Greenfield: Could the primaries be over too soon?

By Jeff Greenfield
CNN Senior Analyst

Adjust font size:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- For weeks now, many of my colleagues have been torn between either wringing their hands about how soon the presidential campaign is starting or plunging full-scale into overcovering it. But let's take a bold step toward the next thing to worry about -- how soon it will end.

Actually, many in the press are doing both -- hand-wringing and plunging -- at the same time.

For a spectacular example of such doublethink, check out Monday's New York Times. While the editorial page bemoans the "23-month campaign," two stories splashed across the front page, and lots more inside, help fuel the very focus the editorial page deplores. (Watch candidates address the experience factor )

Well, maybe it's just that the Times is -- and they are -- a-changin'. The press corps is showing up in the early-voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire in numbers that suggest it's 2008 already.

And now a gaggle of big states (California, New Jersey, Illinois, Florida), tired of being overshadowed by the smaller states, are seriously thinking of moving their contests into February, which could well mean that the nomination contests will be effectively over around Groundhog Day.

If so, it would be part of a continuing trend.

Not that long ago, the primaries were a marathon, not a sprint. George McGovern didn't wrap up his nomination until the convention in 1972. President Reagan almost beat Jerry Ford prior to the convention in '76. Ted Kennedy and President Carter battled into the summer in 1980, as did Gary Hart and Walter Mondale in '84.

But in the more recent battles, the nominees clinched victory before spring, and this time out, it'll likely be earlier. (Watch Sen. Hillary Clinton draw attention in Iowa )

And here's the real issue: No, it's not the need for early massive money, or the shortchanging of a thoughtful political argument. No, the real issue is much, much more important:

What's everybody going to talk and write about? All through 2007, we have plenty to do. For instance, we can cite and analyze and explicate and cogitate over the meaningless, irrelevant poll numbers (meaningless since most normal Americans have sensibly not begun thinking about a vote they won't have to cast for months).

But if the victors are crowned by Valentine's Day 2008, what are we going talk about the rest of that year? Can the republic really take six or seven months of talk about who the vice presidential nominees will be? Or what the acceptance speech will sound like?

Friends, I don't care if you watch C-SPAN II for erotic arousal -- nobody can take half a year of that kind of gasbaggery. It's entirely possible that by the time the conventions arrive, 90 percent of the country will think the election happened already, and come November, you'll be able to shoot a cannon into a polling precinct and not hit a living soul.

Of course, by then, the politisphere will have already moved on to 2012.

Tools:
Save |
Print |
E-mail |
Most Popular |

Next story in Politics

Politics

What are E-mail Alerts? | Manage Alerts | Create Your Own

Get up-to-the minute news from CNN

CNN.com gives you the latest stories and video from the around the world, with in-depth coverage of U.S. news, politics, entertainment, health, crime, tech and more.