Biden may be the biggest winner in Dems’ proposed primary shakeup

“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates.

What’s happening

Democrats advanced a plan last week that would dramatically change the party’s primary calendar, making South Carolina, not Iowa, the first state to weigh in on potential presidential candidates.

For the past 50 years, the Iowa caucuses have held the distinction of launching the presidential primary season — a position that has turned the sparsely populated rural state into the center of the political universe every four years. A new plan proposed by President Biden would instead have South Carolina start things off. New Hampshire, the longtime No. 2 on the calendar, would hold its primary on the same day as Nevada. Michigan and Georgia would also move up into the early-state window.

In a letter making the case for the new schedule, Biden argued that it would give minority voters a stronger voice in the critical early stages of the primary. “You cannot be the Democratic nominee and win a general election unless you have overwhelming support from voters of color,” he wrote. Iowa and New Hampshire are two of the least racially diverse states in the country. South Carolina, by contrast, has one of the largest Black populations.

Perhaps no other state played a larger role during the 2020 Democratic primary than South Carolina. Biden delivered a dominant performance there thanks to his deep support among the state’s Black voters. The victory helped him bounce back from lackluster results in earlier primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada — putting him on course to comfortably win the Democratic nomination and eventually the presidency.

Why there’s debate

Biden himself is widely viewed as one of the biggest beneficiaries of the new schedule, assuming he chooses to run for reelection in 2024. Many argue that starting the primaries in a state where he is so formidable would make the already long odds that a potential challenger might unseat him even slimmer. Some political analysts believe the changes would give a boost to moderate Democrats in general, since voters of color generally tend to favor mainstream candidates over their more liberal rivals.

The changes could also make it harder for lesser-known candidates to establish themselves through the kind of in-person campaigning that is possible in smaller states like Iowa and New Hampshire.

There’s also debate about what the new calendar might mean for the Democratic Party as a whole and the U.S. more broadly. Many Democrats have celebrated the plan, arguing that it would end decades of outsize influence for states that don’t reflect the diversity of the party’s base and reduce political incentives lawmakers have to pander to voters in small states on issues like farming subsidies and climate change. Others argue that the move could hinder Democrats’ ability to win back many of the white working-class voters that have shifted toward Republicans in recent years.

What’s next

The new calendar won’t become official until a final vote is held by the Democratic National Committee, which is expected to take place early next year. Even if it passes, the party will face a daunting list of bureaucratic hurdles to put it into effect — including potential conflicts with state laws in Iowa and a pledge from Democrats in New Hampshire that they won’t conform to the national party’s schedule.

Perspectives

Voters of color will have more power to influence the Democratic Party’s direction

“Primaries are winnowing processes, and candidates that are more popular with Black or Hispanic Democrats are disadvantaged when the first states to winnow the field are ones that have relatively few Black or Hispanic voters. Biden was able to weather the early contests, in part by doing a good job of setting expectations about how he would fare. But it was touch-and-go for a while.” — Philip Bump, Washington Post

Lesser-known candidates will have an even harder time breaking through

“Historically … candidates without national profiles could use Iowa as a springboard to earn national media attention and fundraising capacity. Without Iowa at the start of the calendar, it’s unlikely that Barack Obama or Jimmy Carter would ever have become the Democratic nominee.” — Seth Moskowitz, UnHerd

The new calendar would be a blow to progressive Democrats seeking to upend the party’s power structure

“The new calendar could be a long-term blow to the Bernie Sanders wing of the party. … The importance of New Hampshire and Nevada — both of which Sanders carried in 2020 — is diminished by the fact that they vote a mere three days after South Carolina.” — John McCormack, National Review

Democrats may have conceded Iowa to the GOP for the foreseeable future

“Losing the early state slot will make it harder for Iowa Democrats to rebuild. For decades, presidential candidates have helped the party identify supporters and recruit volunteers. … Presidential candidates have headlined fundraisers for numerous down-ballot candidates and local party groups in the early states. Their campaigns have paid large sums directly to the Iowa Democratic Party for access to the voter file or tickets to large ‘cattle call’ events. All of that is going away now.” — Laura Belin, CNN

Democrats are abandoning white working-class voters

“Iowans are exactly the sort of heartland voters the Democratic Party needs to win back if it wants to build a durable majority. The proposed move to South Carolina is symbolic of the party’s tendency to write off working-class white voters far from the coasts.” — Dave Seminara, Wall Street Journal

Ending Iowa’s outsize political influence will be good for the country

“I like both Iowa and New Hampshire, but the idea that these two states have some divinely ordained role in our elections is silly — and even costly. For instance, were it not for the Iowa caucuses, America probably wouldn’t be stuck with ethanol mandates. This government moonshine is bad for cars, the environment and the economy (outside of corn-producing states).” — Jonah Goldberg, Los Angeles Times

It will be even harder for any primary challenger to defeat Biden

“If Mr. Biden runs again, a decision he has indicated is coming early in the new year, the state that set him on a path to the nomination in 2024 will offer a formidable first hurdle to any would-be challenger.” — Blake Hounshell and Lisa Lerer, New York Times

The changes may be irrelevant if Biden dominates the Democratic primary

“The irony is that if Joe Biden winds up running for reelection without significant Democratic opposition while Republicans have some sort of Trump-DeSantis-Pence-Haley-Pompeo-Cruz donnybrook, the same old calendar, complete with a first-in-the-nation Iowa caucus, may be where all the action is, making the ‘reformed’ Democratic calendar irrelevant.” — Ed Kilgore, New York

The changes would end a system that suppresses the voices of nonwhite and low-income voters

“Turnout is typically much lower for the Iowa caucuses than it is for primaries. Big-D and small-d democrats are supposed to care a lot about maximizing voter participation, but that’s something the Iowa caucuses can’t deliver. … They are an inadvertent and self-defeating strategy to minimize the role minorities and lower-income people play in the nomination process.” — Timothy Noah, New Republic

Which state goes first is not as important as most pundits think

“As often as not, Iowa and New Hampshire, for all the attention paid to them, have played marginal roles in the nominating process. The later states, for all their understandable complaints, have had plenty to say about the ultimate nominee.” — Jeff Greenfield, Politico

Is there a topic you’d like to see covered in “The 360”? Send your suggestions to the360@yahoonews.com.

Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Paul J. Richards/AFP via Getty Images