Fifty Nifty United States

As South Carolinians vote today, in the Republican Party's third presidential primary, the press has been filed with its quadrennial series of stories about how the early-voting states that typically define the presidential contest are completely unrepresentative of the U.S. They're too small! Too white! Too kooky! Too conservative! Too wealthy! Too poor! Too few people cast votes before the country renders its judgment! The Times' Gail Collins, as much as I like her sweetly acerbic columns, is at the front of this chorus.

Maybe so. New Hampshire would essentially lose its raison d'etre if the first primary weren't there and become a much smaller version of Montana. Though maybe Iowa and New Hampshire are good choices, partly because of habit -- a culture of civic engagement is difficult to build and these two states already have it -- and partly because of their less mobile populations -- people who live in one place for longer are more likely to care about their communities, and states such as Arizona, Florida or Nevada are filled with newcomers. (Defending South Carolina's political culture is a step too far for me. See the Confederate flag, Strom Thurmond and Mark Sanford as a few examples for why.)

Then again, which state, if placed at the start of the primary, would be a good placeholder for the country's voters? The big ones on the coasts? Too liberal and their media markets are too expensive, which would shutout all but the wealthiest candidates. The Midwestern ones? Too postwar. The Northwest or Vermont? Too quirky. Arizona or Florida? Too hot and old, with too many transplants. In a way, the heterogenous landscape confirms that great American principle of the melting pot: Everyone is different yet comes together to form the union.

Nonetheless, I recommend North Carolina and Colorado, nouveau swing states that were once conservative, not terribly populous, and driven by natural resources, but over the past 20 years have redefined themselves in the knowledge economy, with growing cities that increasingly attract well-educated younger professionals, and titled toward the left center as a result. Their demographics appropriately combine where we were and where we're headed in a way that would compel candidates to do the same in their campaigns. The contest would look a lot more like the 21st century than it now does.