Michigan will replace Iowa as the first primary contest for Dems

[S019]

It's disapointing Dems are dropping Iowa with the history and excitement of the caucus just because the state wouldn't vote for them. In 2012 and 2016 Rs still had Iowa first despite Obama winning the state by a decent margin.

It's being dropped because the electorate isn't representative of the D primary electorate.

But they aren't dropping NH and that state is whiter than Iowa.

Honestly, I don't know why they also didn't drop NH, but moving SC first and adding GA into the first states is a good move.

[Agonized-Statism]

I don't think these matters too much since on the Dem side, I don't expect the primary to be very competitive especially if Biden seeks-reelection which seems like the most likely outcome.

It's a good time to get it done, I guess. Any closer to 2028 and factions start getting mad about the changes.

[Illiniwek]

I'm sorry, but South Carolina should not be the first primary. Its obvious that Biden is trying to reward / perhaps follow through on some backroom promise to do this in return for the support he got in SC that surged him in the 2020 primary. South Carolina is a one-party state. The South Carolina Democratic Party has no major relevance on the national scene.

The two most deserving states for these early primaries are Michigan and Georgia. Pick your order. But these are the most representative states

The one caveat being New Hampshire. If they won't go willingly away as first in the nation, I think its ok to keep them there. New Hampshire may be overwhelmingly white, and therefore not nationally representative, they are representative of the strongest Democratic region of the country. I am ok giving them this position because if New England starts voting Republican, Democrats are going to be in serious trouble.

So my order I'd be fine with:

NH
MI/GA
NV
SC
Iowa

[DS0816]

https://twitter.com/jmart/status/1598407602483986458

It does not matter.

Democrats rig their primaries.

[SInNYC]

Good news for potential candidate Gretchen Whitmer*

*Although, probably not...it's 100% downside for favorite son candidates.  No one cares if you win your home state big, but if you underperform it's a death kneel (i.e., Rubio in 2016.) 

or Harkin 92

[kwabbit]

It's disapointing Dems are dropping Iowa with the history and excitement of the caucus just because the state wouldn't vote for them. In 2012 and 2016 Rs still had Iowa first despite Obama winning the state by a decent margin.

It's being dropped because the electorate isn't representative of the D primary electorate.

South Carolina might be even more unrepresentative. The primary electorate is like 60% Black? Iowa is also a bit more diverse than people think.

This seems like an effort to prevent progressives from getting the nomination by killing them off in South Carolina. Not to sound like PSOL or Jfern, but the order seems designed to protect the professional class of the Democratic Party at the expense of labor/the left by using Black voters in SC and GA.

Nevada is clearly the best state by the DNC’s own criteria. Maybe Biden wants to reward
Clyburn or something, but it’s odd for the DNC to set standards and then to just ignore them.

[Landslide Lyndon]

It's disapointing Dems are dropping Iowa with the history and excitement of the caucus just because the state wouldn't vote for them. In 2012 and 2016 Rs still had Iowa first despite Obama winning the state by a decent margin.

It's being dropped because the electorate isn't representative of the D primary electorate.

South Carolina might be even more unrepresentative. The primary electorate is like 60% Black? Iowa is also a bit more diverse than people think.

This seems like an effort to prevent progressives from getting the nomination by killing them off in South Carolina. Not to sound like PSOL or Jfern, but the order seems designed to protect the professional class of the Democratic Party at the expense of labor/the left by using Black voters in SC and GA.

Nevada is clearly the best state by the DNC’s own criteria. Maybe Biden wants to reward
Clyburn or something, but it’s odd for the DNC to set standards and then to just ignore them.

If progressives can't appeal to black voters then they don't deserve the nomination.

[Blair]

Can the title be fixed?

[kwabbit]

It's disapointing Dems are dropping Iowa with the history and excitement of the caucus just because the state wouldn't vote for them. In 2012 and 2016 Rs still had Iowa first despite Obama winning the state by a decent margin.

It's being dropped because the electorate isn't representative of the D primary electorate.

South Carolina might be even more unrepresentative. The primary electorate is like 60% Black? Iowa is also a bit more diverse than people think.

This seems like an effort to prevent progressives from getting the nomination by killing them off in South Carolina. Not to sound like PSOL or Jfern, but the order seems designed to protect the professional class of the Democratic Party at the expense of labor/the left by using Black voters in SC and GA.

Nevada is clearly the best state by the DNC’s own criteria. Maybe Biden wants to reward
Clyburn or something, but it’s odd for the DNC to set standards and then to just ignore them.

If progressives can't appeal to black voters then they don't deserve the nomination.

Appealing and outright winning are different. It’s very difficult for a progressive to outright win Black voters in the first primary. That’s what you need to win SC.

The Democrats just had a very successful midterm despite terrible Black turnout because they persuaded educated White voters. Biden won in 2020 despite mediocre turnout and persuasion among Black voters. Democrats can win in many ways and the primary is supposed to showcase that instead of passing candidates through a bottleneck in SC. The old system wasn’t great but this might be worse. Jesse Jackson might’ve won under this system.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

One of the advantages of having four small states go first is that it has an equalizer effect. Smaller states require less money to campaign in, and if you have less name recognition, it's easier to crisscross the state and put yourself out there. Not every underdog is deserving, but neither is every frontrunner, and having small states go first allows the quality of candidates' ground games and campaigning skills shine through. See: 2008 Democratic primaries.

Michigan is a bigger state by area and far, far bigger by population. Underdogs or outsiders who may genuinely be better candidates run a greater risk of getting drowned out, and I'm not sure that benefits the party on the long run.

Come join us in the 2020s where any weird rando with a social media presence can raise 10s of millions of dollars and end up on national debate stages despite having literally 0 name recognition before announcing (looking at you Andrew Yang). This idea that bigger stages hurts gadfly underdogs is just so wrong...if anything there's never been a better time to be a random nobody gadfly candidate.

To the extent that larger primary states shuts weird novelty boutique underdogs out, well, good.

Yeah and how did Andrew Yang do in the Iowa primaries again? Right.

I'm not talking about gadfly underdogs like Yang. I'm talking about underdogs with real potential like Obama who benefited tremendously from Iowa being a state where he could show off his strengths without being drowned out by a rival who initially had much more funding

[prag_prog]

lol since when did NH not support Dem candidates and since when did SC start supporting Dem candidates ? Good lord..this whole thing could have been handled in a much better way instead of whatever mess is going on right now.

https://twitter.com/AdamSextonWMUR/status/1598724604645806081

[prag_prog]

I don't mind moving Iowa out of first place but I hope NH is first or 2nd. Secular Whites are also a key part of Dem coalition and NH fits that demographic perfectly.

[new_patomic]

Making South Carolina first even though South Carolina didn't ask for it.

Harping on all of these changes being in the name of racial diversity, specifically, which just is great for headlines.

The fact that it isn't even clear if South Carolina or Georgia can actually change their dates given they're totally controlled by Republicans.

Wew oh wew.

[Landslide Lyndon]

South Carolina and Georgia aren't going to accommodate Democrats. This looks to me more like a gesture of good will towards Clyburn and black voters by Biden.
I think the final solution will be having Nevada and New Hampshire primaries taking place on the same day.

[politicallefty]

I'm not against NH going first so long as they share it with another state or two. Sharing it with NV is a good idea that provides for both geographic and demographic diversity. I do think it's especially important for the first few states to reflect both.

[Comrade Funk]

Reward the state that give us grifter candidates for Senate all the time

[Frodo]

South Carolina and Georgia aren't going to accommodate Democrats. This looks to me more like a gesture of good will towards Clyburn and black voters by Biden.
I think the final solution will be having Nevada and New Hampshire primaries taking place on the same day.

I certainly hope so.  I don't want big states taking center stage so early in the process. The less we change the order of the first four states (apart from Iowa for obvious reasons), the better:

Nevada
New Hampshire
South Carolina
Michigan

And I see no reason to insert Georgia this early in the calendar when we already have South Carolina in the original line-up.  Pick one or the other.  

[Minnesota Mike]

South Carolina and Georgia aren't going to accommodate Democrats. This looks to me more like a gesture of good will towards Clyburn and black voters by Biden.
I think the final solution will be having Nevada and New Hampshire primaries taking place on the same day.

I think it may have changed to a state run primary last cycle but for years the South Carolina presidential primaries were party run, if they have to have a party run primary again in 2024 I'm sure they will. What the final lineup will end up being.

1) New Hampshire- They have the flexibility and the will to move up as far as they need to to be first. Big question is how severe the DNC sanctions will be.

2) South Carolina

3) Nevada

4) Georgia? I don't think this one is written in ink yet. I doubt GA Dems get any cooperation from GA Republicans. Possible party run primary but that is a question mark.

5) Michigan.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Reward the state that give us grifter candidates for Senate all the time

Democrats at least try in Mississippi, which is the blackest state in the country. It's smaller than Georgia too, which is important because Iowa is being replaced by a much larger state.

[Suburbia]

Iowa is too white for Democrats.

SC helps Biden, Adams, and other candidates who are aiming for the Black vote.

[Orser67]

I have no problem with a Southern state going first...but a Southern state going first AND the South being the only region to get two states in the first group of state going first? Feels extremely unfair.

[Kabam]

Actually Michigan will be 5th

https://twitter.com/ec_schneider/status/1598470081557798912?s=20&t=Jkrv22Nn2...

This is pretty good. Except why do they put South Carolina first? Makes absolutely no sense.
It's a safe red state atm and neighboring swing state Georgia is among the first states, too.

[Holmes]

"It can't be Iowa because it doesn't vote Democratic anymore!"

"Yay South Carolina!"

[Biden his time]

I know it's really fun for us to watch the primary results trickle in week by week state by state, but wouldn't the best solution for a representative primary just be holding it nationwide all on the same day?

No state is more representative of the country than all fifty of them

[Landslide Lyndon]

"It can't be Iowa because it doesn't vote Democratic anymore!"

"Yay South Carolina!"

Iowa is being booted because it's unrepresentative of the Democratic coalition and because local Democrats botched it the last two times (especially in 2020). The fact that it became a solidly Republican state just sealed its fate because now national Democrats don't feel the need anymore to pander a potential swing state.