The map highlights the idiocy of the current system by which we choose a President. Iowa — Iowa! — New Hampshire, and South Carolina, where a tiny unrepresentative fraction of Americans live, get lots of attention. Texas, the second-largest state by both area and population, is virtually ignored.
The map also shows the direct relationship between money and politics: lots of time in Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Miami and, interestingly, Las Vegas. Maybe some of the candidates at the bottom of the pack are trying to boost their campaign coffers by wagering donations at the tables. That would make about as much sense as our current Presidential election system.
Please share widely!
Bob, don’t forget that Nevada will be holding the second nominee selection event for the Democrats, after Iowa this year. The fact is that candidates are flocking to the state’s largest conurbation. While it is true that this event is being overlooked, some campaigns are really focused on winning Nevada.
<
p>
Not only are the Nevadans there, so are the HQs of the all-important Nevada unions. Finally, you’ll see some conventions in Vegas that bear candidate attention, such as the gatherings of thousands of African-American journalists, and I believe the VFW. I’d imagine all these probably explain Vegas’s importance more than money.
The graphic also shows why Mike Gravel isn’t a serious presidential candidate. Six campaign visits in 2.5 months? GOP cellar-dwellars Paul and Tancredo top 30 each in that stretch of time. Gravel simply isn’t doing what a campaign does — except showing up at debates.
It’s definitely worthwhile clicking on each of the individual candidates to see what they have in mind. Willard’s effort in particular impressed me. I don’t think much of him as a candidate, but as an operator he is formidable: he’s running a truly national effort.
<
p>
As to Nevada, you are no doubt right that the attention it has been getting is due largely to the caucus. Second they may be in time, however, but they are a long fourth in attention behind Iowa (I write again: Iowa!), New Hampshire and South Carolina.
…to be elected president. He was in the House 35 years ago.
Age? Age didnt hurt RayGuns chances. Now we will probably wind up having to endure glaring at his image on our currency.
…one–such as a president–can hire wisdom. It is not necessary for a wise man to be president. What is necessary–and what we’ve seen with GWBush–is that we need someone who knows that he–or she–is not a know-it-all and who seeks and makes use of advice from others.
<
p>
A presidency is–or should be–a joint venture among the president and his advisors. What I am more interested in is who the presidential candidates’ advisors are. Gravel’s problem is that he is currently 77 years old; Reagan was “only” about 70 when he was first elected president. Query whether Gravel would live long enough to serve two terms as president.
<
p>
I actually like Gravel. I’ve seen him on Bill Maher’s show, and he has, as the Germans would say, eine gute Launa (gawd, how to translate that? A good disposition). I respect him for his work in the House. But it isn’t required that he be in the Oval Office to give counsel to those who are.
disgrace … The NYT is a friggin joke… all the lies fit to print… a big Zero in the credibility Dept. There’s no longer anything “excellent” about the NYT.. my humble opinion
And it’s free.
whatever you think of the NYT’s content, its website has a lot of very fine Web 2.0 stuff going on. Much better than any other newspaper website I know of — they’ve caught up to and surpassed the previously superior WaPo.
…the NYTimes’s fish wrapping and birdcage liner? The NYTimes showed, with its “TimeSelect” that it itself devalued its news reporting.
<
p>
We used to listen to BBC, Deutsche Welle, and, yes, Voice of America over shortwave in the US. Fortunately, at least the first two are available over Internet streaming. I’m not sure how reliable VoA is, after Reagan politicized the operation.