Biden Is Putting South Carolina First. I Won't Vote for That.

[Uncle Joe]

(snip)

The ultimate goal of this process is to win; the Biden reform proposal honors that by moving these four key states, from different regions of the country with their collectively diverse electorates, to the front of the line. And if that’s all it did, we could wrap up this essay here and declare victory.

But the Biden nomination calendar contains a fundamental, dooming flaw: the replacement of Iowa with South Carolina as the first state. The change would be comical if it weren’t tragic.

We all know why South Carolina got the nod. President Biden, Representative Jim Clyburn and many of his top supporters were buoyed by their campaign’s comeback in February 2020 when the state delivered Mr. Biden his first victory of the season — and a big one at that. The media attention from that victory, and the consolidation of the Democratic field that it yielded, helped catapult him to winning a majority of the following Super Tuesday states. And when Covid spread through the nation shortly after, the rest of the primary contests were effectively quarantined, and Mr. Biden iced his victory. None of that story is a reason to put South Carolina first, however.

South Carolina is not a battleground state: Mr. Trump carried it by double digits in 2020. It is way more ideologically and culturally conservative than our party and our nation. And the state is not trending in any way toward the Democratic Party. Just two years ago, we witnessed Jaime Harrison — now the chair of the Democratic National Committee — spend the eye-popping sum of $130 million to try to defeat Senator Lindsey Graham. After outraising and outspending Mr. Graham, Mr. Harrison still lost the 2020 Senate race decisively. Let’s not compel all other Democratic campaigns to waste more money that could be better spent elsewhere. If we really want to pick a diverse primary electorate, look to South Carolina’s neighbor to the north — an actual battleground state.

(snip)

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/05/opinion/iowa-caucus-south-carolina-primary-democrat.html

[DURHAM D]

1. I see that the author of this opinion was Bernie's campaign manager.

[lamp_shade]

2. Hmmmm

[Uncle Joe]

3. That is correct, any other observations regarding the substance of the article? n/t

[Autumn]

13. And a damn good article it is. Can you dispute any of it?

I agree with the article. To me it doesn't make sense to have the state that will elect the republican have a big hand in selecting the Democrat.

[2naSalit]

18. First thing I look for, Thanks!

[onecaliberal]

4. They got the nod because we're sick of all white states acting like they're representative

Of the electorate. This change is a very good move.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Did you read the article? n/t

[wnylib]

20. The points that the article brought up about SC being

a conservative state, and a Dem candidate losing against a Republican despite spending millions of dollars are not relevant. This is about the primary election, not the general. Democrats would be voting for their choice of candidate.

I favor the change because it gives African American voters a greater focus during the primaries than Iowa does.

[Uncle Joe]

22. So would North Carolina and it would be far more competitive and a

closer reflection of the stated values of the Democratic Party.

[wnylib]

24. Competitiveness is not relevant in the primary

when it is Dems who are voting for their own candidate. Since they are Dems, they do not share the conservative views of Republicans.

Why would it be necessary to have a state that's competitive in the general election (the only time when competitiveness matters) when casting primary votes within one's own party?

It sounds like you are concerned that Dems in SC might not be far enough left for you.

But the majority of Dems are not on either end of the spectrum in the party. They tend to group toward the middle, depending on the issues.

When it comes to the primaries, we are not assessing Republicans in the state to be the first. We are assessing only Dems since they are the ones voting for our choice of candidate to run in the general. Doesn't matter how conservative the R's are in a state. Presumably the Dems are to the left of the R's or they wouldn't be Dems.

[TexasTowelie]

29. North Carolina also has more media markets than South Carolina

which makes it more expensive to campaign and less likely that an "unknown" will emerge near the top of the results. If the Democratic Party wants to take money out of politics, this idea doesn't support that goal.

[Uncle Joe]

30. I have thought about the small state aspect as well.

Having said that, I can't imagine a pro labor or union message making much impact in South Carolina... at least for a few years.

So any such strong pro labor or union supporting Presidential candidate would be hampered from the beginning starting out in that state.

I've always considered unions an integral part of our nation's success.

[Sneederbunk]

6. I like Michigan.

Midwestern, culrurally diverse, more Democrats.

[Uncle Joe]

7. I do as well, it was all good except putting a non-battleground, crimson red state first.

The most unfriendly union state in the nation.

[wnylib]

21. But it's the Dems who vote in the primary for one of our own.

It sounds you prefer to lead with a state where the Dems are farther to the left. Is there a state where the majority of Dems are far left?

[CentralMass]

26. Jim Clyburn has played king maker in the last few election

[brush]

8. It's long been past time to move deep red Iowa out of...

the first Dem primary spot. What's the reason to keep it there instead of the reasons not to move it to NC?

[Uncle Joe]

9. The article makes no issue with removing Iowa from first place

but why give it to an even more conservative state as in South Carolina?

North Carolina would've been a more logical choice insofar as competitiveness is concerned.

[Clash City Rocker]

11. Why not give it a very liberal state

That will vote for someone who has no chance of winning in the general election?

I don’t think South Carolina Democrats are right-wingers.

[brush]

15. It's pretty obvious this is a thank you from Biden to Rep Clyburn and

Black voters for helping him and Democrats gain the White House.

Again, it's obvious. Why do so many have a problem with that? To be frank about it, we'd lose every election with out the loyalty of Black voters to the Democratic Party.

[BlueMTexpat]

31. Excellent point! eom

[Beachnutt]

10. Should be a Blue state..

Delaware maybe.

[Clash City Rocker]

12. Honestly, if you want someone who'll win the general, maybe it should be a purple state

Really, it should be the state whose Democratic voters best represent the average voter. That’s not a deep blue state. It might be a state that lightly trends blue, or red, but a purple state would be your best bet if you want to win.

[brush]

33. Why? It's a primary, a closed one where only Dems vote.

[orthoclad]

14. Why not simultaneous primaries?

Why stretch the horse-race out?

[brush]

16. I'd go with that but the approval of every state Sec'y of State...

would have to be gained. That's problematic, especially from red state secretaries.

[CentralMass]

17. I think I agree with you.

There reportedly was less then a stellar turn out of the black vote in the primary. I wonder if the house leadership selection and this primary move is an effort to improve enthusiasm.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

19. Biden and Sanders worlds are again at loggerheads over South Carolina

I strongly disagree with the opinion in the OP.

Link to tweet

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/west-wing-playbook/2022/12/05/about-that-faiz-op-ed-00072334

Sen. BERNIE SANDERS’ 2020 campaign manager and current adviser FAIZ SHAKIR sparked both outrage and glee Monday morning by publicly slamming President JOE BIDEN’s recent proposal for Democrats in South Carolina to lead off the 2024 presidential primary.

In a New York Times op-ed, Shakir called Biden’s proposal “comical, if it weren’t tragic.” In an interview a few hours after the piece was published, he added that putting South Carolina first was a “fatal flaw” in Biden’s plan and an “obvious slap in the face to our good sense.”

South Carolina was the state that propelled Biden to victory in the 2020 primary. And the president’s allies in the party were unamused by Shakir’s piece.

“Zero tolerance — ZERO for any disrespect or dismissal of Black voters,” Democratic National Committee Chairman JAIME HARRISON wrote on Twitter while retweeting a similar critique. PATRICK DILLON, a Democratic strategist whose wife, JEN O’MALLEY DILLON, is Biden’s deputy chief of staff, tweeted Shakir’s piece with this comment: “Had to read this twice just to confirm that it does not mention Black voters even once.”......

Biden’s political brain trust believes they have the moral and political high ground when it comes to the calendar and don’t care to pick a fight over it with Bernie world. “We can all agree that an early primary calendar that looks like America and reflects the values of our party serves the process well,” said one Biden adviser, who asked to remain anonymous. “And making sure that the Democratic party’s most loyal voters — Black voters — are at the front of the line and not at the back of the bus feels like something no one should be arguing about.”

Regardless of intention, Biden’s proposal has prompted the first political fight of the 2024 primary. Many Democrats, including progressives like Rep. RO KHANNA (D-Calif.), have already come out in favor of the proposal, which the full DNC will vote on in Philadelphia in early February.

[OilemFirchen]

23. He won't vote for WHAT?

Is Shakir a member of the DNC? Is he even a registered Democrat?

Article is paywalled.

[Uncle Joe]

25. Well here is some more of the article

(snip)

Mr. Biden and the Democrats tasked with changing the calendar have made three central decisions in their proposal, which party officials unveiled last week and will move through a series of procedural steps and votes this winter and would require the cooperation of states chosen to go early. The first is that the Iowa caucus would no longer begin the process. This is the correct decision.

Being first is a special privilege, and Iowa must be held accountable. Accountability can be a tough pill to swallow; by definition, accountability requires a penalty for wrongdoing.

Since the 1970s, Iowa, the state famous for its unique town-meeting-style caucuses, has had the honor of being the first to register its recommendation for the Democratic nominee for president. Yet on Feb. 3, 2020, as the campaign manager for Bernie Sanders, I witnessed a historic travesty of election justice as Iowa’s Democratic Party-led caucus failed to do the one thing it absolutely had to do: count votes and declare an outcome. The state party was unable to report a winner on caucus night (and for many nights thereafter), overrelying on a faulty mobile app and subsequently pointing fingers at others for its own faults.

(snip)

It bears repeating: Being first is a special honor. The state chosen for the task is rewarded in myriad ways. Iowa’s economy has benefited greatly over the years from the high level of campaign spending and travel. Aware of the process’s economic power, many of our Democratic campaigns employed union-friendly hotels, restaurants and vendors when we were active in Iowa. Good luck finding that in South Carolina, one of the fiercest anti-union, anti-labor states in the country. In fact, South Carolina is already first in the nation at something that it shouldn’t be proud of; it is the lowest-density union state in America. It should thus never be in contention to be first on our calendar.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/05/opinion/iowa-caucus-south-carolina-primary-democrat.html

P.S. If you google the article and click on the link, you can get around the paywall.

Here is some background on Shakir, apparently Harry Reid thought highly of his counsel.

After graduating from law school, Shakir worked as a communications aide in the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and as a legislative aide to Senator Bob Graham.[9] He also worked on the John Kerry 2004 presidential campaign as a junior staffer.[5] In 2005, Shakir began working for the Center for American Progress as a policy adviser.[10][11] There, he helped launch the ThinkProgress blog in 2005, of which he was the editor-in-chief from 2007 to 2012.[9]

In 2012, Shakir became House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi's director of new media.[9] During that time, he was involved in advocacy for Muslim-American communities.[10] After that, he served as a senior adviser to Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.[12] Reid's former deputy chief of staff commented, "Reid did not make a big decision without consulting Faiz. There's no one he trusted more on how the progressive community would react on something and no one whose advice he took more seriously on pushing him to the left."[13] Shakir informally advised Bernie Sanders' 2016 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, which drew the ire of the Hillary Clinton campaign team. According to the Podesta emails, Clinton's campaign chair John Podesta chided Shakir for advising Sanders. "Gave him a very hard time," Podesta wrote to Neera Tanden about Shakir's involvement. "I have to say this does not go down easy with me."

Shakir joined the American Civil Liberties Union as its political director in January 2017.[14] In March, he helped the ACLU launch the People Power website, which engages volunteers to mobilize in defence of civil liberties.[11] Shakir had first pitched the idea for such a website to ACLU Director Anthony Romero in 2015; at that time, Romero had dismissed the idea as too radical.[15] The website attracted 225,000 volunteers in eight weeks, coordinating projects such as meetings with judges to film screenings to panels on law enforcement and immigration.[11][16][17]

Upon joining Sanders' 2020 presidential campaign in February 2019, Shakir became the first Muslim[12] and first Pakistani-American[18] campaign manager for a major party U.S. presidential campaign.

He and Roger Lau (who worked for Elizabeth Warren's campaign) share the distinction of being the first Asian-Americans to serve as campaign manager for a major American presidential candidate.[19][20]

In February 2021, Shakir and Nico Pitney founded More Perfect Union, a nonprofit news and advocacy outlet modeled on ThinkProgress.[21] Shakir describes More Perfect Union, which creates video and graphics to support labor issues, as "ThinkProgress for a digital age."[22]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faiz_Shakir

[OilemFirchen]

27. So that would be a no.

And a no?

[Me.]

28. No

is he thinking he and his have another shot which of course is wildly off the mark.

[scarletlib]

32. I don't think Iowa is a battleground state either.