Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

←

Публикация

Предыдущая публикация
Kyle Griffin

BREAKING: WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats select South Carolina to lead off their party's 2028 presidential nominating schedule.

66867182
chicagogirl

How about we all vote in the primaries on the same day. By the time I get to vote in Illinois there are no choices left because most of the candidates have dropped out already. How is that fair. This happens every presidential election cycle.

Обсуждение

11 прямых ответов · 36 сообщений

DOOM

Yep. Same with me in Maryland. The primaries should all be meaningful.

kennypowers55

And chosen by a republican state. Just an embarrassment.

Ответ для kennypowers55
newtonmarunner

Given no candidate with 15 percent or less Black voter support has ever come close to winning the Democratic Party Presidential nomination, it makes a lot of sense for South Carolina, where 60 percent of Democratic Primary votes cast are Black voters, to go first in winnowing the field.

Ответ для newtonmarunner
kennypowers55

South Carolina isn't the only place with black voters.

Ответ для kennypowers55
newtonmarunner

57 percent of Black Americans live in the South, so it makes a lot of sense to start where the majority of Black Americans live.

Ответ для newtonmarunner
newtonmarunner

Oh, and it’s Black voters — not black voters. People get a capital letter.

🗽What? Me? Worry? MalcomJ🇺🇲🇬🇧🇨🇦🇺🇦

Because it narrows the primary field to only the wealthiest of candidates. Delaware should be the place to start. Diverse state that is small, so you can meet most in the state with low transportation costs. Helps first time and dark horse candidates.

Soylent_Orange

How’s out you start your own party if you don’t like it?

Weird Alger Hiss 🎉 𓅳

that's by design. they are doing their best to temper democracy

Ryan Leonard

Same in California. Not sure why the Democratic Party seems to hate large population reliably blue states so much.

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
Ответ для 🗽What? Me? Worry? MalcomJ🇺🇲🇬🇧🇨🇦🇺🇦
Ryan Leonard

That makes almost no sense. We need to let smaller states that do not vote for Democrats decide who the large states that do vote for Democrats get to vote for?

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
lordtwang

Because it costs so much money for advertising and ground game, and some very qualified candidates don't start with large warchests.

Ответ для lordtwang
Ryan Leonard

Ok? So instead we should let small, reliably red states pick who the nominee of the Democratic Party is?

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
lordtwang

I didn't say we should. My suggestion was Georgia, a diverse purple state of medium size.

Ответ для lordtwang
Ryan Leonard

My suggestion would simply be everyone at once. Why should any state have more say than another?

grassfedsteelhead

How about we just switch to ranked choice voting? First past the post voting is inherently restrictive and limiting. It also feels bad to hear “they can’t win, they’re a woman, black, gay, trans, Muslim, atheist, etc, so you have to vote smart (straight white male).” We should be able to choose.

Loops

Voting in California is the worst. June primary. Slim pickings. Just endorsing your choice.

whitestripeskorn

Agree with this.

Couch Radish

When that happens only the candidates who can afford to hit all 50 states with ads all at once or whoever has the highest name recognition will win.

Ответ для Couch Radish
Ryan Leonard

What’s the downside?

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
Ответ для 🗽What? Me? Worry? MalcomJ🇺🇲🇬🇧🇨🇦🇺🇦
Ryan Leonard

Poor assumption.

Ответ для 🗽What? Me? Worry? MalcomJ🇺🇲🇬🇧🇨🇦🇺🇦
lordtwang

This!

Ответ для lordtwang
Ryan Leonard

Except it’s not true. You can’t point at something that wasn’t tried as an example of why not to do something.

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
lordtwang

So you want big states to determine the start of things, which means excluding Dems who aren't backed by mega donors or groups like AIPAC?

Ответ для lordtwang
Ryan Leonard

I want all of us to vote at the same time. Seems crazily democratic, I know.

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
lordtwang

I get what you're saying. I do. But do you understand the logistical problems with this? The monetary problems? The only candidates to emerge will either be famous, wealthy, or establishment backed by super PACs. It would be easy for the party bigwigs to choose who they want.

Ответ для lordtwang
Ryan Leonard

It’s like you’re living 40 years ago. Candidates don’t need anywhere near the money they once did. How much did Mamdani spend? Like $20 on TikToks?

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
lordtwang

Mamdani spent over 10 million on a mayoral race. Local politics and national politics are very different beasts. I don't even know why I'm still debating this with you.

Ответ для lordtwang
Ryan Leonard

I guess my broader point is this-we complain about the Electoral College a lot (and rightly so) as it does not represent the actual voters well. I don’t believe going state by state is any better of a solution than that- the President represents all of the US, not South Carolina and whoever is 2nd.

Ответ для Ryan Leonard
lordtwang

I agree the EC sucks. And I think a group of states should go first. I'd pick a state from each region. Off the top of my head, Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Then several weeks later everywhere else. Note, those are all swings states. We have the EC. We have to strategize.

Ответ для Couch Radish
ECP

That's something they're going to have to do for the presidency, anyway. It's worth it if it means the establishment can't thumb the scales of the primary.

Ashley💭

Hard agree! Im in NY and ours has been at the end of June now. In 2020, by the time it got to us Biden was really the only one left out of the, what, 20 choices earlier primary voters got to choose from. I hate not getting a real choice.