They're finally complaining about Iowa and New Hampshire going first, and not for the right reasons. They're complaining because there are too many white people there. Obama overcame that with a win in Iowa. He won the same way white people win: shaking the most hands and having lots of loyal workers in the state for a year. Then he lost New Hampshire, just like almost every candidate who wins Iowa. The reason those 2 states should lose their first place status is because they've given us 3 consecutive bad Presidents and 4 consecutive bad runnerups. Of course New Hampshire in 2016 had only 2 bad Democrats to choose from. They chose the less disastrous one. The strength of Iowa and New Hampshire is the fact that few people move in or out of those states. Here's a mission for every news organization. Find an Iowa voter who has voted in every caucus since the first one in 1972. There should be hundreds still alive in Iowa. Then search the retirement communities and nursing homes of New Hampshire to find someone who voted in the first primary with the names of candidates on the ballot (1952). It will probably be a woman since most men in their 20s were serving in the military in 1952 and some missed 1956 after voting in 52. If you wanted to replace Iowa you would need a state similar in size with a population that doesn't move much. Kansas would not be an improvement because its mostly Republicans and even more white. Nebraska, South Dakota and North Dakota have even fewer people. Wisconsin likes its position in the middle of the race and boasts that the leader usually loses or barely wins. Minnesota is too large and too cold. You can't expect a fair opening in Illinois. Indiana is certainly unthinkable as long as Mike Pence is viable. The good thing about Iowa is that the only 2 times an Iowan was in the race everyone ignored the Iowa caucus anyway. That leaves Missouri as the only acceptable option. However Missouri is a southern state and the biggest flaw in the schedule in recent elections is that the whole south votes early, eliminating or badly damaging a major candidate every time and giving a lopsided influence for the region. If you start with Missouri you need to spread the other southern states out and they don't like being bullied by northern aggression. So we're stuck with Iowa. New Hampshire could be replaced by Maine, but it's hard to get to obscure parts of the state. Vermont has too few people. Massachusetts is a diverse state with a liquid population. The people they want to help would find a constituency. However the transient voters (students) would vote for a certain type of candidate most of the country doesn't want. That's chaos for the people who want an establishment candidate to win. Connecticutt is too stuffy and a satellite of New York, giving an uncertain theme to what follows. That leaves Rhode Island. No one cares about Rhode Island. We're stuck with New Hampshire. Nevada votes third. Nevada used to vote the same day as California in June. No candidate even visited Nevada, going for the big prize of California instead. Since that was the last major primary day they sometimes voted for local favorites (Reagan in 1968, Jerry Brown in 76) and got nowhere. One day they decided a western state should vote early Harry Reid lobbied to give Nevada the prize. It has the diversity they want but it's still small enough for some candidates to ignore. I don't think anyone ever dropped out after losing Nevada. You could only replace it with New Mexico and that's not worth the trouble for anyone either. South Carolina is important. This year for instance we can say with absolute confidence that Sanders, Bloomberg, Yang, Buttigieg, Gabbard, Williamson and Steyer will not win South Carolina. Some candidates get good numbers in New Hampshire but drop out before South Carolina because they have no hope there. Others get good numbers in New Hampshire, giving a longshot a chance, then scramble to South Carolina with just a week to introduce themselves and get embarrassingly low numbers. Some are done at that point. Others scramble to recover, but no one wins after a shutout in Carolina. There's no state in the region that would go differently except Florida, and you can't let a state that populous vote in the first 4. So the best you can do is rotate. Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska rotate. New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont rotate. Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico rotate. South Carolina, North Carolina and Georgia rotate. Since most of these candidates plan to run 3 times anyway, some can plan on all 3 cycles.
