occasionally be given first shot just as folk in Alaska, Hawaii, Texas, and probably someday Puerto Rico.

and

2) the way the media hype these states and attempt to annoint some moron as the party favorite based upon polls in these states. I'm watching this shit thinking "maybe they're right, but it ain't over till it's over so shut the F up CNN, CBS, FOX, MSNBC, and ABC." Then I flip it to Sanford & Son where I get a valuable and arguably more intellectual lesson in life.

[gopsdragon]

I don't think you would get an argument from any of us that Sanford and Son is more intellectual.