Dems primary calendar changing for 2024

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
51,943
44,805
136
Even in 2020 it was pretty close. Writing off Florida is fucking stupid. Dems have to try to appeal to people in states the lean right. Having the first primary in such a state would give the Dems a lot of extra exposure there and allow the primary ground game infrastructure to roll into general. Every dollar spent in SC during the primaries is flushed down the drain for the general.

The FL Democratic Party is a white hot disaster. I would not advise this even if the Republicans were cooperative (they won't be).

SC primary is already early and thats not likely to change so candidates are going to spend there regardless. I think the first three states being SC, NV, and MI (if they move up) is ok. The media markets are not obscenely expensive and the state parties are well organized. The latter two are vital in the general so the investments from the primary would not be squandered.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,613
11,255
136
The FL Democratic Party is a white hot disaster. I would not advise this even if the Republicans were cooperative (they won't be).

SC primary is already early and thats not likely to change so candidates are going to spend there regardless. I think the first three states being SC, NV, and MI (if they move up) is ok. The media markets are not obscenely expensive and the state parties are well organized. The latter two are vital in the general so the investments from the primary would not be squandered.
I agree about NV and MI.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
I wish everyone would just do their primaries on the same day. The current system seems to give too much power to whichever states are first. Is there some benefit to the current system that I'm missing?
nationwide primary for president would only be accessible to the most money-backed candidates.

Oh I remember. But that is no reason why it should be the first primary state. There are no good reasons for it to be the first primary state
maybe georgia as it could be a purplish state. but little old church going black ladies are your base and the only way they get heard in national politics is with an early primary in one of the states with a lot of little old church going black ladies.
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
34,545
1,707
126
nationwide primary for president would only be accessible to the most money-backed candidates.
True. I wonder, as local news is less and less relevant to younger generations, how much that will change. It will still be expensive to advertise nationally, but not having to put out tons of TV ads on every station combined with the ability to put out low-production stuff on YouTube and Twitch might soften the blow there. I guess it's a balancing act between the point about money and having a few states decide candidates for the rest of us. Some reasonable political advertising laws would help a lot more... wait, I forgot where I lived for a second.
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
8,107
9,359
136
IMO there should be regions or ideological tracts (For example, Dems can have a Pacific Coast/Eastern Seaboard/Great Lakes/Deep South/Mid-West) and each region has one state (maybe the smallest in the region) go first, then the next cohort, then the next.

This would keep the early primary campaigns small, allow candidates to target states they align with, and allow voters in non-voting states see which candidate is preferred by which voting bloc.

Ramp up to Super Tuesday which would be a dry run for the general election involving the largest/most populous states. Most organized campaign with the broadest appeal wins that one.

The Primary needs to be a process of selecting the most electable candidate, not some handout to shithole states so the most conservative, blue dog democrat gets shat out with a lead.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,627
54,579
136
Whatever replacement we land on it never made sense to start out with states that are both unrepresentative AND electorally meaningless. Pick one or the other!
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo