|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 03, 2020, 11:58:42 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  Should Mississippi Go First on the Democratic Primary Schedule?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Should Mississippi be the first state on the Democratic primary schedule?
#1
Democrat: Yes
 
#2
Democrat: No
 
#3
Not a Democrat
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 23

Author Topic: Should Mississippi Go First on the Democratic Primary Schedule?  (Read 1518 times)
Virginia Yellow Dog
Frodo
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,606
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 10, 2020, 07:51:28 pm »

What do you think?  African Americans are the bedrock of the Democratic Party in the South (and in the nation as a whole) yet the primary schedule hardly reflects that reality, and they have long felt taken for granted.  So why not Mississippi which has the highest proportion of African-Americans in the country, and is also the poorest with the greatest concentration of poverty in the Delta?  And are we not the party that have traditionally stood up for the poor and destitute since William Jennings Bryan, and for the disenfranchised at least since the 1960s?  This state will bring us back to our roots as a political party but in a way that is inclusive, and would force Democratic candidates to focus on African Americans and their issues and concerns in a way they haven't.  And as an added bonus, it is still small enough population-wise to enable the kind of retail politicking that Iowa and New Hampshire currently enjoy, and would allow insurgent candidates with limited resources to compete on a more even playing field against more established candidates.   
Logged
Bernie Sanders would be a Menshevik in Europe
Jalawest2
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,255


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2020, 09:03:36 pm »

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-if-early-democratic-primary-states-looked-more-like-the-party/
Mississippi is the 50th most representative state. Not a good idea.
Logged
Virginia Yellow Dog
Frodo
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,606
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2020, 09:26:35 pm »
« Edited: March 10, 2020, 09:30:45 pm by Grand Mufti of Northern Virginia »


We can have Nevada come in second.  But to me it is only fair to reward a constituency that has been our most loyal through thick and thin, and what more visible way to reward that loyalty than by having the poorest, most African American state in the Union the first say in who our nominee should be?
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,741
United States


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2020, 11:09:43 pm »

If Mississippi were the first state to vote, I see Democrats candidate running significantly to the right of where they do now on issues like LGBT rights, immigration and other social issues.  Which I'm all for.

But, to answer the question, I don't think it's a good idea for Mississippi to go first.  As was pointed out, MS is the least representative state of the national Democratic Party.  Candidates who campaigned to win the "first in the nation Mississippi primary" would risk being boxed-in by the media as strictly "Black interest" candidates without appeal to blue collar Whites or suburban/urban liberals.

There's a lot of tradition baked into the current primary calendar.  I say rotate the order of the first four every primary year so that each of IA, NH, SC and NV get a chance to go first.  If once every 16 years isn't enough (which it probably isn't, due to a lot of primary seasons being uncontested), then put the first four states into alternating pairs (i.e., IA/SC; NH/NV; IA/NV; NH/SC) and let these pairs vote over the first two weeks on a rotational basis.  Each of the first four states would get a chance to be the "first in the nation" every eight years, and pairing them together prevents any one of the four early states from having too deterministic of an event on the outcome of the primary.
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,958
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.23, S: -7.48

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 11, 2020, 01:12:17 pm »

I've been hearing lately how South Carolina or some southern state should go first, but if people really cared about "representativeness" then the deep south is not the way to go. Way too black and culturally conservative to be representative of the overall electorate, almost as bad as Iowa and New Hampshire.
Logged
Bernie Sanders would be a Menshevik in Europe
Jalawest2
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,255


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2020, 01:41:17 am »

The 4 most representative small states are
1. Nevada
2. Delaware
3. Oklahoma
4. Connecticut
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,720


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2020, 02:03:40 am »

Maybe just do Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina all on the same day
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,341
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2020, 10:55:52 am »

The 4 most representative small states are
1. Nevada
2. Delaware
3. Oklahoma
4. Connecticut


Yeah, Nevada and Delaware is a good 1-2 combo.
Delaware has the added benefit of being close to Washington, so congresspersons won't have to abandon their everyday duties in order to campaign. 
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,957
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2020, 01:15:51 pm »

Mississippi is even more unrepresentative of the Democratic Party as a whole than Iowa is.
Logged
RIP Aunt Jemima
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,568
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2020, 08:13:59 pm »

No way. Mississippi is way more conservative and religious than the Democratic Party as a whole. If we are going to move the first in the nation primary/caucus to a more diverse state, I'd nominate Nevada. They not only have their fair share of African Americans but also a healthy supply of Hispanics/Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans that are indeed more reflective of the Democratic Party. Of course, the only problem with Nevada is that all the candidates would be spending 99 percent of their time in Las Vegas, Reno, and Carson City with maybe one or two appearances in the cow counties. Just my two cents.
Logged
Virginia Yellow Dog
Frodo
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,606
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2020, 09:13:36 pm »

Any Mississippi Democrats who actually live in the state want to weigh in? 
Logged
DINGO Joe
dingojoe
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2020, 10:35:57 am »

Come over to Louisiana, we're a little more diverse and way more fun. 
Logged
New Frontier
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,265
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -1.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2020, 04:12:30 pm »

No, Illinois should go first.
Logged
#Joemala2020
RFKFan68
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2020, 05:44:14 pm »

If we want a cheap state I think it should be Nevada or Georgia.

If anything goes then Illinois.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,341
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 13, 2020, 08:15:03 pm »


Too big and too expensive. A Bloomberg-like candidate would have the advantage over lesser known ones who are more capable in retail politics.
Logged
538Electoral
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,723


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 13, 2020, 09:42:26 pm »

No.
Logged
Lord Halifax
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,235
Papua New Guinea


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2020, 12:33:49 am »

If we want a cheap state I think it should be Nevada or Georgia.

If anything goes then Illinois.

GA is not exactly cheap. It has a big population and the Atlanta media market is quite pricy.
Logged
lfromnj
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,503


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2020, 11:38:25 am »

NJ or IL has more of the Upper class suburban population than Nevada does but Nevada is cheaper to run in.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,951
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2020, 11:57:15 am »

Mississippi would be a nice "gesture," as even the most elitist White liberal alive acknowledges that the Democratic Party isn't SH|T without the completely unwavering support of Black voters, and they clearly have the most sway in the primaries (partly due to their historically noted and relatively unrivaled pragmatism of sticking together).  However, as others have noted, the Democratic electorate isn't THAT Black, haha.  What percent of MS Democrats are Black now a days, 70%??

It would effectively serve as an "affirmative action" policy to combat the years of advantages enjoyed by the super White electorates in Iowa and New Hampshire, haha.
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,577
Nepal


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2020, 12:33:05 pm »

Nope.

Maybe just do Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina all on the same day

Not a bad idea, actually.  Collectively, they should be representative enough to go first.  Though they should all hold primaries, and New Hampshire would hate it.
Logged
Virginia Yellow Dog
Frodo
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,606
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2020, 12:47:08 pm »
« Edited: March 16, 2020, 02:36:15 pm by Grand Mufti of Northern Virginia »

Nope.

Maybe just do Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina all on the same day

Not a bad idea, actually.  Collectively, they should be representative enough to go first.  Though they should all hold primaries, and New Hampshire would hate it.

The idea is to pick one state small enough in population early in the process so contenders with less resources are on a more even playing field vis-a-vis more established candidates.  
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 277
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 29, 2020, 05:37:53 pm »
« Edited: June 29, 2020, 05:46:22 pm by Battista Minola 1616 »

No way. Mississippi is way more conservative and religious than the Democratic Party as a whole. If we are going to move the first in the nation primary/caucus to a more diverse state, I'd nominate Nevada. They not only have their fair share of African Americans but also a healthy supply of Hispanics/Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans that are indeed more reflective of the Democratic Party. Of course, the only problem with Nevada is that all the candidates would be spending 99 percent of their time in Las Vegas, Reno, and Carson City with maybe one or two appearances in the cow counties. Just my two cents.

But the fact is that close to 99 percent of Nevada Democrats come from Las Vegas, Reno and Carson City...
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 277
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 29, 2020, 05:45:27 pm »

Why not Alaska, by the way, since Native Americans are like 3000 times more ignored than African Americans?
Logged
Timberwolf
Rookie
**
Posts: 158


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 29, 2020, 09:31:21 pm »

Why not Alaska, by the way, since Native Americans are like 3000 times more ignored than African Americans?

Even though Alaska does have the highest percentage of Native Americans of any state, I feel New Mexico would be a more representative state to go first in the primary. Although it has a slightly smaller percentage of Native Americans than Alaska, it has more Native Americans overall along with a heavily Latino population that Alaska doesn't really have. But I'd be in favor of having New Mexico and Alaska go earlier than they do in the primaries to get more say to Native voters.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 277
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 30, 2020, 05:13:04 am »

Why not Alaska, by the way, since Native Americans are like 3000 times more ignored than African Americans?

Even though Alaska does have the highest percentage of Native Americans of any state, I feel New Mexico would be a more representative state to go first in the primary. Although it has a slightly smaller percentage of Native Americans than Alaska, it has more Native Americans overall along with a heavily Latino population that Alaska doesn't really have. But I'd be in favor of having New Mexico and Alaska go earlier than they do in the primaries to get more say to Native voters.

I agree. A really pumped up way to render the ideas we shared in this thread would be substituting all the first four primary states with:
Alaska (the most Native American state)
New Mexico (the most Hispanic state)
Hawaii (the most Asian state)
Mississippi (the Blackest state)
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.084 seconds with 16 queries.