Can we conclude that, first, the "first in the nation" results do not amount to much?

[question everything]

Second, that winning two small states that do not represent the country as as a whole do not "a front runner" make?

Third, either eliminate the caucuses or not have them front and center.

[Todd79]

1. They don't

And it kind of throws it in Michael Moore’s face. Really on both sides. It’s all about schmoozing and it doesn’t prove who is a better candidate for a national election.

[blue-wave]

2. And

Last edited Fri Mar 13, 2020, 03:13 AM - Edit history (2)

do not let people who are not Democrats run for any office in the Democratic primary or in the general elections as a Democrat.

[Turin_C3PO]

3. You should have to be a party member

for at least four years, IMO, to run for the Presidency as a Democrat.

[question everything]

5. This really, should be the number one priority of the party

[MineralMan]

4. Iowa and New Hampshire are no longer relevant.

We need to redesign the Democratic Party primary process. We should have done so before the 2020 election year.

[question everything]

9. $300 million were spent this year in Iowa!

And I don't believe we ever got the final results. And as we were told, the changes were made to placate Sanders.

[teamster633]

6. Let's imagine an alternate reality where Iowa and NH didn't happen.

Bernie wins a caucus, a questionable indicator of party support to begin with. Then Joe wins big in the South Carolina primary, a much more representative demonstration of support. In this scenario we have no reason to be surprised when Bernie gets demolished on Super Tuesday and on Big Tuesday the following week. As soon as our party members were given an opportunity to make their preferences known, there was no question of who had their support. All this conspiracy-theory-rigged-DNC crap could have been avoided by starting our nominating process with states or groups of states that actually represent the diversity of the party, not the entitled opinions of the cloistered white people whose only claim to their position is some tradition of questionable provenance. I live in NH. I can't speak for Iowans, but we here in NH aren't the contemplative, discerning students of politics that our boosters would have you believe. We are no better or worse than everyone else in this country. The time for change has long passed.

[NurseJackie]

7. They're too white. They don't represent.

[Kahuna7]

8. IA and NH shouldn't go first. Any state that insists on maintaining their

caucuses should be made to go last so that they don't skew the results.

[Turin_C3PO]

10. The problem

is that I believe New Hampshire has a rule that they’ll move their primary to the front of the pack, regardless of which states move up their dates.