Santander
Atlas Star
![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif)
Posts: 28,093
![](./avatars/Libertarian/L_KY.gif)
Political Matrix E: 4.00, S: 2.61
![](https://uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/PRIMARY/CAMPAIGN/2024R/Banners/banner2.png)
|
![](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/post/xx.gif) |
« on: March 10, 2016, 03:22:38 PM » |
|
I actually wouldn't keep the primary system at all.
But if I had to keep it, I wouldn't change too much. The current early states are pretty good choices on the D side. I think NC would probably be better than SC as the first southern state, but keeping the early states small gives outsiders a shot at establishing momentum, so SC can stay. MI and OH are great microcosms of the D coalition and should come right after the early states, as part of a balanced schedule between the Northeast, South, West and Midwest. Big, safe D states like NY and CA can go last to avoid spending unnecessary amounts of money before the general election.
|