Julin Castro Calls for Re-ordering of Democratic Primary States

[left-of-center2012]

2020 presidential candidate Julián Castro told MSNBC he thinks the order of primary states should change, arguing the country has changed demographically since Iowa became first-in-the-nation.

“I actually believe that we do need to change the order of the states, because I don’t believe that we’re the same country we were in 1972,” Castro told Ayman Mohyeldin. “That’s when Iowa first held its caucus first. And by the time we had the next presidential election in 2024, it will have been more than 50 years since 1972. Our country has changed a lot in those 50 years.”

“What I really appreciate about Iowans and the folks of New Hampshire is that they take this process very seriously. They vet the candidates, show up at town halls. They give the people a good hearing,” Castro said. “Same time, demographically, it’s not reflective of the United States as a whole, certainly not reflective of the Democratic Party and other states should have their chance.”

“That doesn’t mean that Iowa and New Hampshire can’t still play a role but I don’t think we should be forever married to Iowa and New Hampshire going first,” he continued.

https://www.mediaite.com/election-2020/julian-castro-calls-for-re-ordering-of-democratic-primary-states-country-has-changed-a-lot/

[LonePirate]

1. It's about time one of our candidates finally said this. IA and NH should no longer be first.

[BlueMTexpat]

12. Please see my answer below.

It's not a decision that a Presidential candidate can make or that even can be made at a federal level - at least not yet. Castro is doing himself no favors by advocating for such.

See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary

[Act_of_Reparation]

21. What's he got to lose?

It's not like there's even a remote chance he's going to walk away with the nomination. He might as well use the attention to advocate for issues he feels are important.

[BlueMTexpat]

23. As you say, he likely

feels that he hasn't much to lose. But IMO, the question should never have been asked.

We certainly don't seem to educate our voters well.

[brush]

28. Exactly right as their nearly all-white demographic does not...

reflect the make-up of the country, and even less of the Democratic Party. The results from these first states influences fundraising, donors, national perception, media coverage, delegate count etc. and can doom candidates who might do better in more representative primaries.

[Demsrule86]

29. I agree with Castro.

[boomer_wv]

2. Why

Can't we just all vote at once?

[RockRaven]

4. And on a national holiday (if weekday), or a weekend, while we are at it.

Even on national holidays and weekends many people still have to work, but *Tuesday*!? C'mon, man.

[Xandric77]

18. Very good question

I'm all for it.

[brooklynite]

24. Before we go to campaigning on TV...

I’d like to know a candidate can relate to voters one on one.

[VarryOn]

3. I think 2020 will be last time IA and NHget to go first...

And it cant happen soon enough!

[OldRed2450]

5. Elizabeth warren gave a bad answer when asked....

and seemed agitated by the question. She seemed as though see resented being asked. Castro was great!

Link to tweet

[BlueMTexpat]

11. It is the States that decide when

their primaries should be.

Should IA and NH be first? They've made their decisions. There is no reason why other states can't change their own primary dates to come first.

This is a gotcha question that NEVER should have been asked of a Presidential candidate.

Some - too many here even - don't seem to understand the roles played by the states. Please review the process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary

... The United States Constitution has never specified the process; political parties have developed their own procedures over time. Some states hold only primary elections, some hold only caucuses, and others use a combination of both. These primaries and caucuses are staggered, generally beginning sometime in January or February, and ending about mid-June before the general election in November. State and local governments run the primary elections, while caucuses are private events that are directly run by the political parties themselves. A state's primary election or caucus is usually an indirect election: instead of voters directly selecting a particular person running for president, they determine the number of delegates each party's national convention will receive from their respective state. These delegates then in turn select their party's presidential nominee.
...
The staggered nature of the presidential primary season allows candidates to concentrate their resources in each area of the country one at a time instead of campaigning in every state simultaneously. In some of the less populous states, this allows campaigning to take place on a much more personal scale. However, the overall results of the primary season may not be representative of the U.S. electorate as a whole: voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other less populous states which traditionally hold their primaries and caucuses in late-January/February usually have a major impact on the races, while voters in California and other large states which traditionally hold their primaries in June generally end up having no say because the races are usually over by then. As a result, more states vie for earlier primaries, known as "front-loading", to claim a greater influence in the process. The national parties have used penalties and awarded bonus delegates in efforts to stagger the system over broadly a 90-day window. Where state legislatures set the primary or caucus date, sometimes the out-party in that state has endured penalties in the number of delegates it can send to the national convention.
...

************
Warren understands that. The questioner did NOT. Please do not use this as yet another reason to bash her.

[madville]

20. You are right but

The DNC does not have to recognize delegates from a state that defies them or causes a disruption. It’s happened before with Florida I believe, they tried to move their primary to January ahead of everyone else.

[BlueMTexpat]

22. Are there any states

that are doing that in this election cycle?

This is the one currently at issue ... and, however one may feel about it, it's a bit late to change the rules for this one now. That is why I feel that was a "gotcha" question and why I was upset that anyone would choose that particular issue to take a shot at Warren.

**********
Personally, I believe that the way we elect US Presidents is totally inane and insane. Fifty different states with different sets of voting rules are only part of it.

I could go on ... and on ... and on, but will spare you.

We probably would find much to agree about.

[Demsrule86]

30. That is not completely true...in 08 both Michigan and Florida were punished for changing their place

in the primary...Hillary likely would have won in 08 if t hose delegates counted...very close primary...the DNC has the final say of whether delegates count or not so they can make states change it.

[evertonfc]

6. vote once

Why drag the process out? Why do, in 2020, two states that are least representative of the Democratic party relevant? Demographic make-up of these two states are simply not the face of our party

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. I agree with JC on this. n/t

[question everything]

8. You do mean Julian, right?

[BlueMTexpat]

13. ...

[PhoenixDem]

16. DU Glitch

Accented characters like à á é è ñ ô etc. typed in the "Title" field get eaten.

Someone has to encode the title field in UTF-8.

[Green Line]

9. I agree with him on this

[RainCaster]

10. Do it all at once is a great idea!

Only allow a three month primary season, too.

[BuffaloJackalope]

14. This should be done on a regular basis.

People "concerned" about giving too much influence to California & New York b/c of their population have no problem giving too much it to Iowa & New Hampshire.

[Renew Deal]

15. People miss that the Democratic Party has been very successful in this time frame

Especially since 1992. We have only lost one popular vote since 1992

[Demsrule86]

31. Popular vote doesn't matter...and We had 12 years of Republicans from 80 to 92.

We have won twice and the other side who is less popular won twice. I am talking EC...not popular vote as popular vote doesn't matter. And Iowa and/or New Hampshire is not predictive of winning a general...I would also note that Clinton did not win either.

[Gothmog]

17. I would love to see this change

[madville]

19. The order should be changed up BUT

No large states should be allowed to be in the first 5 contests, no CA, TX, FL, or NY. They have too many delegates to be among the first 5.

The main problem is that it is written into some states laws what order they have to go. NH has to be the 1st primary, they’ll simply move their date if someone leapfrogs them.

[whistler162]

25. How about thirds

one time east(PR and VI), middle, west(including Alaska and Hawaii then middle, west, east then west, middle, east.

[bamagal62]

26. Exactly....

Iowa is about 90% white. It does not represent the population.
Why should they decide the direction in which our primary takes???

[LongtimeAZDem]

27. I think it should be by lottery, drawn at the convention for the following cycle

[brooklynite]

32. Nothing stopping Castro from spending all his time in more ethnically diverse States...

...his IA and NH polling aren't likely to get any worse.