well yall are both right, the goal should be “whoever can produce the best total base motivation + moderate voter motivation”. Swing voters may or may not exist (I tend to think they don’t), but what motivates hardcore base voters to turn out is different than what motivates moderate centrist voters to turn out. Those moderate centrist voters may be reliable D voters when they vote or they may actually be swing voters, but regardless you need to motivate both groups.
1 Like
This is why it’s bad. It lets Jim Clyburn pick the nominee. Which guarantees it will be a eDem compliant fossil.
https://twitter.com/cd_hooks/status/1598534278803062787?s=46&t=qiYyd62g3lFdEu-dwXKdnw
3 Likes
You are right and I tried to find polls about political views by party affiliation AND state but I could find only either/or.
My hypothesis is that South Carolina is more religious and socially conservative than the national average and by extrapolation Democratic voters in the state are as well. As I said above I couldn’t find hard numbers to prove or disprove it.
Just lol the primary system is so stupid. Might be the second dumbest thing in American politics after the electoral college.
3 Likes
YES
1 Like
now this is a good argument
1 Like
I think the impact of the change is less about SC in isolation and more about the change to the schedule as a whole. Part of the reason why SC was so pivotal last time was (a) a few states had already weighed in, which cleared the field a little bit and (b) it came just before Super Tuesday which forced the hand of a lot of candidates who had to decide whether they wanted to put up a fight in all of those states vs drop out and get on the Biden train.
If SC goes first in 2024, I don’t think it will be as pivotal because more candidates will treat it as a single small sample and try to regroup to fight another day. For example, if there is are a bunch of Midwest states clumped together say 6 weeks after SC, I think someone like a Whitmer or a Mayor Pete is going to try to downplay a poor result in SC and HODL in order to get to the Midwest and hopefully use good results there to turn the momentum. In contrast, in 2020, Iowa was one of the most favorable places for Pete, so when doing well there didn’t have much if any impact on SC, he knew he wasn’t going to win, so it made sense to just take the deal.
IOW, changing the schedule will change the dynamic, but I don’t think that moving SC first necessarily means that it will be calling the shots.
3 Likes
Those are both a result of giving the states too much power relative to the federal government.
12 Likes
it’s amazing that both sides are still totally underestimating biden
1 Like
SC is a deep red state, I’d be more interested in a 50ish 50 state going first; I nominate the great state of Georgia, I’m sure you guys aren’t sick of voting yet.
1 Like
Gimmicks are not allowed sir.
1 Like
i missed out on dark brandon account
Not really sure why there is a fuss about the primary states this round. Is it a given that someone is going to contest Biden?
No
I’m with you on this. I assume the fuss is because these shenanigans will be more likely to keep it that way. Many are desperately hoping that will change while knowing it is not likely to happen.
So far Biden’s Russia energy policy is working
1 Like
oil trade wars are good and easy to win.
4 Likes
I think it’s pretty clear that this is true with a thought experiment. Let’s first accept as a given that the earlier primary states have an outsized impact on the eventual nominee. Let’s then take the extreme example that all 49 states are 100% lock for one party or the other, and it’s known that the presidency will come to a single 50/50 state. If your goal as a party is to maximize your chances of putting forward a nominee that will win the presidency, would you a) want that state earlier, b) later, c) no difference ?
this is a bait and switch
also, this still doesn’t address the issue of “winning primary in state X” translating into winning the general. Do you have data that shows swing states that go for a candidate who ends up losing the primary then underperforming for that party in the general?
Your thought experiment is just vibes.