Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Quickie internal tracking poll shows Irvin with big lead, Bailey falling fast, undecideds still in “first”
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Posted in:
* Lynn Sweet…
Illinois Democratic officials are poised to make the case to the Democratic National Committee that Illinois should be among the states with the first votes in the presidential primaries, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
Illinois, if it’s an early primary state starting in 2024, could become a power player in determining a Democratic presidential nominee.
The DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee passed a resolution at its April meeting calling for a 2024 nominating calendar that reflects diversity; helps Democrats win the White House and “contributes to a fair and sound electoral process.”
For a practical matter, Iowa, the state with the traditional kickoff vote for Republicans and Democrats, will most likely lose its special status with Democrats. That’s because Iowa votes Republican in presidential elections; is not diverse; and has a much-criticized caucus voting system. […]
If Iowa is knocked out, the Illinois competition for the Midwest spot will likely be Michigan, Minnesota and Nebraska, a source said.
* The Question: Do you think Illinois should be one of the first states to hold a presidential primary? Explain.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 2:59 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Quickie internal tracking poll shows Irvin with big lead, Bailey falling fast, undecideds still in “first”
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Yes, only so that I can vote for my preferred candidate before they drop out.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:06 pm
“Do you think Illinois should be one of the first states to hold a presidential primary?”
Yes.
The sooner we vote, the sooner the ads stop.
– MrJM
Comment by MisterJayEm Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:08 pm
Can’t wait to see liberal candidates barnstorm the state south of I 80
Comment by Lucky Pierrr Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:19 pm
Yes. We are more representative of the nation demographics wise. And it will be fun to watch the competing local political consultants more in action than ever.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:19 pm
Illinois is, ironically enough, one of the most representative states in the country demographically.
Go for it.
Comment by Nick Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:21 pm
The expense of the Chicago media market will result in well-funded (or wealthy) candidates having a significant advantage that might not be quite the same in less expensive states.
Also I don’t want to see primary ads for 8 months.
Comment by OneMan Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:22 pm
You know why not go first? Especially if Iowa won’t be the first state for Democrats any longer.
Comment by Levois J Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:24 pm
=== Can’t wait to see liberal candidates barnstorm the state south of I 80===
It’s a primary… what your bot thinking forgets… that’s why IOWA or NEW HAMPSHIRE are not representative of a diverse America… in either primary, frankly.
I say, sure.
Gotta have the cash to compete too, a good measure early.
Now if Chicago gets the 2024 convention as well… the negative nellies will implode for sure.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:27 pm
A lot of the people in Iowa hate it because they get pestered by campaigns for a year before the election. It would be a full political consultant employment measure, but I am not sure if it is fun for voters.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:36 pm
Meh. Doesn’t matter to me.
Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:46 pm
I agree IA doesn’t make sense for a first Democratic primary. Illinois could be fine, but so would OH, MI, WI, PA, basically all the midwestern swing states that combine both rural/white/agricultural and some major suburban and urban population centers.
Comment by Homebody Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:48 pm
Yes go first or in first batch. I always hated when Illinois went because it was usually all over. However I bet the part pros and insider candidates do not want it. Have the Presidential decided and then only the true party loyalist come out. Madigan design it that way /S
Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:51 pm
Yes go first or in first batch. I always hated when Illinois went because it was usually all over. However I bet the part pros and insider candidates do not want it. Have the Presidential decided and then only the true party loyalist come out. Madigan design it that way /S
Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:51 pm
Set a 16 week primary schedule. Have a random drawing for all the states (and nominating territories), 3-4 per week. Everybody has a chance to be first (or last). Problem solved.
Comment by God's Country Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:53 pm
Iowa and New Hampshire do not reflect good cross-sections of the U.S. They really distort what the nation-wide tastes really are. Illinois a big, diverse, urban metropolis, plentiful suburban areas, numerous university towns, rural areas, etc… Now that reflects the U.S.
Comment by levivotedforjudy Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:03 pm
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 3:06 pm:
Yes, only so that I can vote for my preferred candidate before they drop out.
For the win, right out of the gate.
Comment by Bruce( no not him) Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:09 pm
why not, all that campaign money on both sides of the aisle coming into the State. the Dems north of 80, and all the GOP running around down State. Imagine what it would do for some of those small communities showing up buying coffee for everyone at the local diner. bring it. and all that gas tax on those busses driving around.
Comment by frustrated GOP Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:10 pm
If Illinois was ground zero for presidential politics, even for one primary cycle, I’m afraid Rich’s head would explode.
And we can’t have that. Hard pass. Let Ohio or PA go first.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:16 pm
Yes. The priority of the nominating process should be to pick the most electable candidate. In early small state primaries, there’s always a risk progressive activists will pull the field too far left.
Illinois going first might mitigate that phenomenon because the primary electorate here is dominated by two big moderating forces: Black voters and organized labor.
Comment by BC Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:21 pm
I love the idea of Illinois being an early contender.
I also like the idea of switching it around, so that every state has a shot at being early in the process.
Comment by Downstate Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:55 pm
Yes. Illinois is a strongly Democratic state. The activists of any major political party have every right to determine who their nominee is going to be. Illinois has been loyal to voting for Democrats , they deserve and early and big say on who the candidate is going to be.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 4:55 pm
===Illinois is a strongly Democratic state===
That’s inherently false to a statewide thinking.
Illinois is a bell weather state to a popular vote winner. That is true since after the 1988 presidential election.
Name the 2018 ILGOP statewide slate without using the Google key.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 5:06 pm
Actually, Michigan makes more sense, more diverse and cheaper for people to air ads outside of the Chicago metro area.
Comment by Old IL Dude Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 5:10 pm
Makes sense to do regional primaries that start with the Midwest (IL, IA, MN, WI, IN). Illinois is representative given its mix of urban, suburban, rural / factory town but it’s perhaps too blue to fit the other criteria (swinging a critical swing state to the blue column). Yes, would be a good chance to give IL consultants opportunities IA consultants have had since 1976 but all the media markets would reward the wealthy which isn’t great.
Comment by here we go Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 5:13 pm
Illinois would be good. But Michigan would make a lot more sense. Both preferable to IA or NH.
Comment by ChicagoBars Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 5:28 pm
Yes, I am in favor of bumping up the primary to around the time of Iowa.
However, don’t do a repeat of 2008’s early bump and lump the GA and Congressional primaries early too. Same with the statewides in off years, Either keep those in late June, return them to mid-March, or somewhere in between.
Comment by NonAFSCMEStateEmployeeFromChatham Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 5:52 pm
Yes. We are one of the 10 largest states population wise. We have rural and urban areas. So we are pretty representative of the country. Yet, three small states control the primaries. My preferred candidates have dropped out long before we get to vote. Usually that candidate is a moderate who might have the best chance of winning in the general election.
Personally I think the primaries should be a series of Super Tuesdays, with each being representative of the country. So 6 or 7 states of varying sizes and locations each week or so. It’s not as if the candidates spend that much time in any state besides the first three anyway. Therefore combinations of states should not be that much of a problem for them.
Comment by thoughts matter Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 6:35 pm
Late to the post, but yes it should.
That said, I do not think it will.
The Chicago DMA- where the Democrat voters are- is VERY expensive. Even down rank radio is extremely expensive especially when compared to Michigan, Minnesota, and Nebraska.
Obviously I’ve never planned a national political convention, but I have to believe this will be a point against Chicago.
Comment by jimbo Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 7:13 pm
==== Set a 16 week primary schedule. Have a random drawing for all the states (and nominating territories), 3-4 per week. Everybody has a chance to be first (or last). Problem solved.====
How does this work with the individual states? I assume each state will have to pass a law to move their elections. Unless they do that it really doesn’t matter what the party wants. I think they tried punishing some states in the past but not sure what affect that had happened on the process.
Comment by Been There Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 8:20 pm
The only argument against Illinois going early is that it’ll be expensive to run here. Besides that, we’re literally the most demographically representative of the USA. Let’s do it.
Comment by TJ Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 8:58 pm
I think the media market argument is reasonable, but also think that Illinois is a microcosm of the entire country. At minimum I think Wisconsin is a reasonable compromise given how it is a contender for most tossup state in the nation, an honor often previously given to Iowa.
Comment by Lake Villa Township Wednesday, Apr 27, 22 @ 11:05 pm
If given first status, would this split our 2 primaries. If so, could lead to some interesting referendum placements.
Comment by Person 8 Thursday, Apr 28, 22 @ 7:00 am
Based on the people we already elect to represent our state I would caution national voters not to pay attention to Illinois voters.
Comment by Really Thursday, Apr 28, 22 @ 7:56 am
It looks like I’m running into issues with the filter again. I might need to be less direct when I refer to Arthur Jones.
Comment by Candy Dogood Thursday, Apr 28, 22 @ 8:01 am
nope. too big and too expensive. the lure of iowa was that it had inexpensive media markets and its voters were highly engaged. for democrats, at least, primary voters are not highly engaged; many of them seek signals about who to vote for and those signals aren’t going to disappear if it gets an early (before march) presidential primary. and if nebraska is in the mix, their democratic electorate is highly concentrated into a single media market. this is like chicago competing for the olympics…
Comment by bored now Thursday, Apr 28, 22 @ 8:14 am
Sure. Why not?
It will give J. B . A better shot.
Comment by Big Foot Thursday, Apr 28, 22 @ 8:15 am
I think it would be good for the state economically, but bad for Democrats given it’s unfair national reputation.
Comment by Chicagonk Thursday, Apr 28, 22 @ 8:29 am