Does NH deserve its first-in-the-nation place in presidential primary season?

[bedstuy]

Of course not.  No state should have one of the first few caucuses or primaries every single year.  It's not fair and it distorts the process in favor of candidates who can play well in IA, NH and SC.

[bedstuy]

Here's the system I think might work:

Divide the country into four regions, West, South, Midwest and Northeast.  The first four primaries rotate among those regions every year.

So, say maybe one year it's:
1st West: Arizona
2nd South: Virginia
3rd Midwest: Minnesota
4th Northeast: New Jersey

Then, you would shift the next year

1st Northeast:  Vermont
2nd West:  Oregon
3rd South:  Florida
4th: Midwest: Indiana

Then, you would also have the states rotate in each of their regions, staggered so the biggest states won't all coincide in one year like, California, Texas, New York, Illinois.

[bedstuy]

Didn't Obama actually raise about the same or slightly more money than Clinton if you only include non-General Election earmarked money?