• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are the Democrats right to bump the Iowa caucus?

Are the Democrats right to bump the Iowa caucus?

  • Total voters
    24
Greenbeard

Greenbeard

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
20,156
Reaction score
21,478
Location
Cambridge, MA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
After the debacle that was the 2020 Iowa caucus, and years of grumblings that the state is unrepresentative and the caucus structure exclusionary, the Dems are making moves to shake up the primary calendar.

Iowa no longer first; Democrats reorder the presidential primary calendar for 2024
Democrats voted to make history on Friday by emphasizing and elevating Black voices in the early days of the presidential nominating process, creating a seismic shift in the way America chooses its leaders.

Iowa will no longer host its first-in-the-nation caucuses under the plan put forward by President Joe Biden and approved by the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, ending a 50-year tradition. Instead, South Carolina — a state with a substantial Black population that helped deliver the nomination to Biden in 2020 — will lead an early voting window that will be significantly more diverse than in years past.

Nevada, New Hampshire, Georgia and Michigan will follow — a slate of states that the committee says will reflect the many pockets of diversity that make up the party’s growing base.
Click to expand...

Iowans, of course, won't be pleased and Iowa Republicans are already trying to stir the pot, but is ending this tradition the right thing to do? Does Iowa have some special right to demand it always get to go first?

 
I favor prioritizing swing states. Iowa might fall into that category except that the democratic base in that state (or at least the people that attend the caucus) seem to be strangely liberal.
 
No, based on the stated (race based?) reason for doing so. Would they be (equally?) right to demand that states with fewer black folks be assigned earlier primary election dates?
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
No, based on the stated (race based?) reason for doing so. Would they be (equally?) right to demand that states with fewer blacks be assigned earlier primary election dates?
Click to expand...
Diversity isn't even the issue. This is a debt paid to Clyburn.

They are also going to run into trouble with NH.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It is according to the OP’s linked source.
Click to expand...
South Carolina is a sop to Clyburn. If you want diversity, you lead with Cali, Texas, Michigan, Mass, Florida or New York.

But.

That kills the cash cow, and the point of a primary season, because you winnow the pack too early.

Anyway, this is a clear indication Biden is running again, imho. And, NH is going to stymie him.
 
Voted "yes" not because I agree with them but it is their party and their determination on the order of caucus state to state.

In many ways it is very obvious what they are doing, and the political implication is telling Iowa their vote is less important than the minority southern states vote. As a strategy I get why the idea is being pushed forward but the criticism from Iowa Democrats to anyone else is worth consideration.

Personally, I am going to sit back with a bag of 🍿 on this one.
 
Greenbeard said:
After the debacle that was the 2020 Iowa caucus, and years of grumblings that the state is unrepresentative and the caucus structure exclusionary, the Dems are making moves to shake up the primary calendar.

Iowa no longer first; Democrats reorder the presidential primary calendar for 2024


Iowans, of course, won't be pleased and Iowa Republicans are already trying to stir the pot, but is ending this tradition the right thing to do? Does Iowa have some special right to demand it always get to go first?

Click to expand...

How representative of america is Iowa or New Hampshire when both states are over ninety percent white folks?
 
bongsaway said:
How representative of america is Iowa or New Hampshire when both states are over ninety percent white folks?
Click to expand...
Their job isn't to represent America. Their job is to force candidates to hit the ground. It isn't about delegates, this early. It's about how campaigns are organized. And how candidates respond to adversity.
 
reinaert said:
South Carolina is a sop to Clyburn. If you want diversity, you lead with Cali, Texas, Michigan, Mass, Florida or New York.

But.

That kills the cash cow, and the point of a primary season, because you winnow the pack too early.

Anyway, this is a clear indication Biden is running again, imho. And, NH is going to stymie him.
Click to expand...

You also “winnow the pack” by selecting much more expensive to (successfully) campaign in states to have earlier primaries.
 
reinaert said:
Their job isn't to represent America. Their job is to force candidates to hit the ground. It isn't about delegates, this early. It's about how campaigns are organized. And how candidates respond to adversity.
Click to expand...
Who is their?
 
Yes, there's no reason for Iowa to go first. Better to choose a more representative state that could potentially swing the outcome of the election, like Michigan.
 
Greenbeard said:
Why would we ask them to vet prospective party nominees if they don't represent the party?
Click to expand...
They aren't vetting for demographics. They are small media markets that test viability on the ground.
 
Greenbeard said:
After the debacle that was the 2020 Iowa caucus, and years of grumblings that the state is unrepresentative and the caucus structure exclusionary, the Dems are making moves to shake up the primary calendar.

Iowa no longer first; Democrats reorder the presidential primary calendar for 2024


Iowans, of course, won't be pleased and Iowa Republicans are already trying to stir the pot, but is ending this tradition the right thing to do? Does Iowa have some special right to demand it always get to go first?

Click to expand...

Somebody needs to explain to me what makes Iowa so special in the first place that the Primary needs to start there.
 
Gatsby said:
Yes, there's no reason for Iowa to go first. Better to choose a more representative state that could potentially swing the outcome of the election, like Michigan.
Click to expand...

I was glad to see them adding Michigan to the first batch of primaries for 2024.
 
Gatsby said:
Yes, there's no reason for Iowa to go first. Better to choose a more representative state that could potentially swing the outcome of the election, like Michigan.
Click to expand...
The parties have historically avoided exactly this condition, since the open selection process was begun. It's the whole point if it, to prevent early consolidation.
 
Cardinal said:
Somebody needs to explain to me what makes Iowa so special in the first place that the Primary needs to start there.
Click to expand...
Not sure but I think it's in their state constitution, lol, as if their constitution overrules the dnc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom