The coastal states of New York and California have long been important in Primary races for their ability to provide funds, but not for producing successful candidates. The West coast has come up with a plan to change this for the 2020 election cycle by changing its Primary date from June to March. Ostensibly, this is designed to provide early political “weight” and momentum to Californian candidates However critics argue that it is being done to allow the DNC’s chosen establishment candidates a better chance against any future “insurgency” candidate. (Read Bernie Sanders)
Not counting the 2016, the 2020 election will likely be one of the biggest races in recent political history. With the Republicans presently having a Super majority in both Congress and Senate, the Democrats will be looking to start building some momentum in the 2018 midterms. Republicans “failure to launch” legislatively so far could aid Democrats, but any successes they achieve in the near future will likely solidify their congressional control. Add that to the fact that the Democrats have not done well in special elections since President Trump’s election. If the DNC fails to get a “Star Candidate” in the race, they will likely spend the following four years in the political wilderness.
The two candidates seeking to benefit from this shift are U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. The plan is to draw early political donors to the Californian candidates, leaving other potential candidates without enough funds to run effectively.
Don Fowler, a former DNC chairman, said “In all probability, the winner of the California primary would be the nominee,” and that “the implications for the flow of the winnowing process [of candidates] is very significant in moving California.” How other non-west coast candidates will react is being kept under wraps in order to portray a “unified party.”
Political analyst Tony Quinn has seen this all before in 2008 when 20 other states also tried the same tactic. He says: “They can change the dates all they want — we’ve tried this over and over and over, and it has not worked.”
“I think what you’re dealing with are politicians who don’t have any memory.”
While many claim that this is a “corrupt” or “unethical” move, Garcetti defends it on the basis of allowing Californian candidates the same opportunities as others:
“I’m more concerned about what’s best for all Americans, not just what’s best for our state.”
“I’ve gone to Iowa. It’s amazing to see in a small setting people actually get the chance to touch and feel and vet candidates,” he said. “But we want to make sure that’s done in diverse states and big states like California that, you know, like in the Senate, our vote isn’t watered down.”
On the reverse side, experts are saying that the rest of the nation’s dissatisfaction with California’s political attitudes can only benefit President Trump, if he seeks re-election in 2020.
Mark is a political writer and journalist who has worked on campaigns for Brexit.