Do you want the primaries to last a long time?

[WillyBrandt]

By long time I mean until March, and possibly longer. I'm all for it: we're getting hundreds of millions of dollars of free advertising, and I think it's improving the leading candidates.

It also drowns out the media oxygen from the Bushies, which is biased in their favor anyway.

And I really don't think the Democrats are doing that much damage to each other during the primaries. People forget the little barbs; even hard core politicos have trouble remember who said what when.

Moreover, the idea of uniting behind a candidate early doesn't make much sense to me. How does this actually help us? Folks are looking on the prolonged primaries with fascination, not with derision. Uncommitted voters are judging the respective candidates, seeing who they like best--whoever it is, this is a good process that bodes ill for the Unelected Fraud.

Update: Commenter below gets it just right: "The traveling bash Bush road show is having a very positive effect, I hope it goes on and on"

[greatauntoftriplets]

1. Yes.

The Illinois primary is March 16. Why should we get shut out of the system?

[MuseRider]

2. YES, I agree.

Your reasons are exactly right IMO. Plus our caucus isn't until March and I want to go caucus for DK.

[DemNoir]

3. Its getting the countries attention

The traveling bash Bush road show is having a very positive effect, I hope it goes on and on

[Hippo_Tron]

10. EXACTLY!!!

Instead of having one person traveling the country bashing Bush we have 6 doing it. That means we cover a LOT more ground. This is one of the reasons why I don't want Sharpton or Kucinich to drop out now.

[mlawson]

4. What 'we' want doesn't matter. Sorry.

[NoPasaran]

5. Yes

My primary is on March 9. I want it to mean something.

[bigwillq]

6. Yes b/c my candidate (Dean) is trailing

The longer it goes on the better the chance Dean could make a comeback

[WillyBrandt]

7. Apart from the eventual nominee, do you think it's good?

[bigwillq]

14. I'm confused.......

Do I think what is good?

[Hippo_Tron]

8. I don't have a problem with the primary lasting till March...

Or maybe even early April because that still gives us a few months to unite behind the nominee against Bush.

[mmonk]

9. I don't know

I'm tired of the media, DNC, DLC, and debates where Clark is never asked policy questions because they are trying so hard to make him an issue.

[WillyBrandt]

11. Yes, it sucks... but long primaries are good for Clark and the Party

IMHO

[GodHelpUsAll2]

12. Yes they shoud go on

To be fair to everyone in the country they should ALL go all the way to the convention. It's insulting to me when you hear the DNC, DLC and the media calling for someone to drop out. Super Tuesday and several other of the large delegate states haven't had a chance to have their say yet. We should all get to voice our preferences and then after all voting is done the decision will be made. Anything else is a direct slap in the face to those who have not even voted yet. Which right now stands at approx 80% that have not vote yet.

[patricia92243]

13. Longer it lasts, the less likely Kerry will be the one we're stuck with

[DebJ]

15. Especially if Kerry gets nom, he needs to take hits NOW so that Bushco

doesn't take advantage of all the dirty stuff they can pull up. The Dems need to clear the air on the facts, first, so that Bush has to use his 200 mil to make stuff up (oh yes I forgot they are good at that)

I am a Dean supporter and I think time is on our side

[BootinUp]

16. I think its a huge mistake to end it early

But I'm just a peon.

[Cronus Protagonist]

17. ABSOLUTELY

You can't BUY this kind of coverage, biased and underreported, though it is.

"ANYBODY BUT BUSH" Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

[pop goes the weasel]

18. oh yeah!

The longer it lasts, the more attention is paid to what Democrats offer that Republicans do not. The longer the debates go on, and are kept open to all candidates, the more Democrats look like the party that considers information carefully before marching off to war or spending tax money. I hope that we don't have a clear nominee until the convention, so that we can get lots of media attention and come out of the convention boiling over with energy for whoever is newly agreed upon.

I'm a DK supporter, but I sure hope that people who don't want Dennis will at least consider voting for someone who isn't Kerry, just so we can make sure this process takes its own sweet time.

[Skip Intro]

19. We are ruling media coverage right now

as much as it can be ruled, anyway, and all to the dismay of the bush regime. AND we're getting the message out to the, um, sleeple(?), about this thuggish gang's dismal record, and our passionate alternatives.

As long as this process goes on, its win/win for us and loose/loose for the resident and his gang.

No one should drop out as long as they have the will, the support and resources to continue. (Unless, of course, Kerry wants to drop out and endorse Dean - :D )

[NV1962]

20. I see it as a Long March onto the WH

1) The way media trivializes, their vapid "scrutiny" is no real test

2) The "surviving" candidate will have proven viability and strength

3) A protracted campaign hammers the issues home better than a blitz

4) The combined effects of Dem candidates weaken Bush

5) Tell me who you're eagerly pushing and I'll tell your fatal flaws

[Leilani]

21. It should go on!!

Bush"s numbers continue to fall!!

Dems get their message out!!!

I think the front loaded system stinks.

Just my opinion!

[democracy eh]

22. Yes - then the Dems will control the message as long as possible

when it is over the republican hate machine will set the message

with a primary the message is news
when it is over the Dems message will be politics, therefore will be ignored