We Drafted The Perfect Primary Calendar

Summary

---

GD POLITICS – "We Drafted The Perfect Primary Calendar"

Host: Galen Druke
Guests: Nathaniel Rakic, Mary Radcliffe
Date: July 30, 2026

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Galen Druke and the team take on a nerdy, spirited challenge: if they could design the presidential primary calendar from scratch, which states should go first? The episode digs into the history and evolution of the US primary process, debates the virtues and flaws of the current system, and sets out to create a more equitable, representative, and logistically sound order for Democratic primaries through a live "draft" of states.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Primary Calendar: Accidents of History

• The unique power granted to states like Iowa and New Hampshire is described as stemming from an "accident of history" (00:46).
• Galen explains how the Democratic nomination process became democratized post-1968 and why small early states gained unique influence, referencing Jimmy Carter’s Iowa strategy in 1976 (00:46-01:29).
• The current 2028 reform (Democratic Party proposal): Ousts Iowa, puts South Carolina and Nevada ahead, and brings six states into the pre-Super Tuesday mix (01:29-01:55).

2. Warm-Up: What’s the Best State? (00:56-05:53)

• Hosted with humor and light competition, the trio discusses their choices for "best state," each defending their picks with personal and cultural references.
  • Nathaniel: Maine, for its ocean access (02:59).
  • Mary: Waffles between Ohio and Michigan, settling on Michigan for its "big water" and diversity of outdoorsy things (03:43, 04:13).
  • Galen: Chooses Texas for its strong, unique sense of identity and upstate New York as a runner-up (04:36, 05:04).
• Notable Quote:
  • “Texas is the only other state in the Union that has a New York style sense of itself, which is...arrogant and obnoxious. No, like an enthusiasm about being what it is. Right. Like, anybody can be a Texan.” – Galen Druke (05:04)
• Nathaniel throws in data: Despite the stereotypes, Minnesotans and Michiganders are most likely to be proud of their states—not just Texans and New Yorkers (06:18-06:22).

3. The Real Topic: The Draft & Calendar Reform (06:51 and on)

• Galen sets the stage for the draft, invoking random.org for order: Galen, then Mary, then Nathaniel (snake draft format).

• Before the draft: reflections on the politics and mechanics behind the proposed DNC calendar shift—especially the fallout from Iowa’s 2020 caucus disaster and questions about New Hampshire’s willingness to yield its “first-in-the-nation” status (07:38-10:00).

  • Nathaniel’s Insight:
    • Iowa “done fucked up” in 2020, giving cover for its demotion. Longstanding arguments about Iowa and New Hampshire’s lack of representativeness within the Democratic Party and national electorate.
    • “They were like, bite me,” quips Nathaniel on New Hampshire’s defiance in 2024 (09:00), referencing the state’s tradition and legal requirements.
  • Practical Constraints:
    • The state parties versus legislatures: sometimes Democrats can’t just shift primary dates due to state government control (10:30).
    • DNC now imposing harsher penalties—100% delegate loss for out-of-order primaries (11:16).

• Notable Quote:

  • “This is the beauty of data. You can find out in real time when your dear host is totally wrong.” – Galen Druke (06:39)

4. Is South Carolina a Representative First State? (13:09-14:10)

• Galen and Mary dig into the irony of South Carolina’s placement first, noting it’s "less representative of the Democratic electorate" than Iowa or New Hampshire (13:09).
• Mary's Take:
  • “What’s ironic about putting South Carolina first is I actually think it takes some power away from the voters of South Carolina… it might feel like you're rewarding South Carolina, but it's like, practically speaking, has the opposite impact.” (14:10–14:20)
• Nathaniel and Galen follow up with the point that black voters and establishment figures play unique, sometimes overlapping roles in South Carolina’s influence.

5. Drafting the Ideal Primary Calendar (16:46 and on)

• Each panelist is granted picks to select which state should go first (and in what order), debating criteria like competitiveness, representativeness, state size, ideological diversity, and media market cost.

  • Criteria Used:

    • Competitiveness in general election
    • Representativeness by race, class, and ideology
    • State size (smaller enables retail politics and less expensive media)
    • Ideological diversity (progressive-establishment balance)

  • Galen’s First Pick: Nevada (16:46)

    • Represents working-class, large Latino, and unionized populations.
    • “If you have a primary early on in a really big state like New York, New Jersey...the media market is so expensive that you really make it difficult for dark horse candidates to break through” (16:52).
    • Nevada’s mix of white working-class, labor, and Latino voters—plus it’s a swing state.

  • Nathaniel’s Validation (on Nevada):

    • Nevada ranked fifth most representative of the Democratic electorate and top among small states (19:35).
    • Reiterates the importance of retail politics.

  • Mary’s Criteria:

    • Small state, affordable media, but crucially: must have ideological diversity within Democratic ranks (21:21).
    • “Candidates on both sides of that intra party divide should be...having an opportunity to make a case to voters that would be interested in them” (21:21).

6. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Iowa done fucked up in 2020, and they didn't do much better in 2024…these things are about media exposure, which of course, what these things are about.” – Nathaniel Rakic (07:38–08:50)
• "There's a racial component here. There is also, like, a Democratic Party sectoral debate component here as well." – Galen Druke (15:40)
• “If you don't abide by the rules, you lose 100% of your delegates as opposed to 50%...multiple hundred thousand dollar fine levied on the state.” – Galen Druke (11:16)
• “This time around, if you don't abide by the rules, you lose 100% of your delegates as opposed to 50%...maybe a lot of the candidates won't give a shit.” – Galen Druke (11:16–11:45)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Timestamp | Topic/Quote | |-----------|-------------| | 00:46 | Galen introduces the history of primary state power | | 01:29 | 2028 calendar shake-up; Iowa ousted; SC & NV first | | 02:39 | “Which state is the best?” — panel warm-up | | 05:04 | Galen’s argument for Texas’ unique identity | | 06:18 | Nathaniel: “Minnesota and Michigan” most proud states | | 07:38 | Why Iowa is out; New Hampshire’s resistance | | 11:16 | DNC rule changes: full delegate loss for rebels | | 13:09 | South Carolina’s representativeness and strategic arguments | | 14:10 | Mary on paradox of putting SC first | | 16:46 | The draft begins: Galen selects Nevada, explains why | | 19:35 | Nathaniel’s support, referencing past data analysis | | 21:21 | Mary outlines her first-pick criteria (ideological diversity) |

---

Tone & Style

The episode is rich with data, seasoned with playful taunting and intellectual rivalry—just the right mix of political nerdiness and humor that makes the group feel both expert-level and approachable. Galen manages the conversation’s flow, while Nathaniel and Mary offer principled and often witty pushback. The style is candid, sometimes irreverent, but always thoughtful.

---

Further Listening

For the full, extended draft and ensuing debate, listeners are prompted to visit gdpolitics.com (23:10).

---

This summary captures the episode’s deep dive into party nomination rules, state-by-state demographics, political strategy, and the panel’s own preferences—an ideal reference for listeners new to the show or the topic.

Transcript

[Mary Radcliffe]

I have devices in my house that are listening to everything I say.

[Galen Krug]

Oh, I was just talking to Nathaniel about how I'm totally opposed to those.

[Mary Radcliffe]

I mean, but I have them, right? They are technically listening to everything.

[Galen Krug]

Libertarian Mary Radcliffe has a Google home on Alexa or a Siri listening to everything she says in her home.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Kaylin, we have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Google Home devices.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Oh, man.

[Galen Krug]

How does this. And it's okay because it's not the government.

[Mary Radcliffe]

I mean, honestly, the truth of this is that I am so cynical about data privacy that I think it probably does not much matter.

[Galen Krug]

Hello, and welcome to the GD Politics Podcast. I'm Galen Krug. The way we choose our presidential nominees in America is an accident of history. Some states began hosting more open primaries dating back to the Progressive Era in the early 20th century. But the process was largely democratized after the disastrous Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968. No one ever really intended for Iowa and New Hampshire to have so much sway. But once the process opened up and Jimmy Carter launched his career by camping out in Iowa ahead of the 1976 caucuses, building momentum in the early states became key to winning a presidential nomination. Some would argue the whole process is a little nonsensical, or at least unfair. Why give so much power to a handful of states? Why not have everyone vote at the same time, or at least have groups of states vote at the same time? Also, what's so bad about a party convention where the nominees are chosen to begin with? That's closer to how almost every other democracy in the world chooses its candidates. Well, in 2028, the process is getting shaken up again, just not the way any of those reforms would suggest. The early states will keep their outsized power, but Democrats are reshuffling which states get the privilege. According to a calendar newly proposed by the dnc, six states will get to weigh in before Super Tuesday, which is the earliest date any other states will be allowed to weigh in in the order they were proposed. Those states are South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan, and Virginia. Iowa has been ousted from the lineup altogether, and South Carolina and Nevada have been placed ahead of New Hampshire, the historical worst in the nation. To mark the occasion, we are going to host our first ever primary calendar draft. If some states are going to vote first, which ones should they be? So joining me for this very nerdy and hopefully also fun game are Nathaniel Rakic and Mary Radcliffe. Nathaniel and Mary, welcome to the podcast. Are you ready?

[Mary Radcliffe]

Yeah. This'll be fun.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

So ready. This is like A combination of like, you know, our presidential primary drafts, but also the old game that we did at 5:38 every few months, which was like, which state is the best? Which always created the most like, infuriating arguments in the newsroom.

[Galen Krug]

Okay, really quick, which state is the best?

[Nathaniel Rakic]

So I think my answer has changed. I argued at the time Vermont, but I think now I'm going to go with Maine because I've become more of like an ocean guy.

[Galen Krug]

Okay.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Are you the arbiter of this because you don't live in a state?

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Yeah.

[Galen Krug]

Oh, harsh.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Yeah.

[Galen Krug]

Okay.

[Mary Radcliffe]

The rest of us are biased, I guess.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

I mean, I'm biased too, but I gotta remove my master.

[Galen Krug]

Yeah. Boston boy picks Maine. That's kind of biased anyway, but Maine. Maine is genuinely a good choice.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

I know, right?

[Galen Krug]

I approve. Mary. Best state.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Best state. Just in general, there's so many elements here.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

That's why it's hard, that's why it's fun.

[Galen Krug]

Mary's too open minded. She's not partisan enough. You need to just say Michigan or Pennsylvania.

[Mary Radcliffe]

I actually, what I want to say is going to get me destroyed by all the Michiganders out there. But I actually kind of want to say Ohio.

[Galen Krug]

Oh, I love. That's really out of left field.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Okay, no, here's, here's the thing. There's like a lot of really. Pennsylvania has that too. All three of these states have a lot of really great outdoorsy stuff that I love. Yeah, yeah.

[Galen Krug]

But Ohio has Maine, like far less diverse terrain than Michigan.

[Mary Radcliffe]

That's true. And Michigan has big water.

[Galen Krug]

Big water.

[Mary Radcliffe]

I miss big water. I haven't lived near big water since I left Seattle. And I miss a lot.

[Galen Krug]

The east coast of Lake Michigan is fucking beautiful.

[Mary Radcliffe]

I know, I know.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

I was just there.

[Mary Radcliffe]

I went to college on the western side of the state and we used to just like go hang out on the dunes all the time.

[Galen Krug]

Okay, so are you choosing? It sounds like you've changed.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Yeah, I have to change to Michigan. Even though I don't live there anymore.

[Galen Krug]

If I'm not allowed to choose the state that I live in, which is New York, obviously the best state. I mean, upstate New York, fantastic. The city, all kinds of. You have access to whatever you need, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. My second favorite state, which is maybe a more interesting choice, is Texas. Texas. I love Texas.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

You know, you're Texas superiority Galen.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Not enough snow even.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Okay. I think New York is better than Texas, which should tell you exactly what I think about Texas.

[Galen Krug]

So I think Texas is the only other state in the Union that has a New York style sense of itself, which is like, arrogant and obnoxious. No, like an enthusiasm about being what it is. Right. Like, anybody can be a Texan. You go there, you get into the music, culture, food. There's just a. The sports teams. There's just a strong sense of identity that you can be like, enthusiastic to be a part of. And it extends beyond just the NCAA or whatever it may be that, yes, certainly exists in the upper Midwest. And also, by the way, I love the upper Midwest, but I think Texas has a strong sense of itself. It has, you know, a boom in economy. It has really good food. I think the people are pretty friendly. Yeah. So that's what I'll say about that.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

All right, not to go on too much of a tangent here, but I think we talked about this poll on either GD Politics or FiveThirtyEight. But YouGov did a poll about whether people feel like most proud of their country, their state, or their city. And. And the most proud of their states. Do you guys want to guess?

[Galen Krug]

Texas and New York? I don't know. That's kind of already my guess.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

No. Minnesota and Michigan.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Huh.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

So I actually think that the idea that, like, you know, like, certainly, like, I mean, I think there's obviously like, you know, Texas is like, oh, you know, Texas pride and everybody does the flag and the boots and everything like that. But like, I think the idea that, you know, Texas and New York have a monopoly on state pride and state identity is. Is very false.

[Galen Krug]

Okay.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

All right.

[Galen Krug]

I have been fact checked. This is the beauty of data. You can find out in real time when your dear host is totally wrong. Okay, let's get to the matter.

[Mary Radcliffe]

The actual topic of this.

[Galen Krug]

Yeah, the actual topic at hand. So we are going to do a draft and I turned to random.org in order to help us. I did not want this lineup the way it turned out, but random.org chose it. So it's Galen, Mary, and then Nathaniel, we're going to do a snake draft. So, Nathaniel, you'll get to choose two states in a row. But before we get to that, what do you make of this newly proposed calendar? Is New Hampshire going to roll over and let this happen? Why is there no Iowa? Will they be able to actually coordinate across the states in such a way that they get this desired calendar? Nathaniel, why don't you go first as the new Hampsh defender amongst us?

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Galen, you really have me pegged. All right, well, the. For the reason that Iowa isn't there, is that Iowa done fucked up in 2020, and they didn't do much better in 2024. Well, they had. They were demoted in 2024. Like, you know, this. It all stems from 2020, although, so obviously there folks might remember there was like, the glitchy reporting system with the Iowa caucuses, and we didn't get results for like, 24 hours. And it was just a huge debacle and it embarrassed the DNC and embarrassed. I, I think that was. And I think, you know, that was the. The catalyst for all of this, but, like, conversations about Iowa and New Hampshire not being representative of the Democratic Party in particular, but also the country, especially with, you know, with regard to race and stuff like that, that had been percolating for a while. I think there were a lot of states that were happy to kind of like, you know, shiv Iowa when. When it was down. And so I think that that was kind of the excuse that people took to. To boot Iowa out of the lineup. Plus, obviously, Iowa has kind of moved off the map. Right. I think that there is a thought that, you know, you want to have this really involved organizing thing going on in a state that you can be competitive in in the general election. And Iowa just hasn't been that way. Although I think 2026 is interesting in that regard because I think Rob sand has a pretty decent chance of being elected governor. But obviously these decisions will be made by then. Yeah. So I don't think New Hampshire is going to roll over. They are, as you mentioned, Galen, very proud of the fact that they have been the first in the nation primary state for about a hundred years. They did this in 2024, where they were told, hey, you're not going to go first anymore. And they were like, bite me. And they moved up their calendar, their date to be first. It should be noted that under state law in New Hampshire, they have to be the first primary. And obviously that's kind of an unenforceable law because they don't. Can't control what other states do. But what happened in 2024 was that it cost them their delegates. And they initially. And they had basically like a beauty contest where, you know, they voted, but it wasn't actually worth anything technically, but it was worth something in terms of media exposure, which of course, what these things are about. And then they did the sneaky little thing later where they had like, a small gathering of party insiders and they called that the primary. And then New Hampshire got their delegates back, and it was a whole, like, you know, corrupt thing. And, you know, not corrupt, I shouldn't say corrupt, but it was, it was a whole kind of like backroom deal, slimy thing. But yeah, I think that New Hampshire is going to do the same thing and they're going to, they're going to move themselves up to, you know, mid to early January.

[Mary Radcliffe]

There's not much space to move up to though. Right. If I recall, the proposed calendar isn't the first primary quite early?

[Nathaniel Rakic]

January 22nd, but we've had some time. Back in 2008, I believe the Iowa Coxes were like January 3rd. So like, yeah, there is, there is time. These places can go. You know, they're, you know, they are not ashamed to go very early. I'm always curious, like, you know, is this the year that we're going to get like our first like December primary caucus and. Probably not, but it could happen.

[Galen Krug]

We should also mention here that the Democratic Party is constrained by how the states run their primaries internally. So in some states, the state party can just decide when it wants to place its primary on the calendar. In other states where the state itself runs the primary, if Republicans, for example, control the state legislature or the governor's mansion, the Democratic Party can't all by itself move the actual date of the contest. So the Democratic Party is constrained by some of those rules and regulations or we on this podcast are not. So we are going to, this is going to be our sort of magic wand version of the Democratic calendar lineup. In the future, we will do a Republican calendar. But for this very moment, the Democratic Party seems to be engaged in this fight. You know, one thing that I'm thinking about here in terms of whether or not New Hampshire rolls over, whether or not all the states play by the rules. The Democratic Party has levied higher sort of penalties this time around than it did in 2024 for abiding by the rules. This time around, if you don't abide by the rules, you lose 100% of your delegates as opposed to 50% of your delegates. There's a multiple hundred thousand dollar fine levied on the state. But I've heard rumblings that the Democratic National Party is so broke, Ken Martin is so unpopular, that under the current scheme, maybe a lot of the candidates won't give a shit what the Democrat national Democratic Party has to say. And in some ways it could even create this anti establishment, anti elitist vibe. If you say, well, screw the Democratic Party, I'm going to, you know, I'm going to go to New Hampshire. I'm going to go campaign in New Hampshire, ahead of whatever the South Carolina primary.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Yeah, I don't know. I think the stakes are really different in a 2028 primary compared to a 2024 primary. Because in the 2024 primary, this was before Joe Biden had dropped out of the race. This was basically Joe Biden against nobody. I'm sorry, Dean Phillips. Right. Like this. There was no contest to be had. And so I think states were perhaps a little bit more willing to do that silly things like New Hampshire did where they moved their primary and they're like, we don't care about the delegates. This is our thing. Whereas in 2028, this is. This is a much more significant contest. We don't know yet how many candidates will be running, but I suspect quite a lot. There's more incentive to ensure that your state gets its voice heard, I think, in a. In a contested primary than in one that's basically just like going to coronate the sitting president.

[Galen Krug]

I think we're going to get into this. But it is worth saying here, perhaps ironically, that South Carolina, which has been moved to the front of the pack, is less representative of the Democratic elector than either New Hampshire or Iowa, which, you know, I guess is ironic, but, like, part of what the Democratic Party was doing here, I guess, is trying to say we want to reward certain parts of the electorate. Whether you think that's legitimate or not, whether that's how a primary calendar is meant to work. You know, Donna Brazile, for example, at the rules meeting where they decided this made an argument for, you know, black voters are the most reliable Democratic voters in the country. They ought to have the first say in South Carolina. So there's some interesting, different politics being played here, incentives going on here, which I think we will. We will lay bare what. How we actually think those incentives should be structured as we get into this draft. So are we ready?

[Mary Radcliffe]

Yeah. I. Can I just say one more thing, though. This is, I think what's ironic about putting South Carolina first is I actually think it takes some power away from the voters of South Carolina.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Yep.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Right. The first few nominating contests are like, you're going to have this big candidate field, maybe there's 20 candidates, and you're sort of culling down. Take you get a few of them drop out after each contest, and then whoever's third or fourth gets to play cleanup. Right. Jim Clyburn, representative from South Carolina, longtime representative from South Carolina, said pretty much the same thing with some baseball analogy that I bet Nathaniel knows. And I don't remember because I Don't know baseball. And so, like, it might feel like you're rewarding South Carolina, but it's like, practically speaking, has the opposite impact.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

I think that's a really good point. And I saw an insightful tweet from our friend Jacob Urbashkin, who made the point, you know, was responding to the idea that, like, Pete Buttigieg might not like this new order because it starts with South Carolina. And he tends to. At least in 2020, he struggled with black voters. But I think it. Jacob made a good point, which is that basically, like, Buttigieg can kind of. All he has to do is kind of survive, get through South Carolina. And if he gets 15% in South Carol, that certainly wouldn't have been enough to win it under the old regime. But, like, it's enough for, like, second or third place maybe now. And then he moves on to a place like New Hampshire where he can do really well. Like, I don't know, it actually could work out for him. So, yeah, I think these. These states have different roles now and also influence.

[Galen Krug]

For what it's worth, this is a real throwback. But I was in South Carolina for that primary in 2020 and actually interviewed Jim Clyburn, who was at the time the majority whip. His nephew was working on Pete Buttigieg's campaign. And when I asked him, like, he was trying to, like, hide. Like, we all knew he was endorsing Joe Biden, but this was, like, two days before he did it, and he was kind of trying to hide the ball. He's like, oh, yeah, I'm still open to, like, various other people. And I was like, okay, yeah, who name them? And he said, Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg. So I think that there's. Yes, it is. What is your relationship like with black voters in the Democratic Party? But it's also, what is your relationship like with the establishment? Because black voters are also the most. Tend to be. Especially older black voters who vote the most in primaries tend to be more aligned with the establishment. And so there's a racial component here. There is also, like, a Democratic Party sectoral debate component here as well. Okay, shall we go? Shall we do this? Is everyone ready?

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Let's do it.

[Galen Krug]

Okay. So I am going first, begrudgingly. And I am going to choose Nevada. So not that far off from what the Democratic Party itself chose. Nevada goes second in its scheme for a couple reasons. I. As we go through this, I'll. You'll see this trend. But I am trying to prioritize the competitiveness of the state in a general election, how representative the state is of the Democratic Party and the size of the state. And that's for a few reasons. So one, if you have a primary early on in a really big state like New York, New Jersey, even say maybe Pennsylvania or Texas, the media market is so expensive that you really make it difficult for dark horse candidates to break through or candidates who just don't have lavish funding out of the gate. And I think we have seen that the best funded candidates are not necessarily, necessarily always the strongest. You know, like Michael Bloomberg spent what, a billion dollars on his campaign in 2020 if he had sort of plopped down in Pennsylvania or California or what have you. You can move the needle a lot more with dollars. Also, I think there is something kind of romantic about the, you know, kissing babies, shaking hands, pressing the flesh vibe of a primary state. Nevada is a state with 3.2 million people, which is really not all that much. I'm already going long here. But in terms of the competitiveness and representativeness of the party, the places where Nevada over indexes compared to the party as a whole are areas where the Democratic Party really needs to figure its shit out. It overindexes on white voters without a college degree. So it's a very working class state. It is also an extremely competitive state. Democrats had been winning it for a while. Trump obviously won it narrowly in 2024. And so you would think that the Democratic Party would want to incentivize its candidates to be able to relate to non college educated voters across the board over indexes with non college educated white voters. But there's also a very large Latino population in Nevada, a very large labor population within Nevada. You know, unions are very strong there. If Democrats want to become this more economically populist, more labor aligned party, maybe that's a good way to do it as well. And so, you know, I understand that Las Vegas is a bit of an expensive media market and that is where most of the people are concentrated. But you can still go to Reno. You can still, you know, you can still get on the airwaves in Las Vegas and ex urban Las Vegas without spending a bajillion dollars. So that is why my first draft pick is Nevada.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

Yeah, I mean I think that if we are being kind of like objective about it, which you know, of course I will not be, but if we are being objective about it, I think that Nevada is pretty clearly the, the best choice. So back in 2019, our former 538 colleague Jeffrey Skelly did an analysis of which states were the most representative of the Democratic electorate. Nevada was ranked fifth overall and was the highest ranking small state. And I completely agree with Galen in terms of the retail, the value of retail politics. I think especially in a presidential primary, you want to give a candidate, like somebody who maybe doesn't go in as the front runner with a lot of money, you want to give that person a chance to genuinely connect with the voters and kind of, you know, do a surpr, you know, like thing like Jimmy Carter did in Iowa. And I think a small state provides for that. So I think that Nevada is the perfect combination of small and representative. So well done, Galen.

[Galen Krug]

Thanks. I'll just say here as a baseline so we can get a sense of how our states compare as we go through them. Broadly speaking, the Democratic electorate in a primary, presidential primary campaign is 60% white, 20% black, 10% Latino, 10% other. So that's, you know, Asian, Native American, what have you, mixed race, et cetera. And so when we're comparing these different states to the baseline, that's what we're comparing it to. And in general, there are far more people without a college degree than with a college degree in the United States. It's somewhere like 37% of Americans have a college degree. When it comes to people who are voting in primaries, it's a bit more split. It's closer to 50, 50, because people with college degrees tend to vote at a higher rate. So just to just to that baseline. And now, Mary, it's up to you.

[Mary Radcliffe]

Yeah, so I had some of the what I was thinking about was along the same lines as you for the first state, Galen, I agree that we probably should have a smaller state as the first state so that candidates have the opportunity to like, talk to voters. And I agree with the money piece of this. Right. We don't want to choose a state that's going to have like a really expensive media market where only candidates that have a ton of money are going to be able to compete. This is the first state we want to have, should be a state where people can come off, out of nowhere, off the wall and make their case to voters and let the voters actually make those decisions. But the other piece that I was thinking about is for my first state, I want there to be some ideological diversity in the Democratic Party in that state. I want there to be representation of, for the simplicity of this discussion, like the progressive lane and the establishment lane. I want both of those to be present in that first state because candidates on both sides of that intra party divide should be like having an opportunity to make a case to voters that would be interested in them so that both sides of that divide have the opportunity to winnow the field. And so I have decided.

[Galen Krug]

Wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on. Before you say it, Nathaniel, can you guess which state Mary's gonna say based off of the criteria she just mentioned?

[Nathaniel Rakic]

I mean, nothing.

[Galen Krug]

I think she's gonna say Michigan.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

No, Michigan's too big.

[Mary Radcliffe]

It's too big.

[Galen Krug]

Oh, then she might say New Hampshire.

[Nathaniel Rakic]

That would be real contrarian, I think. I, I, I don't truly know. But you know, I'm gonna maybe say Wisconsin.

[Galen Krug]

That would be a very good pick. But okay, Mary, go ahead. That's the end of today's Preview. Head to GDPolitics.com to become a paid subscriber and catch the full episode. Mary, Nathaniel and I spent a little over an hour drafting Democratic presidential primary states, and it was honestly pretty fun. We debated the value of the size of a state, the role it plays in the general election, and its represent of the party. We also talked about regional diversity, ideological diversity, and whether institutions within an early state actually matter. Think of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, for example. Is that replicable elsewhere? To hear our lineups and let us know who did the best job, head over to GDPolitics.com to catch the whole thing. For eight bucks a month or 80 bucks a year, you'll get twice the number of episodes, and we'll help ensure we can keep making an independent podcast again, that's gdpolitics. Com. Hope to see you there.