In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
they behave like this.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> they behave like this.
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.

On 12/4/22 11:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> residents.

Excellent, more Oath Keeper talking points. Meanwhile;

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/jun/18/whether-wisconsin-most-gerrymandered-state/

On whether Wisconsin is the most gerrymandered state

Hint: it's not Dems doing the gerrymandering. I know you're lack of
testicles won't allow you a rebuttal though. Maybe some guy with a
working pair can stand in for you?

Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> they behave like this.
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

Fuck off, eunuch.

On 12/4/22 11:49 AM, suzeeq wrote:
> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>>   RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>
>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>> they behave like this.
>>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>
> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.

The dickless wonder doesn't give a shit.

On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:

> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>
>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>> they behave like this.
>>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>
> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.

The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which is what
Biden is 'adjusting'.

On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>
>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>> they behave like this.
>>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>
>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>
> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which is what
> Biden is 'adjusting'.
>
So, what's wrong with that?

In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:

> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
> >>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
> >>>
> >>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> >>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> >>> they behave like this.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
> >>>
> >> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
> >
> > The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
> > is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
> >
> So, what's wrong with that?

When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
don't think that's racist?

If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
people, would that be cool?

On 12/4/2022 12:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>>>
>>>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>>> they behave like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>>>
>>>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>>>
>>> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>>> is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>>>
>> So, what's wrong with that?
>
> When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
> don't think that's racist?

Not really.
>
> If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
> one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
> people, would that be cool?
>
Not the same thing.

They're still getting to vote in the primary, just IA won't get bragging
rights for being first.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>they behave like this.

>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.

They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
ads in the Number 3 television market.

In article <tmivad$ljp1$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:

> On 12/4/2022 12:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> >>>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> >>>>> they behave like this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
> >>>>>
> >>>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
> >>>
> >>> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
> >>> is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
> >>>
> >> So, what's wrong with that?
> >
> > When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
> > don't think that's racist?
>
> Not really.
> >
> > If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
> > one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
> > people, would that be cool?
> >
> Not the same thing.

Always the response when the double standard rears its ugly head.

> They're still getting to vote in the primary, just IA won't get bragging
> rights for being first.

In article <tmj12j$3o6ne$3@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
> >The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> >residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> >they behave like this.
>
> >https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
> That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
> that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
> time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.

I submit the example of Nixon's people in 1972. There was no way Nixon
was going to lose that election. None, and yet Nixon's evil minions
did what they did anyway.

> They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
> population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
> a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
> first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
> ads in the Number 3 television market.

Concise and accurate. This reshuffle has nothing to do with fairness
or representation. Yeah, Iowans are mostly white -- they got them on
that, all righty -- but they pay close attention to what's going on
around them. They're also good at eliminating dumbass candidates who
have no chance at the nomination. (Does anybody seriously think Biden
is vulnerable?)

South Carolina reflects South Carolina. The idea that South Carolina
is representative of minorities generally is pretty damn racist.

On 12/4/2022 12:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>> they behave like this.
>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
> That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
> that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
> time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.
>
> They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
> population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
> a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
> first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
> ads in the Number 3 television market.
>
I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
PAC money usually win out.

suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>On 12/4/2022 12:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

>>>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>they behave like this.

>>>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

>>That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
>>that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
>>time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.

>>They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
>>population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
>>a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
>>first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
>>ads in the Number 3 television market.

>I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
>or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
>say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
>more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
>I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
>spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
>PAC money usually win out.

If there were to be a national primary, then nomination by convention
would be dropped. The problem is that the only candidates who could
participate are those with the cash for tv ads nationwide.

Starting with small states, you start with a lower-budget political
campaign and try to prove you have a following with "retail" politics,
not television advertising.

That's the theory, at least.

On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 12:04:35 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> > On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> >>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>> >>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>> >>>
>> >>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>> >>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>> >>> they behave like this.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>> >>>
>> >> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>> >
>> > The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>> > is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>> >
>> So, what's wrong with that?
>
>When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
>don't think that's racist?
>
>If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>people, would that be cool?

If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
primaries then I don't see the problem. The states that got the
primaries were arbitrarily picked so what's the problem with making
another arbitrary decision to switch the states that get the first
primaries.

On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 21:54:45 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>On 12/4/2022 12:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
>>>>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>>they behave like this.
>
>>>>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
>>>That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
>>>that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
>>>time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.
>
>>>They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
>>>population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
>>>a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
>>>first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
>>>ads in the Number 3 television market.
>
>>I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
>>or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
>>say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
>>more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
>>I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
>>spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
>>PAC money usually win out.
>
>If there were to be a national primary, then nomination by convention
>would be dropped. The problem is that the only candidates who could
>participate are those with the cash for tv ads nationwide.
>
>Starting with small states, you start with a lower-budget political
>campaign and try to prove you have a following with "retail" politics,
>not television advertising.
>
>That's the theory, at least.

Given that the leaders seem to change over time I'm not so sure that
theory works out in fact. Though I don't think starting with the
largest states first would change anything. It's the extended time for
primaries that gives time for the leaders to alternate as some
candidates prove themselves better able to connect with the voters.

On 12/4/2022 4:59 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 12:04:35 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>>>> they behave like this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>>>>
>>>>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>>>>
>>>> The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>>>> is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>>>>
>>> So, what's wrong with that?
>>
>> When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
>> don't think that's racist?
>>
>> If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>> one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>> people, would that be cool?
>
> If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
> primaries then I don't see the problem. The states that got the
> primaries were arbitrarily picked so what's the problem with making
> another arbitrary decision to switch the states that get the first
> primaries.

Meanwhile, there's the question of why we'd *want* the earliest
primaries to "represent the nation". Don't we hate spoilers?

In article <4u5qoh15e0r2pd3ohukh7dhhlbussmt2a9@4ax.com>,
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 12:04:35 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >> > On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >> >>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
> >> >>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> >> >>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> >> >>> they behave like this.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
> >> >>>
> >> >> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
> >> >
> >> > The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
> >> > is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
> >> >
> >> So, what's wrong with that?
> >
> >When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
> >don't think that's racist?
> >
> >If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
> >one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
> >people, would that be cool?
>
> If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
> primaries then I don't see the problem. The states that got the
> primaries were arbitrarily picked

Every state has a primary.

On 12/4/2022 1:54 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>> On 12/4/2022 12:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
>>>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>> they behave like this.
>
>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
>>> That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
>>> that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
>>> time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.
>
>>> They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
>>> population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
>>> a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
>>> first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
>>> ads in the Number 3 television market.
>
>> I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
>> or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
>> say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
>> more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
>> I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
>> spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
>> PAC money usually win out.
>
> If there were to be a national primary, then nomination by convention
> would be dropped. The problem is that the only candidates who could
> participate are those with the cash for tv ads nationwide.
>
> Starting with small states, you start with a lower-budget political
> campaign and try to prove you have a following with "retail" politics,
> not television advertising.
>
> That's the theory, at least.
>
Hmmm. I still think it's riduculous to have a nearly year long campaign.

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 12:04:35 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> > On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> >>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> >>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>> >>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>> >>> they behave like this.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>> >>>
>>> >> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>>> >
>>> > The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>>> > is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>>> >
>>> So, what's wrong with that?
>>
>>When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
>>don't think that's racist?
>>
>>If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>>one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>>people, would that be cool?
>
>If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
>primaries then I don't see the problem.

That claim has been discredited.

>The states that got the primaries were arbitrarily picked so what's the
>problem with making another arbitrary decision to switch the states that
>get the first primaries.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>In article <4u5qoh15e0r2pd3ohukh7dhhlbussmt2a9@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 12:04:35 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <tmipa1$lh9g$1@solani.org>, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 12/4/2022 10:21 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> >> > On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On 12/4/2022 9:51 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> >> >>> In article <aa5f7eff-be81-43b0-80a4-605400d22041n@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> >>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>> >> >>> residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>> >> >>> they behave like this.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>> >> >>>
>> >> >> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>> >> >
>> >> > The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which
>> >> > is what Biden is 'adjusting'.
>> >> >
>> >> So, what's wrong with that?
>> >
>> >When they're doing it because there's too many white people in Iowa, you
>> >don't think that's racist?
>> >
>> >If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>> >one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>> >people, would that be cool?
>>
>> If what they want to do is better represent the nation in their
>> primaries then I don't see the problem. The states that got the
>> primaries were arbitrarily picked
>
>Every state has a primary.

Iowa, the state we are discussing, doesn't have a presidential primary,
nor does Nevada.

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Sun, 4 Dec 2022 21:54:45 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>On 12/4/2022 12:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311

>>>>>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>>>>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>>>>they behave like this.

>>>>>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0

>>>>That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
>>>>that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
>>>>time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.

>>>>They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
>>>>population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
>>>>a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
>>>>first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
>>>>ads in the Number 3 television market.

>>>I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
>>>or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
>>>say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
>>>more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
>>>I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
>>>spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
>>>PAC money usually win out.

>>If there were to be a national primary, then nomination by convention
>>would be dropped. The problem is that the only candidates who could
>>participate are those with the cash for tv ads nationwide.

>>Starting with small states, you start with a lower-budget political
>>campaign and try to prove you have a following with "retail" politics,
>>not television advertising.

>>That's the theory, at least.

>Given that the leaders seem to change over time I'm not so sure that
>theory works out in fact. Though I don't think starting with the
>largest states first would change anything.

You don't know what you are talking about and you are simply ignoring
what I've been saying. It's easy enough to check how much money various
presidential campaigns had raised prior to any of the early caucuses and
primaries. You can tell right off which ones could have bought significant
and sustainable television advertising.

How could a presidential campaign possibly raise big money not yet
having demonstrated that it's appealing to party voters?

>It's the extended time for primaries that gives time for the leaders
>to alternate as some candidates prove themselves better able to connect
>with the voters.

Yeah? In a state with major television markets, you don't connect with
voters in gatherings of just a few dozen people. You must buy television
advertising. There are simply way too many people to reach in person.

In article <tmj4v5$3oofh$1@dont-email.me>, Adam H. Kerman
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
> >On 12/4/2022 12:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> >>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >>>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
> >>>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
> >>>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
> >>>they behave like this.
>
> >>>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
> >>That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
> >>that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
> >>time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.
>
> >>They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
> >>population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
> >>a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
> >>first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
> >>ads in the Number 3 television market.
>
> >I think it's rather silly to have the primaries spread out over 6 months
> >or so before the conventions. Why not just have a national primary day,
> >say in May or June, where everyone is voted on at once. Right now it's
> >more like reality TV competitions where some are voted off the island...
> >I mean ballot. It may cut back on the ridiculous amounts of campaign
> >spending which assures that the wealthiest or those more susceptible to
> >PAC money usually win out.
>
> If there were to be a national primary, then nomination by convention
> would be dropped. The problem is that the only candidates who could
> participate are those with the cash for tv ads nationwide.
>
> Starting with small states, you start with a lower-budget political
> campaign and try to prove you have a following with "retail" politics,
> not television advertising.
>
> That's the theory, at least.

Sure. The months-long trudge to the nomination is more of a winnowing
than anything else. It's valuable, too. In 1972, Ed Muskie looked to
be the sure nominee, but he was a mental case. The whole press corps
knew it.

On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 20:48:19 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63837311
>
>>The DNC is openly punishing Iowa for the crime of having too many white
>>residents. Imagine being a White person and still voting Democrat, when
>>they behave like this.
>
>>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>
>That headline is a lie. South Carolina is going to go first because
>that was the first primary Biden won in 2020 and he wants a boost this
>time. It's kind of stupid 'cuz no one important is challenging him in 2024.
>
>They keep claiming South Carolina better reflects the national
>population but that state has nearly no Mexican ethnics, so that's also
>a lie. If you want a state that reflects the national population to go
>first you'd go with Illinois but no one has the money that early to buy
>ads in the Number 3 television market.

Pardon me for being a dumb Canuck but aren't there something like 4
Latinos for every black person in the United States?

Your point about the cost of TV ads is well taken :)

On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 18:21:53 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>On Dec 4, 2022 at 9:49:34 AM PST, "suzeeq" <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgt2zzqe3k5dpro/Iowa.png?dl=0
>>>
>> But Iowa doesn't vote Democrat generally.
>
>The Democrats in Iowa vote Democrat in the Democrat primaries, which is what
>Biden is 'adjusting'.
>
But how is that different from any other state? Surely he doesn't
expect Iowa Democrats to vote in the GOP primary?

On Sun, 04 Dec 2022 13:33:38 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>> > If they were shuffling the order of primaries and said they were putting
>> > one state to the back of the line because that state had too many black
>> > people, would that be cool?
>> >
>> Not the same thing.
>
>Always the response when the double standard rears its ugly head.
>
>> They're still getting to vote in the primary, just IA won't get bragging
>> rights for being first.

Of course it's the same thing - if it said "Hispanic" or "Asian"
instead of white don't you think there would be screaming???