Our nomination system sucks

OK, you went to a lot of events. I'm not saying that people preach STRICTLY social issues, but that is the majority of the reasons people vote in Iowa, steroetypically. The evangelicals gave Huckabee a win and failed to do so in any of the later states, save last night. This shows how traditional and social issues bear enormously on Iowa results. I didn't argue that small candidates shouldn't have a chance. I said that the small candidates that do receive a chance out of Iowa don't reflect ideals that the party wnats nationally. Huckabee proves. We should give small market candidates that reflect the nation a chance. Not just candidates that Iowa, or any other single state, takes a liking to. All of the smaller candidates you mentioned had no effect on the race anyway. Brownback dropped out virtually before Iowa. Richardson had momentum despite finishing fourth in Iowa. I don't see your point. There is no evidence or argument that would show that small market candidates have some kind of an effect in one state than they would have on a national stage. Having a notional primary would allow these small candidates a national stage like the youtube debates and showings on pundants television programs. The only times this encouraging of the small market candidate actually occurs is when that small market candidate fits the demographic opinion of that particular first and second state, like Huckabee and Iowa. A national primary would allow the small market candidates a national stage, in order to reach more voters, while still reflecting the true opinion of the party's constituents devoid of the tinted lens of a few lopsided states. Caucuses impede grassroots movements. They exclude small candidates and a massive number of voters, only counting the most avid of political participants. Choosing delegates versus relaying through a party is irrelevant to the grassroots movement. In fact, one could argue that direct selection of delegates by caucus goers ignores the spirit of the party and again, only encourages the most avid political participants. Caucuses are the true reflection of funding. Whoever can afford the organization required to get avid supporters to the caucus wins. Romney and Obama, the two biggest fundraisers, have dominated caucuses. There is no incentive to spend time with people any more so than primaries. Why do you think Guiliani didn't campaign in places like Iowa? Because his message didn't resonate in such a traditional and religous states, despite his massive leads in the national polls at the time. Again, a perfect instance of a state skewing the opinion of the party as a whole. McCain leading in the polls is due to his ability to be popular in consecutive states. He resonated in NH which gave him momentum to the military states of SC which gave him momentum into FL. This made him the declared front-runner and put him into the lead in many states on super tuesday, despite his widespread despisal amongst his own party. The only reason McCain is in the lead is because the states that happened to be the first couple fo primaries were states his message resonated in, despite his hatred among conservatives. His ability to win there spurred him to popularity and people felt pressured to vote for the frontrunner, which is why he is winning. John McCain is the perfect example of why we shouldn't have state-by-state nomination systems. Huckabee having traction is a bad thing. The only reason he is known is because the people of Iowa liked him. He had onel second place finish after that. This shows that not many republicans find him appealing. Had it been maine or indiana or some other state, huckabee would be off the map and some other niche candidate would be rolling now. I realize the media plays a part in the problem. But, the 'vote-for-the-winner' trend kills any chance of the party's constituency being represented. We see a candidate fitting a different niche every couple of days. If a candidate can string together a couple of these niche areas, they become the heir-apparent (McCain) and collect votes they otherwise wouldn't have gotten. A national primary provides all of the small market candidates with an equal chance rather than giving one of them a niche to take hold of like Huckabee did. While I admit, it doesn't solve every problem (maybe regional primaries), it ensures us an accurate candidate as far as constituetive representation.