The new proposed early primary calendar is a bit of a mixed bag for me. For those who don’t know the proposal is 1. South Carolina 2. New Hampshire and Nevada and 3. Georgia and Michigan. As I understand it, the goal here was to get swing states in the mix along with more diversity.
In my book, they hit a home run with Georgia and Nevada. Two diverse swing states that are growing. And of course we all know Iowa needed to go after that last fiasco.
Here are the demographics of the new proposal.
And here it is without white people…
And again without Georgia and Nevada.
I have no idea how New Hampshire is sticking around. It doesn’t well represent the country at all expect for maybe the fact that they have an independent political streak.
As with Michigan, which is better but still severely under-represents so many.
South Carolina, on the other hand, is great for Black representation, but it’s not a swing state and falls well short everywhere else.
Now I know you would all loose sleep at night if you didn’t find out what Tony would do. So here it is…
I’d scap South Carolina, Michigan, and New Hampshire, and add New Jersey, Illinois, and Washington. Now I know these are not swing states, but I think what was lacking with the others was not just diversity, but regional representation. Like other ethnicities, not all white people are the same. Adding regional representation adds another level of diversity. Plus, you would still have Georgia and Nevada.
Democrats also have huge problems with both Latinos and Asian Americans. Leaving them out of the map seems like a huge mistake. Washington also gives Native Americans a bump at 2%.
I agree with not adding states like California, New York, Texas, and Florida because they are simply too big and don’t give the poor fundraisers a fair shot. But you also want people vs land represented so these medium sized states do the trick.
Let me know what you think?Follow Tony