So, I was discussing the 2024 Primary with Congressman Clyburn this evening...

[brooklynite]

His view is that SC can support the kind of retail politics Iowa has been famous for. This will allow candidates without nAme recognition or a big financial chest to have an opportunity to become competitive.

Works for me.

[BlueCheeseAgain]

1. South Carolina has more or less indicated who our last three nominees have been.

Obama in 2008, Clinton in 2016, and Biden in 2020 won South Carolina by large margins after more ambiguous results in IA, NH, and NV. They then ran up big totals in other states with large African American populations, and eventually won the nomination. Only Clinton in 2008 was able to keep the overall race close despite that.

South Carolina didn't choose the nominee, but it revealed how African Americans were voting. So having them go first makes a lot of sense. I also wouldn't mind seeing a diverse state with at least one major city go first, either.

[jalan48]

2. In the past 60 years South Carolina has voted for the Democratic candidate only twice.

Kennedy in 1960 and Carter in 1976. Why would we start in one of the most conservative states in the country?

[Demsrule86]

12. So what? Iowa never votes for us.

[jalan48]

13. Why not Georgia? It has more black voters and, we have a chance to win there.

[Demsrule86]

17. Georgia was one of my suggestions.

[question everything]

20. And GA gave us control of the Senate

Yes with the help of Whiny who told his disciples to stay home. Still..

[Buckeyeblue]

23. You would have to raise and spend a lot for Georgia

Because of the mix for urban/rural. I think a small state going first is better. What about Nevada?

[jalan48]

24. Nevada works for me, plus it's a state we can win, unlike SC.

[Demsrule86]

33. why should a small state have such a large effect on our choice...I think larger states should

go first. It was opined that Biden had no chance because he didn't win Iowa or New Hampshire...which is ridiculous. That will bite us in the butt as we will end up and have ended up choosing candidates who won't win a general.

[question everything]

21. Iowa voted for Obama twice

[Demsrule86]

34. True, but Iowa has changed...and was never diverse enough to be first...they had way to much

impact on who the candidate would be.

[questionseverything]

3. Why not a state That might actually vote for a democrat?

[brooklynite]

5. Like New Hampshire?

Last time I checked, that wasn’t an acceptable choice around here.

[questionseverything]

8. Like a state we really need and have a decent chance with

Wisconsin comes to mind

[Demsrule86]

10. There are Black voters in Southern states (and in other areas too) who elect house members

Their opinion matters. And consider that no Democratic presidential candidate can win without a huge percentage of Black voters.

[Demsrule86]

11. New Hampshire is a small state with few electoral college votes...if you really want to pick

a state we might win to go first, I would say Virginia or Georgia.

[Celerity]

14. NV, AZ, NC, VA, GA, WI, NH, CO (in no particular order) ALL are vital swing states, none are

NY/CA/TX/FL/PA expensive (GA and VA are getting there, but they are so vital and diverse)

All are diverse except for NH, but NH is small, cheap, and quirky (face to face needed, so sharpens skills), so adds a twist.

[Demsrule86]

18. I vote down 'quirky' New Hampshire...it is not diverse and has very few electoral votes...what is

the point? And really quirky means out of stop to me with other Democratic voters. Thus, I believe we should not have such a state have a big influence in early primaries. The point is to pick a candidate who can win a general.

[Celerity]

19. It would do no harm going 6th, 7th, or 8th. That said, their state law that

mandates they are the first primary is going to be an issue.

They may refuse to comply with a demotion. If the DNC then says, 'well, your delegates won't count then' we will have an ugly intraparty war on our hands.

[JoeOtterbein]

4. I'd like give Jim a call,...

...can you PM me his number?

[brooklynite]

6. Sadly this was a face to face chat.

But if you can get down to Charleston tomorrow, I might be able to work something out.

Link to tweet

[JoeOtterbein]

7. Darn! AND...

...great pic!

Also, who's the old guy with the yellow shirt?

[Demsrule86]

9. I agree, but I expect no primary should Biden decide to run...we lose always when that happens.

Incumbency is of great value.

[brooklynite]

15. Unlike the Republicans we don't hold a Primary process to protect the incumbent

We hold one which reflects the choice of Democratic voters.

[Demsrule86]

16. I completely disagree...who did President Obama run against in his second term...refresh my

memory. Let me just say, whenever we had a primary opponent for an incumbent, we lost the election. Thus anyone primarying this president if he is healthy and can run, better make it into office the first time, because he/she will be blamed for any presidential loss. Personally, I would never vote for such a person in subsequent primaries...and I bet I am not alone. Incumbency is very valuable in presidential politics...but you know that. And let me say that I can't think of any candidate who could put together a winning coalition except Biden...., particularly in must-win rustbelt states.

[brooklynite]

22. Not the point...

We didn’t CHnge The Primary process in 2012 (or 1996) to make it harder to run against Obama or Clinton.

[Demsrule86]

25. It is exactly the point. It was understood that no one should run against Pres. Obama and

endanger the General despite Sander's alleged efforts to get someone to run. When you have an incumbent president, no one else should run...incumbency has value and no one has won a general in decades when there was a primary challenge. If Biden runs, no one else should run. And anyone who does will be a pariah in the Democratic Party IMHO...as they are very likely to cost us the general.

[brooklynite]

27. Why then is the DNC spending extensive time restructuring the nominating practice?

(I've already given Leadership my advice).

DNC is not leaping to the assumption that Biden is running and nobody would run against him. They're developing a process that will work regardless of the circumstances. I think they call it "democracy".

[Demsrule86]

30. Well, what if for some reason Biden was not able to run...then we would need a primary.

And primaries need to be restructured. There is no reason to have Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada first every year...New Hampshire and Iowa in particular should not be early as they do not reflect our party. I believe they have over the years helped select candidates that had difficulty winning a general. You are into politics and know perfectly well that if an incumbent president is running it would be suicide politically to have primary opponents. And I hope and pray that Biden can run as I don't see anyone that can win the rustbelt at this moment other than him. A primary is a means to an end...it is a process that selects a candidate who has the party's support and thus can win a General.

[Demsrule86]

32. And neither of them had a primary opponent now did they? And both won the General...let's

look at who didn't win the General as an incumbent...Carter lost and likely would have won if Kennedy had not run in the primary...and we would have been spared, Reagan.

[dsc]

26. SC is one of the most anti gay states in the nation

I wouldn't be happy with them having first in the nation status. Maryland would be vastly better.

[brooklynite]

28. So you only want successful candidates at the outset?

Washington is one of the most expensive media markets. You're requiring a candidate to already have a war chest.

[dsc]

29. Charlotte isn't cheap and neither is Atlanta both of which are needed for SC

but if you don't like Maryland then we can use Hawaii or Delaware.

[brooklynite]

31. Why do people insist on starting with absolutely safe Democratic States?

They don't provide the basis for selecting candidates who can win a national election.

[dsc]

35. I am not wedded to a Democratic state

but I do have a major problem with a state that has a majority still against marriage equality and is quite likely to have a Don't Say Gay bill by 2024 having such a major role in our primary.