As a result of the November 8 election, Democrats have a majority in both houses of the legislature in both Michigan and Minnesota. Both states have a Democratic Governor as well. As a result, Democrats are free in those states to pass laws concerning presidential primaries. Democrats have been dissatisfied with the presidential primary calendar for some time, and feel that Iowa and New Hampshire, the first two states to choose delegates to national conventions, are not good choices.
Two more states the Democrats rigged?
Having small states start the Presidential primary season is good because it gives the big, early field of candidates the best opportunity to do retail campaigning on a local level.
IMO, the schedule of Presidential primaries should start with small states from all over the country without regard to region. Then, the medium sized states should vote in the middle primaries to downside the field. Then finally, the big states, like California, Texas, New York and Florida should go last to decide among the strongest remaining candidates.
Walter, that is an original and excellent idea.
I like this idea because it gives more power to the Caucasian people.
@ George W:
I’m not sure that my idea is original. I have notice that about 20-30 years ago the primaries seemed to follow this plan roughly. I recall Presidential election years in which California and New York would typically end the primary season.
I’m not sure that my plan would favor any particular ethnic group. Notice that the large states that would have the final say all have significant non-white populations.
The early states have the most influential role. By the time it gets to the late states it’s typically decided, or at least there’s a winnowed down field and most likely a clear front runner. T
Personally I’m mad about it. The small states don’t have a lot of big cities or Sun people.