2020 Election Thread (formerly: 2020 Presidential Candidates Thread) (Part 1)

It’s not wonderful that it is first, it is wonderful that it is structured the way it is, where a form of single transferable vote is combined with a forum in which you have to sell your candidate to your neighbors. I’ve voted for president in 6 states, they all have their procedural quirks, but the Iowa process is something special.

As for the order, my call for smaller states first is not my own invention, it is a thing called a “graduated primary system”, or “The California Plan” (I think because it was proposed early on by the California Democratic Party as a way to rationalize the national primaries).

1 Like

I didn’t say it was a plan you devised.

And I have no interest in selling my vote to my neighbors. Good fences make good neighbors - another fine regional tradition.

8 Likes

That’s not what happens. I understand the skepticism though, I was skeptical too until I participated in one, and over the many elections since I left Iowa I’ve always regretted that the states I was living in didn’t have as creative a system.

1 Like

I think it’s fine for Iowans to run their primary as they see fit. I have no interest in romanticizing their choice into some special process that deserves primacy over other voters.

I’m sure Iowans find that convincing as it’s in their self interest to find it so. Mine is not.

10 Likes

I’m not a Iowan, so no self-interest here. Just reporting my experiences. I currently live in a place where the results of elections are announced hours before my polls close, so I also appreciate the frustration of decisions being made without my input.

Primary order is set by two parties, usually cooperatively so as to not create too much confusion. Now that the GOP is getting out of having primaries, maybe the DNC can make the decision on their own. Order changes are worked out by committees and voted on at the convention, where Iowa has no special power.

I never denied what the process is to determine the primary schedule. You however have argued for keeping it (the status quo) so.

5 Likes

I did? I thought I was arguing for the California Plan. The status quo appears to have California showing up in Super Tuesday.

A change is by definition not the status quo - it’s a change.

8 Likes

Everything that is today is the result of a change in the past, like the decision to move the California primary again. In any event, I’ve argued neither for the system after this change nor for the system before this change; please don’t mischaracterize what I said.

I do believe that big states moving forward will mainly serve to anoint candidates chosen by the media. Any proposal to change the order of primaries should be based on maximizing the chance of getting a good candidate, not on pique: neither Iowans or New Hampshirites pique should they be displaced, nor Californians pique at not getting to be the elephant in the room on something.

Who are you talking to here? This post seems to refer to previous conversations- but it didn’t address anyone directly and wouldn’t have showed to me if I didn’t come back to check the thread.

6 Likes

i can understand why someone reading through these comments would come away thinking you were supporting the status quo since you spent a good bit of time extolling the specialness of the iowa approach. and one sentence i missed the first time through in support of having a different state at the start of the process.

6 Likes

Who are you talking to here?

I meant it for you, but it is 3AM and I’ve been grading papers since 7 and I apparently clicked the wrong “reply” button.

you spent a good bit of time extolling the specialness of the iowa approach

I’ll do it again: I like the Iowa approach, and I think it gets an unfair rap from people that don’t know much about it except that Iowa is small and their caucus is first. I don’t really care whether it is first, though there are worse things that can happen…such as CA, TX, NY, FL et al all creeping forward so that the nomination is determined in February. You can have massive reform with or without moving Iowa’s place in the order.

Perhaps it shouldn’t be Iowa or New Hampshire as the first, all the time, but I do see the benefits of the couple first caucuses / primaries being in fairly small states. It lets the less well funded / well known candidates get their word out, and lets them test the waters before plunging into one of the big states with a ton of delegates which are vital for everyone wanting the candidacy.

2 Likes

no one would design it this way if it weren’t already like this

5 Likes

WHAT ARE YOU DOING JOE? Rudy effing things up for Donnie on live tv is Grade A entertainment

7 Likes
9 Likes

I am of the opinion that both can be correct. His bumbling is entertaining, but treating it as if it were legit news is irresponsible. Plus think of all the comedy writers out of work! Anymore you don’t need them, just quote Rudy and co. and it is hilarious!

6 Likes

Donnie must be fuming. He’ll be striking out at Pence in 3, 2, …

5 Likes

If Trump tries to throw Pence under the bus, Pence might start openly campaigning for impeachment

Nobody has more to gain by it than he does

9 Likes

You’re just try to cheer me up.

Thanks!

5 Likes