Looking back now, was it worth it for California to move its primary up?

[W_HAMILTON]

I believe California wanted to move its primary up so that it could have more influence in determining who our nominee would be, given that it is one of the largest and strongest Democratic states in the country. Now that Super Tuesday is over, we apparently won't know the final results from California for a few days at least, which led to the big news from Super Tuesday being how Biden dominated in various smaller states and pulled off surprising wins elsewhere.

As an unbiased observer -- I don't really care one way or the other about when California decides to hold its primary, I'm just curious as to what everyone else thinks -- it seems like California moving its primary up did not have its intended effect. The surprising wins from Biden earlier in the night seemed to dominate the news coverage, and some have pointed out that Biden's overwhelming wins in some smaller states will end up offsetting any potential delegate lead Sanders is able to muster in California.

Back in 2016, Sanders always had "well, we still have California coming up!" to counter the narrative that Hillary was running away with it; however, now California is essentially off the table, with its results potentially offset by several Southeast states where Biden won a much more decisive victory than Sanders is expected to win in California.

So, in the end, do you think California achieved its desired results? Or should it have remained further down the road in our nomination process?

[hlthe2b]

1. well, I think a lot of CA (and other state residents with early mail-in voting) have learned...

to hold onto that ballot and hand-deliver on the day of, rather than prior, in case one's candidate choice drops out.

That said, I do think earlier is better for the larger states.

[beachbumbob]

2. the biggest issue will always be when other candidates drop out

and people vote early and/or by mail

[OnDoutside]

3. It does have the effect of putting clear water between the top of the race and those who should have

exited before now. And that's a good thing.

Above all, Iowa and New Hampshire as the first states, has to go, as well as the caucus.

[Fresh_Start]

4. Of course it was worth it. you have a huge engaged group of voters

who felt their votes didn't matter..candidates didn't stop by except to pick up money to run in other states.

[thesquanderer]

5. I don't think California's decision was based in impacting a single year/election.

Any single year is unpredictable, with its own dynamics.

[dsc]

6. It was why Harris dropped

she faced having happen to her what happened to Elizabeth and dropped out to avoid it.