Calling for people to drop out nine days before a very large group of states vote in a primary reveals the structural problem with political punditry—the campaign is just much too long, and people burn through all the permutations of takes before anything has even happened.
-
Show this thread
-
Already there is nervous chatter about the party being weakened because it didn't immediately select a standard-bearer after the first votes were cast. The fact that a large proportion of the country will have a chance to vote in contested primary is healthy for democracy.
1 reply 8 retweets 44 likesShow this thread -
What is not healthy for democracy is stretching the campaign season so far that the nominee will have spent A BILLION DOLLARS and over two years running. The fact that two billionaires will be on the debate stage this week is a blaring klaxon that this process must change
3 replies 13 retweets 64 likesShow this thread -
The Presidential primary should begin in June and end in August. That would already be lengthy. The current system where people run for 18 months, and the nomination is supposed to be sewn up before anyone votes, is not surfacing strong candidates (except for your favorite)
2 replies 12 retweets 45 likesShow this thread -
I'm excited that I get to go to the polls in Maine next week and have my vote matter. I'm even more excited that my friends in California will have their vote matter—the most populous state was always an afterthought in the past. I just wish it hadn't taken 12 months to get here.
1 reply 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread
Consider that in the co-equal branch of government, Congress, we don't even know who the candidates will be in some of the most contested Senate seats, and primary elections are still months away in many states.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.