Two Arguments Regarding A Long, Drawn-Out Primary

[THUNDER HANDS]

Argument one would be: A long, drawn out primary would give voters a better sense of who our candidates are, how they respond to different arguments and attacks, and how a campaign would operate over the long term. It would ultimately be a good thing for the candidate.

Argument two would be: A long, drawn out primary would be messy, ugly, and viscious. Both candidates would sling so much mud at eachother that voters would end up thinking the other was so intolerable and nasty that they'd eventually say 'whatever, I hate them both.' And whoever emerged the winner would be so beat up at the end that any general election campaign would be severely hapered by whatever bad blood spilled out in the primary that they'd have no momentum going into the general.

Which argument do you find more convincing?

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. 'both' candidates?

maybe they can waste their time fighting, and Edwards will rise to the top like the cream he is.

[FredfromSpace]

2. I prefer a long drawn out primary.

Means the rest of us get to participate, for one thing..