Washington, California move Primary. Should Oregon?

A new Legislative deal is setting Feb 19th as the new Washington Primary, two weeks after Super Tuesday. Washington and Oregon have held May elections in the past, putting them near the end of the cycle. This has saved themselves millions in election tax dollars, but resulted in low profile in candidate importance. Washington follows California which just moved theirs from June to February. As more states move earlier so has Iowa and New Hampshire to keep their first state status.

This begs the question, should Oregon do the same? Should most states finish their primaries in February and March? Does it matter? At what cost?

  • Jerry

    Who really cares? I don’t. These politicos are all sick. Why vote for them earlier?
    Oregon will never decide any election.
    Worry about something else.


    On top of that, Oregon isn’t a real national trends kinda place so how the people here vote isn’t a stunner for anyone. I’d just leave it the same and let the other states one up each other.

  • jeff

    I think that they need to split the nation up into about 4 equal (in electoral votes), geographically diverse blocks, and then have each block have their primary/caucus on a succeeding month, rotating backwards each presidential election year. And no blocks containing both NY and California…

    It’ll get the primary voting out of the way in about 4 months, they could move the conventions up to early/mid-summer, and then we could have a real brawl for the general election.

  • Dave A.

    Who really cares? A few political junkies? Most people couldn’t care less; not to mention Oregon’s electoral votes are unlikely to swing any national elections.