‘Form Of White Privilege’ For Iowa To Vote First

[GURPS]

According to New York Times opinion writer David Leonhardt:

The strongest part of the case for change, of course, is the racial aspect of the current calendar. Iowa and New Hampshire are among the country’s whitest states. About 6 percent of their combined population is black or Asian-American. Almost 87 percent is non-Hispanic white, compared with 60 percent for the country as a whole. Demographically, Iowa and New Hampshire look roughly like the America of 1870….
The typical defense from Iowa officials is that their state can be trusted because it once voted for a black man (Barack Obama) — which is a pretty stark bit of paternalism.
In truth, the whiteness of Iowa and New Hampshire matters. Consider that Cory Booker and Kamala Harris were doing as well as Amy Klobuchar in early polls of more diverse states; they led Pete Buttigieg in some polls. But Booker and Harris are finished, in no small part because of their struggles in Iowa and New Hampshire. Klobuchar and Buttigieg still might break out.

In the piece, Leonhardt says that Iowa and New Hampshire owe their early-voting status, in part, to circumstances that are no longer relevant — a complex delegate system for Iowa, and weather-related, cost-saving reasons for New Hampshire.

Furthermore, Leonhardt decries the early-voting tradition as “another form of privilege for groups that already benefit from the senate and electoral college,” and implores people to consider allowing other states to vote first next election.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/nyt-columnist-form-of-white-privilege-for-iowa-to-vote-first



IMHO - All Primaries should be held on the SAME Day .... anything else and you FAVOR That State over others

 

[vraiblonde]

Two words:

Barack
Obama

 

[Grumpy]

Two words:

Barack
Obama

half right?

 

[officeguy]

IMHO - All Primaries should be held on the SAME Day .... anything else and you FAVOR That State over others

I always thought so. However, if you think about who would benefit, you wouldn't like the result. Candidates would go where the votes are and pander to the interests of a few large states. In the end, we would end up with two New Yorkers running against each other. And nobody needs that.

 

[Barabbas]

Primaries, from the point of view of the government, are meaningless. There is absolutely no requirement anywhere in the superior documents for primaries. The concept of primaries - strong parties controlling candidates - was actually abhorrent to most founding fathers.

There's no requirement for primaries to be the same for each party - they don't use the same processes, so they certainly have no need to use the same dates. If Democrats want to start in Mississippi and Republicans in Iowa and Libertarians in Hawai'i, they certainly all have the right to do that. If they don't want to hold primaries at all, they have the right to do that.

Primaries are about the most blatant, in-your-face waste of government funds - with no basis in authority anywhere constitutionally - that we have.

Let the parties pay for and accomplish their party-specific races as they deem fit, and be done with it. Change the laws in each state to allow anyone on the ballot, and not give advantage to someone who puts a specific letter behind their name.

I mean, do you know why Bernie is running as a D instead of an I (since he's not a D)? It's because it is a HELL of a lot more work and money to get on the ballot if you are not a D or R. So, he lies and says he's a D, because then he doesn't have to do that work.

He was elected in 2018 to the Senate as an I. Same as the last time. Same as the time before that.

Stop primaries - they are meaningless. At least, stop them from being enshrined into law - they're just party politics that belong to the party involved alone.

 

[Hijinx]

Maybe not all the same day, but split geographically.
There is no reason these two state should be ahead of all of the others except for the money spent canpaigning in those states.

By the time the rest of the states get to vote the result is pretty cut and dried.

Let me add that to the New Yorl Times a snow storm is racist for being white.
They never tire of dragging out the old ragged race card.

 

[Merlin99]

Primaries, from the point of view of the government, are meaningless. There is absolutely no requirement anywhere in the superior documents for primaries. The concept of primaries - strong parties controlling candidates - was actually abhorrent to most founding fathers.

There's no requirement for primaries to be the same for each party - they don't use the same processes, so they certainly have no need to use the same dates. If Democrats want to start in Mississippi and Republicans in Iowa and Libertarians in Hawai'i, they certainly all have the right to do that. If they don't want to hold primaries at all, they have the right to do that.

Primaries are about the most blatant, in-your-face waste of government funds - with no basis in authority anywhere constitutionally - that we have.

Let the parties pay for and accomplish their party-specific races as they deem fit, and be done with it. Change the laws in each state to allow anyone on the ballot, and not give advantage to someone who puts a specific letter behind their name.

I mean, do you know why Bernie is running as a D instead of an I (since he's not a D)? It's because it is a HELL of a lot more work and money to get on the ballot if you are not a D or R. So, he lies and says he's a D, because then he doesn't have to do that work.

He was elected in 2018 to the Senate as an I. Same as the last time. Same as the time before that.

Stop primaries - they are meaningless. At least, stop them from being enshrined into law - they're just party politics that belong to the party involved alone.

If the D's want a primary than they pick up the tab, provide the machines, the venues, the personnel. Same thing for the R's, the govt. shouldn't have to pay a cent for it.

 

[GregV814]

GPA, class , alphabetic order, height, chronological order are all privileged.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

I've always thought the primaries should be held on a single day that way how New Hampshire votes doesn't affect how Maryland votes etc.

But to call it white privilege is stupid, South Carolina is an early primary state, have you ever been to South Carolina?