• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

First in the Nation - Arizona?

zaffre

fdril
Location
Massachusetts
Pronouns
he/him
Been doing a little reading lately (fun, right?) and I’ve noticed that one of the foundations of the US election system is fairly flimsy w/ regards to butterflies. I refer, of course, to the Iowa Caucus.

Iowa has garnered fame, importance, and unholy ethanol subsidies by being first in the nation to get out and vote - and it was accidental.

1D81EBAC-7424-4F28-BD42-8FB77FE09D2F.jpeg

Have Iowa not moved up so early - or moved up slightly less - and the caucus that will win national media attention for being first to go in the *new* system is Arizona, which went only five days after Iowa in 1972 in OTL. Arizona legislators are almost certainly going to realize the benefits, just as Iowa did, and let’s assume they determinedly occupy the top spot instead. Less corn, more cacti.

And this changes - everything. Not least in 1972, where the most successful liberal challenger in Arizona was not George McGovern but John Lindsay. Maybe Lindsay gets the nom, maybe Humphrey manages to oust the mayor who, after all, has rather weaker ties to the party than McGovern does. Maybe McGovern still gets the nomination.

But even if he does, come 1976 and instead of Carter nabbing a high profile finish in an early caucus - Mo Udall’s chances just skyrocketed.

This isn’t even getting into the more modern consequences of replacing a heavily white, heavily rural caucus with one that is, ah, not.

Anyone else have thoughts?
 
Might not be what you had in mind, but the first thing I thought of is that ITTL scrapping agribusiness subsidies won't be such a non-starter politically - meaning we could see a world with no King Corn and no HFCS.

Farm issues were HUGE in the 80's and Iowa isn't the only corn-growing state. The agribusiness subsidies weren't really about propping up big agribusiness (though that was certainly an effect of them), they were intended to keep family farms open. I think the 1980's farm subsidies were the logical endpoint of the small farm-USDA-agribusiness triad that was built in the 1920's and reducing Iowa's political influence wouldn't be enough to change them.

You might see more serious attempts by both parties to incorporate Native Americans into their coalitions.

I don't really know what any version of the Republicans would have to offer Native voters in Arizona. Reservation Indians have been a deeply Democratic voting bloc since the New Deal and it would take a lot to change that.
 
Another outcome -- it does not take long for this to have an immediate impact: 1976. Carter relied on Iowa, where, let's face it, he was almost a perfect candidate to launch his campaign, then he moved quickly to NH, where he'd also been working hard, to capitalize on that momentum.

If the first caucus is a rival's home state, he's likely to skip it (which is going to devalue the importance of Arizona in its second cycle out of the gate). Now, you have him and Mo head-to-head in NH. Especially in the 70s, the NH Democratic electorate appreciated Carter's fiscal conservatism to an extent, but it was also a strong state for Mo, and Carter will be lacking any Iowa momentum. You could make the argument that the state goes to Udall. One other counter argument is that without all that time in Iowa, more Carter resources are going to NH, which is also fair...

Anywho, if it all goes down Udall's way the second cycle with this calendar, I could see an earlier effort to rotate the primary calendar if other states want a crack at launching a favorite son to the Democratic nomination.
 
Farm issues were HUGE in the 80's and Iowa isn't the only corn-growing state. The agribusiness subsidies weren't really about propping up big agribusiness (though that was certainly an effect of them), they were intended to keep family farms open. I think the 1980's farm subsidies were the logical endpoint of the small farm-USDA-agribusiness triad that was built in the 1920's and reducing Iowa's political influence wouldn't be enough to change them.
Yeah, agribusiness was (and to some extent still is) a force in Arizona as well, only instead of corn, it's cotton and alfalfa.
 
Back
Top