Joe Biden wins primary election in New Hampshire despite not even being on the ballot

Maven (famous)@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 638 points –
Joe Biden wins primary election in New Hampshire despite not even being on the ballot
businessinsider.com
191

You are viewing a single comment

Choosing to ditch NH because it's, “Too white„ isn't a flex.

New Hampshire having a state law that they always get to go first, for a national election, that's been around for 100 years, is dumb as fuck.

It's good this change is happening. The primary orders should shuffle around more often. No state declaring "we're always first" within their state laws should be recognized at the federal level.

Here's a crazy idea. Every state has their primary on the same day so that no state gets to dictate who others get to vote for.

Here's an even crazier idea. Ditch primaries altogether and use Ranked Choice Voting.

I'm sick and tired of other people deciding which lesser evils I'm allowed to choose between long before my turn to vote even comes around.

They should let the most populated states go first. I'm tired of having our votes count for nothing because half the candidates have already dropped out by the time they get to us, even though we outnumber the people in all the states that go before us. Those early wins and losses would really mean something if they represented a large and diverse population. Might make up a little for how underrepresented we are in the Electoral College.

You as an individual are under-represented, but you as a populous state are too powerful. If California primaries first , no one else matters.

When New Hampshire primaries first, you get a lot of meeting the candidates, an interesting survey result, but the result is still wide open.

Either way, it’s all of us in the middle who get shafted. We don’t get an early say but our vote doesn’t count for much with the big guys coming soon.

I’m torn about whether it is good to be a “safe”state. While it’s nice that we don’t get the nonsense or the robocalls or the mail or the ads, would it hurt to get some attention? Can we be treated like we matter?

How is that more fair than every state going at the same time?

The problem with that version is that, just as in the national election, the candidates will only really campaign in the purple states with a lot of independent or undecided voters. I'd like to see them have to reach out to a diversity of voters within their own parties first. I'm not saying it's more fair necessarily, just that I think it would be good for the process and maybe help each party wind up with a better (or at least more representative of the party as a whole) candidate in the general.

I'm a fan of random order, all within 5 weeks. With polls being open over the entire week.

Helps get more voices in the say. With every state having turns seeing higher candidate engagement that only Iowa gets now. And candidates not feeling pressured to drop out right away because Iowa didn't like them.

At first I disagreed a bit, but primaries are changing from what they used to be, so maybe you have a point. Used to be that there wasn't that much political noise the year before a presidential primary, but now we've got debates and all sorts. There's time now for candidates to get their ideas out there and for people to know who they are. I don't think that was the case in say 2016, where we really got to know Bernie as time went on and that raised his popularity.

omw to the state capital to draft a law saying my state gets to go firster

1 more...