Topic: Today

Speaking My Mind: Should New Hampshire keep the first-in-the-nation primary?

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

Click here to tell us what you think.

Evelyn McCarthy — I have been a resident of NH for 20 yrs. It is a wonderful state (country) to live in. Being a part of such a wonderful place…I see no reason to change the Primary to another state. It started here…and has done well here…and it should BELONG here… Is it politics or envy that causes the want to change to another state….?

Barbara Welcome — I agree 100% with Alex Leoni, that NH should remain as the first voting primary. Why can’t bureautics (probably spelled wrong) in the parties leave well enough alone. This has worked since its inception and should remain as such. Doing this new way to me is politically incorrect.Take the money being blown and put it to use in a much better way, e.g. better medical care, lower taxes, help the homeless.

Lynda True — I agree with Mel Allen. I came of age in NH, where l learned the importance of researching each candidate (regardless of party), making an educated decision, and taking the time to cast my ballot. People in NH are not influenced by fame or fortune, and take the right to vote as seriously as their freedom. They set a high standard for the rest of the country and believe that every individual vote counts, including yours and mine. That’s an American tradition worth keeping.

Denis Dionne — Yes, definitely. I grew up here in NH,and will always live here. This is a part of what makes NH great!

Kim Nahodil — Yes, I think N.H. should be first as it always was. I lived there for the first 16 yrs. of my life, but I now reside in PA.

Alex Leoni — I am a die-hard liberal in the San Francisco Bay Area, California. That being said, I have a sense of history and certain traditions. The politics of today are not the politics of the original framers of our electoral process. I think we should return to the original primary process with New Hampshire in the pole position. Additionally, I resent and dislike this earlier process that has developed.

Jim Whitehead — The tradition should be recognized. Just as the constitution should be recognized. Who amongst the candidates even believes in the constitution. At the same time, I am just a cajun from Louisiana that most everyone in this country believes we should be judged by our politicians. NOT. I will give a unique recipe to anyone that will truly do research into all of the persons running and make up their own minds. Visit their web sites and look at the U-tube videos, My Space sites, and make up your own minds. Do not JUST watch the television. The best Gumbo, Jambalaya or Shrimp/crab and corn bisque is the offer. jwhitehead2@charter.net

Brenda Reeves — Yes, it should stay. Has worked ok.

Ralph Worthington — I left New Hampshire 50 years ago and moved to Florida. You can take the man out of New England, but you cannot take New England out of the man. New England will always be my home.

Sharon Hart — The first in the nation primary should definitely still happen in New Hampshire!! To have it anywhere else would just be wrong!!

Theresa Montagnon — I’ve spent a great deal of my life in the state of New Hampshire and the state and it’s people are just as American as any others. I vote they keep the Primary.

Randell Martin — I appreciate, and enjoy, the traditions of the New Hampshire primary and the Iowa Caucuses leading off the presidential campaign season. Keep the primary where it is on the calendar.

Jeanne Moran — In my heart, I believe all elections are “fixed”…not by God!! By politicians!!!!!! Who think they’re God!!!!!!!!

Christopher Hall — Of course New Hampshire should remain the very first Primary in the nation! Do you really trust an Iowan to make an informed decision? NO!! Keep the tradition ALIVE!

Dorothy Nazarian — New Hampshire’s historical position of first in the nation primary should be fought for and held on…it’s not a partisan issue to be debated, but a matter of principle. In this heightened atmosphere of degrading political discourse, we should not forfeit what has been an accepted, acknowledged, and constitutionally required (NH Const.) position held by New Hampshire.

Rebecca Buccini — Do you consider your state a good cross section of the U.S.? If not, why is primary held in New Hampshire? Don’t know history. Second thought, why not New Hampshire? It’s as good a place as any even though your weather is not always so wonderful when it is held.

Bruce Berry — I believe the expression is…”as goes New Hampshire, so goes the nation.” The voters of New Hampshire are true, honest, and of high moral fiber. Let’s keep this tradition and dump the electoral college instead.

Richard Gillard — Absolutely. It is a huge point of recognition for the State of New Hampshire. Big for tourist recognition with all the media swarming over the state and each night on the major networks NH gets a lot of free publicity. While it is small, it is mighty in that many candidates fall out as a result of the primary. It has huge publicity value and an economic boon for the State. Besides, it is a lot of fun to watch.

Betty Hale — Somebody has to go first! Why not “the shire”! NH is more balanced than ever in terms of representing the rest of the country. We love the tradition of our first primary — and so does most of the country.

Mel Allen — In a political landscape where big money buys slick tv ads, New Hampshire is an exception. Here candidates cannot rely solely on ads and packaging — they actually have to face people every day, in living rooms, and diners, and in schools. They can’t duck questions. Their strengthe and weakness are revealed. The nation would lose if New Hampshire lost her role as first in the nation.

Ralph Worthington — The first time I ever voted I was teaching at Goffstown High School in New Hampshire. It was thrilling to me that NH had the nation’s first primary. I hope that it will continue that way.

Jewel McKenzie — The Northeast is steeped in history and well-known for speaking their mind. When NH speaks the US listens…why is that? Because New Englanders are grounded in the value of “…for the people, by the people.” It’s a reminder to the rest of the nation what we fought for in the beginning…a fair voice in the governing of our nation, stated simply by the votes of of the people from a state that declares “Live Free of Die.” Don’t take that away from our citizens!

Debbie Despres — Just because it has “always been” is not necessarily a good reason to keep the status quo. Why not let Vermont or Maine or some other state benefit from the attention of the first in the nation primary?

JulieAnn Perleoni — Everyone knows that New England has the highest rate of educated people. Besides, New Englanders are terrific judges of character and morality, skeptics at heart, New Hampshire should remain the first state in the nation for the primary.

Rachel Kipka — New Hampshire, for many years, has indicated the national “attitude” towards the candidates for our nation. I hope we keep it that way.

Norman Tellier — Definitely YES — I believe in the old adage as New Hampshire so goes the country.

TJ Meenan — Yes, make sure you keep it nice and early, but be sure and lean to the right when you do! Support our troops!

Brian Gibb — Since we’re the first in the state, I think we should keep our primaries, as is, first. Why change?

Rake Morgan — It must have been 20 years ago that I listened to a “Saturday Night Live” news commentator rant about New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary status. To paraphrase, he wondered why the fate of the Union should be left to a bunch of “syrup-sucking squirrel watchers?” It was a good question. And very funny. I think I rolled off the sofa laughing so hard that I hurt my stomach.

Despite that slam at New Hampshire voters, our primary works. The idea is that voters can go to a primary “event” and meet someone like Dick Gephardt or Joe Lieberman drinking a Coke in someone’s backyard along with a grand total of six other voters and ask a question about health care or Iraq and get a response that is not entirely scripted or weenied into a meaningless TV sound bite. But who else cares? That opportunity means something to me, and it means a great deal to many other voters in this state. But, in fact, it must seem merely quaint to outsiders, a relic of a political process that started dying the day political consultants realized they could swing more votes via the mass media than by shaking cold New Hampshire hands or kissing our colicky babies.

Like the unrelenting floodwaters that pounded us last spring and summer, the pinky ring crowd, the media moguls and political consultants will not go quietly into that good night. It is inevitable that the dam will finally give way and New Hampshire’s political clout will be washed into the muddy mainstream and lost forever.

Randall Lapierre — New Hampshire should keep the First in the Nation Primary for reasons both sensible and sentimental. The most important aspect that New Hampshire offers to Presidential Candidates is accessibility. One could travel from Manchester’s airport to Mt. Washington and on to Seabrook all on a day’s drive. The size of the state, in conjunction with the cost of television and radio media, makes New Hampshire the ideal starting block for lesser funded candidates, allowing for a fairer and more open process. New Hampshire voters have a history of independent ideals with concepts that span the political gamut. They take that responsibility seriously; they listen to ideas and vote their conscience. They are not swayed by the presence or reliance on large corporate interest. Any candidate that speaks with energy and honesty can find an audience in New Hampshire. The state has held the first primary since 1916, it has executed that responsibility well and should continue to host until it no longer offers equalizing accessibility to potential presidential candidates.

Arlene Banks — America is about tradition; the values we treasure from our ancestors. New Hampshire should always remain the first-in-the-nation place for the primary.

Susan Peters — As a former NH resident, I can’t begin to explain how fortunate the people of NH are. After living in NH for the first 30 years of my life I moved to New York state. I live where the candidates never come, or if they do it’s to attend $1,000-a-plate fund raising dinners. During the last Presidential season in NH, my high-school-aged daughter enjoyed going to political rallies where the candidates were completely accessible. She can’t wait to able to cast her vote in 2008. We will be in NH again in the summer and will take every opportunity to see any and all the candidates. YES, NH should keep the first in the nation Primary. And anyone one from other states who really wants to get a good look at the field of candidates should make it a pilgrimage, and reserve early!

MareAnne Jarvela — Yes! Keep NH the first in the nation to have a primary. We love the attention from the media. We love to meet and greet the candidates. And, we take pride in being a warm and welcoming state for all who have big dreams.

Suzanne Butler — The issue of whether NH is diverse enough to be the first in the nation primary is foolish. Voters make decisions based on the information they have stored in their brain about the candidate, not the color of their skin. NH is a smaller state and so residents are able to spend a lot of time picking the brains of potential candidates thereby becoming better informed about who to vote for.

Karen Rhodes — Why change what has been going on for so long? Living in Massachusetts, we look forward to hearing the results from there first. A New England Tradition. Having lived here many years, coming from Illinois, this has been something have always looked forward to. Keep it up.

Comments

Leave a Comment

Enter Your Log In Credentials