Didn't follow the Iowa primary stuff
Do the Republicans have their Iowa primary at a different time than the Dems?
If they are held at the same time, did no one represent the Dem Party?
Now there are Republicans going to New Hampshire - No Democrats there either?
A lot of harm is being done our party if those who are interested are so discouraged from attending because the frontrunner hasn't declared yet. They can't get supporters to contribute yet.
Potential candidates are hamstrung. Nice going...
Wouldn't it be nice if we had the democracy we used to have? The rules are the same, but the game is different.
Webb and O'Malley are not being discouraged from entering the race by HRC, they are discouraged by not getting much fundraising support. Many of the Democrat party's chief fundraisers are already in HRC's camp. I have no problem with the race being put off under late spring or early summer. Our elections are too long anyway. Let the GOP shoot themselves in the foot and engage in infighting.
they have caucuses, and likely won't do so til sometime in '16. Notwithstanding this, there are already polls: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html
Actually changed who won the caucus. For a party that seems to be a stickler for counting votes properly and validating them all, they seemed to have a hard time doing so in this instance. Turns out Romney didn't win and Santorum won instead.
and they make it harder for candidates who can't attract large donations. There is an inconsistency between people here saying they want big money out of politics and their anxiousness to run presidential campaigns years in advance. Imagine if all these months people had talked about something that actually amounted to something rather than clubbing one another over the heads about candidates who haven't declared yet and may not even run. If people want a different kind of politics in America, people should probably start with themselves, their own exceptions and concerns?