Why my vote doesn’t count

Tomorrow, I’ll be showing up at the Kentucky Primary to cast my vote for, among other things, who I want to have the Republican nomination for President in the national elections this coming fall.  I’ve been watching primary election results since very early this year, itching to have my say, but now, when it finally comes time for me to vote, my vote no longer counts.  Why?  Because the states who had their primaries early in the year decided the Republican nominee long before it came up for vote in Kentucky.  Now I am left asking why my vote doesn’t count?  How many votes have been swung in favor of the wrong candidate (forgive me, McCain) simply because the right candidate was forced to drop out early because more liberal states got to vote first?

This seems to me to be a grossly unfair system.  Why do the first two or three states to hold primaries get to decide for the rest of us?  Public opinion is demonstrably easy to sway, so it makes sense that the winners of the first few states are going to be the ones that the next states to hold primaries will vote for.  And on an on.  But this seems to me to sway the election in favor of the bigger names and budgets–those with the staying power to keep their campaigns going for months.

I don’t need a candidate to come stand on a platform somewhere in my state and tell me what he’s going to do for me personally to know who I want to vote for.  I don’t need the candidates to have to spend thousands of dollars trying to buy the votes for each state as it comes up on the docket.  I want to know what candidates plan to do on a national scale.  How they stand on the issues that matter to everyone, not some labor union in Michigan.  After all, that’s what congressmen are for, not the President.  Presidential candidates should be concentrating on the big issues that matter to all Americans, and they should be able to state these stands through national televised debates and by communicating with the non-profit voter information associations.  So with all that in mind, why can’t all the states hold their primaries at the same time, just like the national election, so that a handful of states do not have the power to sway the nominee elections?

Yes, I’m a little bitter.  I know that when I go in and make my selection for Presidential nominee tomorrow, my vote doesn’t matter in the least.  But don’t worry, I’ll vote tomorrow, and since my vote is completely useless, I’ll use it to vote for the person I really wanted to see win the nomination but knew never had the chance–Alan Keyes–according to sample ballots, his name is still on the the Kentucky ballot.  Too bad I can’t switch parties and vote against the person I least want in the national elections on the Democrat side, but I guess that’s only fair since this keeps avowed party supporters from swaying the other party’s nomination.

Anyone want to state their support for holding a national primary?  I’d like to know what you think the pros and cons to such a suggestion are.