Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SomeCalcium t1_j63yixk wrote

This was going to happen sooner or later. I understand where the DNC is coming from, Iowa was a poor representative of the general electorate and are a poor predictor of what the national election would look like. NH isn't great either, but at least we're more representative of suburbia/college educated voters.

I think you're eyeing this a bit too vindictively. The DNC's purpose here is not to specifically spite NH, but make a more dynamic primary process that will respond to electorate and more relevant to the general election. Hence why you have Georgia and Michigan moving forward since both of those states are more relevant in the general election. In future years they'd likely move other states forwards or backwards based on the general election results. That's a good thing.

I also don't really care what happens with RNC. Their party and their primaries are way more of a shit show than the DNC. Their winner take all system is atrociously bad and it's partly the reason why we ended up with Trump in the first place.

1

SameOldiesSong t1_j643n0e wrote

> This was going to happen sooner or later.

Maybe so. But if that’s the case, they could have gone about it in good-faith. If they were intending to move NH to Super Tuesday, then just say that; just have that be the initial proposal. And if you are going to pick a state that is more racially diverse, pick one that makes sense in the larger scheme of things rather than the one that looks an awful lot like a political kickback to a state that helped propel the current president to the WH. Pick one that is purple or reliably democratic. One that is more religiously diverse and better represents the country and Dem voters on that front.

And I don’t think everyone in the DNC is being vindictive (I certainly think some are), I just think they are needlessly picking a fight that they cannot win. And one that isn’t going to help them with purple voters who have currently sent an all-blue delegation to Washington. And it’s one that hands the GOP a lot of assets that I’m sure they are thrilled to have.

> I also don't really care what happens with RNC.

Nor do Republicans about the DNC. It’s why the DNC will be the ones people blame (to the extent people blame anyone) if they choose to disenfranchise NH voters.

1

SomeCalcium t1_j646594 wrote

I think you overestimate how much voters care about the primary and underestimate how much they care about actual policy. Case in point, the Republicans straight up canceled a bunch of their primaries going into 2020 and voters did not punish them for that.

If Biden is running again, he's the de facto nominee and Democratic primary turn out would be low regardless. If he opts not to run, then maybe this has a small impact. Furthermore, the primary really only impact Democratic voters or Democratic leaning independents, not potential swing voters who don't vote in the primary anyways.

Regardless, whatever small spat happens over the primary will largely be forgotten by the general election. It's actually better to pull off this band-aid now with a sitting Democratic President running for a second term rather than later when the primary actually matters.

1

SameOldiesSong t1_j64dl8u wrote

It may be that primary order is a non-issue for people but the push to move SC first indicates it isn’t a meaningless issue for a lot of other people, its one people put weight on. That people think it is important is why this fight is occurring. And NH’s FITN primary is a part of the political culture of NH, so taking that away is a little more precarious. There’s a reason that all of the State officials felt comfortable coming out strong against this (including state Demparty).

And of those five states you referenced , 3 were deep red so they were never at risk for GOP. The two purple states they played with in 2020, Arizona and Nevada, both went for Biden and both of the toss up Senate seats went blue. Can’t say that the canceled primary was the reason but I don’t think we can say with confidence that voters didn’t tag them for it.

NH has open primaries so it will stop independent voters who want to weigh in on Dem candidates from doing so.

Main point in all of this is that the DNC picked an unwinnable fight and are posturing to significantly reduce the presence of the party in a purple state with an all-blue delegation. And they are doing this in service of something that you say voters don’t care about: primary order. It’s so stupid and is just them shooting themselves in the foot. And it was done in bad faith. This does not strike me as something the DNC really thought through.

1