Showing posts with label travel primary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label travel primary. Show all posts

Friday, July 21, 2023

Another way to look at current support for the First-in-the-Nation primary in New Hampshire

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • How about an update on some quiet calendar and rules stories from around the country that maybe have not seen much of a spotlight? We dig into a few 2024 things in Delaware, Georgia, New York and South Dakota. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Six in ten New Hampshire residents support a New Hampshire law that requires the state's Presidential Primary to be held before any similar contest.
It was interesting the ways in which this finding was reported. At home in New Hampshire, WMUR headlined an article, "New UNH poll shows most support law requiring New Hampshire hold first presidential primary." 

Meanwhile, national outlets like The Messenger honed in on the crosstabs focused on Democrats in the Granite state, "Poll: Less Than Half Of New Hampshire Democrats Support First-In-The-Nation Primary Law."

Neither is untrue. Neither is off-base. It is just interesting to what each opted to draw attention. 

FHQ would offer another interpretation. Yes, Democrats in the state appear to be divided over the first-in-the-nation question, but in years past that number likely would have been far, far higher. Again, the first-in-the-nation primary has been one of the few things where Democrats and Republicans in New Hampshire have seen eye-to-eye as politics has become more and more polarized. And many Democrats are still with Republicans in the state on the matter according to this survey. But all/most of them are not. Not anymore anyway. Not at this time.

That is a big deal. A national party -- in this case the Democratic National Committee -- taking a stand on the early calendar has triggered a marked dip in support for one of the biggest institutions New Hampshirites hang their hats on in the national spotlight every four years. 

Now, it is fair to ask whether the numbers would have trailed off as much if Democrats were looking at a competitive nomination fight in 2024. But they are not. And that buttresses the argument that if ever there was a time to make big calendar changes, it is during an incumbent reelection cycle. This is just one poll and there is so much yet to play out in this New Hampshire/DNC drama before next summer at the Chicago convention.

...but this is an interesting poll result. 


...
Much of the current negativity around the DeSantis campaign may be legitimate. It may also be overblown. Campaigns at this level are often on a knife's edge. But whether it is real or not, one of the things to eye (as a real operationalization of that) is how much emphasis Team DeSantis puts on Iowa. Yes, Trump and DeSantis have been "eyeing Super Tuesday states," but that is not anything that is new. However, if the DeSantis campaign and affiliated groups begin to put all or most of their eggs in the Iowa basket, then that could be a sign that the campaign's options (on a number of fronts) are waning. Wooing evangelicals in the Hawkeye state (before a gathering there) may or may not be evidence of that. But it is something to watch in the coming days.
This week Never Back Down, the super PAC affiliated with the DeSantis effort, is scaling up its activity in the Hawkeye state, host of the first-in-the-nation caucuses next January. Again, this is a super PAC and not the campaign itself, but it is somewhat telling.


...
From around the invisible primary...


...
On this date...
...in 1988, Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis accepted the Democratic presidential nomination in Atlanta.

...in 2016, Donald Trump gave his acceptance speech in Cleveland, completing his path to the Republican presidential nomination.



--
See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 4:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Wednesday, July 19, 2023

A twist in the 2024 Republican endorsement primary

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • At least one state representative has given voice to some contingency planning in New Hampshire to circumvent any issues that may arise in the calendar back-and-forth with Iowa. Is it at all necessary? All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
It has been a unique cycle for Republicans and the endorsement primary. There is no real precedent for a former and defeated president returning to run for a third nomination and a second term, not in the post-reform era anyway. But not surprisingly, Donald Trump's presence has had an impact on how elected officials have endorsed in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination race. First, the former president has the most high profile endorsements of any of those vying for the nomination. However, the support is far from unified as it was when Trump ran for reelection as president four years ago. Still, Trump enjoys a frontrunner's support based on the endorsement metric. 

Although, again, that backing is not unified. And while other candidates have won endorsements of their own, Trump being in the race has frozen some elected officials, creating a melange of non-endorsements, unendorsements and pre-endorsements that have not been typical in past competitive nomination cycles in either party. 

And Trump has upped the ante in the endorsement primary among the non-endorsement crowd of late, carving out a small group of folks who have remained on the sidelines but whom the former president clearly views as should-be endorsements. The arm twisting first went public last week when Trump questioned Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds' loyalty for remaining neutral in a contest that will kick off in her state next January. Now the list has expanded to include Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the former press secretary under Trump turned governor of Arkansas. She, too, has withheld her endorsement to this point and has subsequently drawn the ire of the former president for not backing him.

This is a new development. There may be behind-the-scenes cajoling between a presidential candidate and a potential endorsement under normal circumstances, but this is a very different form of public arm-twisting in an attempt to extract an endorsement. It is not exactly breaking a norm, but it is not something that is common either. And it serves as an extension of Trump's atypical return from defeat to run a third time, another series of perceived political transactions for the former president.

[Perhaps Montana Representative Matt Rosendale is on this list as well, albeit in a more indirect way.]


...
The latest survey on the presidential primary in the Granite state has been released by the University of New Hampshire. On the Republican side, Trump (37 percent) and DeSantis (23 percent) are the only two candidates above 10 percent and thus, are the only two who would qualify for delegates if the poll represented the results of the primary. The former president's support flagged some from the last UNH survey in April but he maintains a relative high floor of support.

Among Democrats, Joe Biden (70 percent) is the only declared candidate north of the 15 percent qualifying threshold for delegates in the Granite state. But there are questions over whether the president will even be on the ballot for the primary if Democrats in the state opt to go rogue. Two-thirds of Biden supporters in the poll indicated that they would write the president's name in. 


...
I talked with Lou Jacobson for a piece at Politifact about the changes to the 2024 primary calendar and the dwindling number of unknowns related to it. 


...
From around the invisible primary...


...
On this date...
...in 1984, former Vice President Walter Mondale put forth New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate and accepted the Democratic presidential nomination.



--
See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 5:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |

Tuesday, July 18, 2023

New Hampshire blinders in the Democratic nomination race

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Michigan Republicans had everything in place with respect to their 2024 delegate selection plan. ...until they didn't. The plan adopted by the state party last month hit a snag with the RNC and will require a tweak. But the state party has options. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Al Hunt had an eye roll-worthy opinion piece up at The Messenger over the weekend and it was the 315 billionth one since December to inform readers about how the Democrats' Biden-led calendar changes for 2024 have "backfired, spectacularly" in New Hampshire. And again, this was not revelatory. There has been a steady stream of stories and opinion pieces in this genre that have followed the same basic formula: accentuate the negative in the only story outside of the president's age to move the needle in a nomination race that looks like a yawner, only gather quotes from folks inside of and tied to the state of New Hampshire and assume the worst for the president. 

Look, if folks have caught even a whiff of one of these Biden/New Hampshire stories since late last year, then they will likely understand that upsetting folks in a battleground state may have implications for the president in the general election next year. That has been and remains clear. 

However, Hunt, like many before him, has chosen the New Hampshire-centric path that leads to hypothetical chaos (or some lesser form of uncertainty in the 2024 Democratic nomination race). And that path always seems to place some variety of blinders on those who spin these yarns of incumbent woe. 

Folks miss that New Hampshire Democrats are not without options in this saga. Like other state parties, New Hampshire's Democrats can opt out of a state-run presidential primary in favor of some party-run contest to allocate national convention delegates. The Democratic Party in the Granite state has the very same free association rights under the first amendment that all parties across the country do regardless of any state law on the subject. Perhaps, then, the state party could diffuse the situation by going along with the calendar rules supported by folks from 55 of 57 states and territories and adopted by the Democratic National Committee for the 2024 cycle. [It honestly is like that Politico piece from May was never reported. It certainly was not internalized by very many.]

But even if New Hampshire Democrats continue along the route of defiance, does that necessarily mean that the Biden campaign will topple like a house of cards on the evening of (probably) January 23? Is a non-loss by the president in an unsanctioned primary really the death knell for Biden in 2024? It could be. But it could also very well be that the South Carolina primary comes along eleven days later on February 3 and starts a string of (actual delegate-allocating) victories for the president, things become boring and attention goes where it most always does when an incumbent is seeking renomination: to the other party's active contest. But, of course, Hunt did not reckon with that possibility. 

Neither did he consider the long-term implications of New Hampshire Democrats' defiance in the short term. Again, what if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or Marianne Williamson wins a New Hampshire primary, the ballot of which the president is not on? That is not embarrassing for Biden. That is embarrassing for New Hampshire Democrats. The state party would lose face and set itself back even further for future discussions of the calendar for 2028, a cycle that will actually matter on the Democratic side. It is shaping up to be competitive. 

Iowa Democrats still have a chance to mess this up, but this is what separates them from New Hampshire Democrats in this calendar kerfuffle. Iowa Democrats are seemingly playing the long game. If they go along with the 2024 calendar rules and manage to pull off a successful mail-in presidential preference vote, then the party will have a leg to stand on in pitching a return to the early calendar for the Hawkeye state in 2028. They may be rejected again, but that is still a firmer foundation from which to argue than "we defied the national party the whole way in 2024 and some conspiracy theorist won our meaningless primary." The membership of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee may change substantially between now and 2026 when the calendar decisions are made for 2028, but unless the entire committee is made of DNC members from New Hampshire, then Granite state Democrats are very unlikely to find a receptive audience for their early calendar pitch. 

But Hunt does not consider that either. And it is understandable. It is not a flashy story at the moment (if it ever is for more than just FHQ and, like, seven other people). But at some point, Hunt and others will get beyond this initial set of questions about the Biden/New Hampshire situation and dig a little deeper. One can only hope.


...
This addendum from Seth Masket to the most recent wave in his survey of Republican county party chairs includes a graphic that is just fascinating to look at. It charts the percentage of county party chairs considering various candidates against the percentage who do not want a particular candidate nominated in 2024. As he notes, there are caveats, but it does give a sense of the direction of movement in the race. And Tim Scott noticeably moved in a positive direction. The junior senator from South Carolina saw his consideration numbers go up and his against nomination numbers trail off. Neat graphic. Seth continues to do solid work over at Tusk. 


...
From around the invisible primary...
  • In the staff primary, the DeSantis campaign trimmed its payroll over the weekend, cutting loose a dozen staffers. That drew parallels to Jeb Bush and Scott Walker and others who have busted out of the gates with hype to spare only to find themselves in a similar position: not meeting expectations (that they did not set), scaling back only to scare skittish donors which leads to further scaling back. Wash, rinse, repeat: doom loop. [Look, it is another troubling sign in a series of them for DeSantis and company in recent days. It may or may not be premature to write the obituaries of the Florida governor's campaign. But the simple truth of the matter is that DeSantis remains well positioned to do well in the 2024 race. [Well may mean something other than winning the nomination.] The governor has raised a lot of money -- with some caveats -- has the (endorsement) backing of a fair number of elected officials and has experienced staff in the broader campaign orbit. On those measures, DeSantis is well ahead of every other nomination aspirant but one.]
  • In the money primary, Mike Pence and Chris Christie turned in FEC reports that fell below $2 million. For what it is worth, both entered the race for the Republican nomination just last month. 
  • Wall Street donors are opening up their checkbooks for Trump alternatives, but that money is going to multiple candidates. 
  • The chatter may be there, but Georgia Governor Brian Kemp is not running for president. ...again. 
  • DeSantis has been in the Palmetto state the last two days and Chris Christie will make his first stop in South Carolina on Thursday, July 21.


...
On this date...
...in 1984, former Vice President Walter Mondale is formally nominated in a roll call vote at the Democratic National Convention in San Francisco.

...in 1988, the Democratic National Convention kicked off in Atlanta.



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 2:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Friday, July 14, 2023

The DeSantis-is-sinking stories may be oversold to some degree, but...

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Trump either wins Iowa or plays the victim card next January. Does Iowa even matter in 2024? Yeah, the caucuses in the Hawkeye state still matter. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
There has been a lot of ink spilled in the last week or two about the shape the DeSantis campaign is in a little more than a month since the Florida governor launched his bid for the Republican nomination. Donors are nervous. Deck chairs are being moved. Murdochs are looking elsewhere. Poll numbers are plateauing if not trending downward. And that collective picture could portend an ominous swing into debate season starting next month. Or it could be blip on the radar, a summer lull. Time will tell that tale, but DeSantis remains the clear second option in the current field, albeit not as clear as it may have once been. He continues to bring in money at a pretty good clip. And for some reason he continues to draw in a fair number of endorsements. He may not be best positioned in the race for the 2024 Republican nomination, but he is well positioned even despite the current (real or perceived depending on the metric used) slide.

But here is the thing: DeSantis is now flirting with the threshold for qualifying for delegates that will be used in a lot of states. He is on the wrong side of 20 percent in the latest Morning Consult national poll. No, the Republican nomination process is not a national primary, but not being able to meet delegate qualifying thresholds will kill a campaign quickly once votes begin to be cast. 

...if the ship is not righted. 

There are still six months until the Iowa caucuses and the first few states -- at least as the rules are understood at this point -- have low bars to claim (small shares) of delegates. There is no formal threshold in Iowa, it is set at 10 percent in New Hampshire and Nevada's rules in previous cycles have set the threshold below five percent. But the winner-take-all by congressional district method South Carolina Republicans use is not forgiving and neither are rules in the Super Tuesday states, the majority of which have the maximum 20 percent threshold. 17 percent for DeSantis still puts space between him and the rest of the field, but it is far enough behind Trump right now that the Florida governor is in danger of missing out on delegates when it counts next March and beyond. 

Still, much can happen between now and the voting phase and that could be good or bad for DeSantis.


...
Not surprisingly, New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan is giving January 23 a good look for an eventual landing spot for the presidential primary in the Granite state. That has made sense since South Carolina Republicans settled on a February 24 date for their primary, clearing enough space in front of the South Carolina Democratic primary for both Iowa and New Hampshire in January next year. But there is a question that has to be answered first before Scanlan is able to pull the trigger later this fall on that late January date. 


...
From around the invisible primary...


...
On this date...
...in 1972, South Dakota Senator George McGovern accepted the Democratic presidential nomination in the wee hours of the morning of July 14 in Miami.

...in 2007, former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore dropped out of the race for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. 



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 2:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Wednesday, June 21, 2023

One more quirk in the scheduling of the South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Republicans in the Virgin Islands have set forth an ambitious plan for 2024 delegate allocation and selection in the island territory. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
One more thing on South Carolina Republicans setting the date of their 2024 presidential primary...

In revamping FHQ's 2024 presidential primary calendar after the decision out of the Palmetto state over the weekend, it dawned on me that the South Carolina Republican primary has really not "moved" all that far. In truth, it has not moved at all. The date was never set. But now, the primary is set for February 24, 2024. 

Where did FHQ have it tentatively placed way back in the initial iteration of the calendar that was released the day after Inauguration Day in 2021? 

February 24, 2024. 

This is not a boast. It is more a coincidence than anything else. In that time, in early 2021, before the Nevada legislature established the new presidential primary in the Silver state and scheduled it for the first Tuesday in February, the outlook on the 2024 calendar was fairly straightforward. It was going to look like 2016 and 2020: Iowa during the first week of February, New Hampshire's primary the following week and the South Carolina Republican primary the next weekend more than seven days after that. 

However, something was going to have to give in the long run in that scenario because FHQ also had the Nevada caucuses -- again, before the primary was established -- on the same February 24 date. Ultimately, two things gave. First, Nevada established the early February primary. But second South Carolina Republicans relented by apparently yielding their implied third position in the Republican order to Nevada Republicans (whether the party there opts into the state-run primary or not).

But it is funny how it has all worked out to this point. Nevada Republicans still have to settle their plans for 2024. 


...
From around the invisible primary...
  • In the money primary, Ron DeSantis has been fundraising in California this week. Next week the Florida governor will do the same thing in Rockland County outside of New York. The $6600 per person dinner with DeSantis and major business leaders will be his second fundraiser of the day in the Empire state, following another event in Manhattan.
  • Axios Detroit does their version of the hybrid Michigan primary-caucus system helps Trump story. To be clear, it is not so much the format that helps Trump as the make up of the Michigan Republican Party that may benefit the former president. This can be a kind of chicken or the egg argument, but if the party were tilted toward another candidate and/or if the grassroots were energized and aligned with another candidate, then the format would help them. The big thing about the change is that it erects institutional hurdles that will make it hard for candidates not named Trump or DeSantis to effectively compete in the Great Lakes state. They are the two with the best combination of name recognition, financial resources and organization to make it work in Michigan under the proposed hybrid rules. ...at this time. That picture could change.
  • A local, North Dakota-centered look at how folks nationally are reacting to Governor Doug Burgum's bid for the Republican presidential nomination. 
  • In the travel primary, both Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis will be in New Hampshire next Tuesday, June 27. Trump to keynote a New Hampshire Federation of Republican Women luncheon in Concord and DeSantis for a town hall meeting in Hollis. 
  • Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's anti-Trump run at the Republican nomination is not without some heavy hitters in the political donor game. There was some early reporting that Mets owner and hedge fund founder Steve Cohen was also financially backing Christie's bid through a super PAC. Cohen remains on the periphery of the Republican race for now. 

...
On this date...
...in 2011, former Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman joined the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. 



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 11:30 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Thursday, June 8, 2023

Pat Robertson, 1988 and the Modern Caucus Strategy in Republican Presidential Politics

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Another big daily digest update on primary calendar maneuvering in the mid-Atlantic and northeast and possible delegate allocation rules changes by Republican state parties in a pair of big states. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Many obituaries will talk about Pat Robertson's impact on how Republican presidential candidates strategize around the Iowa caucuses on the day of the televangelist's passing. And while his 1988 run for the Republican presidential nomination expressly targeted Christian conservatives, it was about more than just Iowa and evangelicals. 

The Robertson campaign's savvy on the grassroots level not only delivered caucus victories that cycle in Alaska, Hawaii and Washington, but in many ways, it laid the predicate for the modern caucus strategy that recent campaigns like those of Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012 or Ted Cruz in 2016 mimicked. It has not always been all about evangelicals. Rather, it is about emphasizing the delegate selection process through the caucuses (in most states) to push as many delegates through to the convention to influence the ultimate nominee and the platform (if not the rules for subsequent cycles).

George H.W. Bush, for example, won the preference vote in the Nevada precinct caucuses in 1988 only to have Robertson's team run an end-around on them in later rounds of the caucus/convention process when delegates were actually selected. It is the same thing Ron Paul pulled off in a number of states in 2012, including Iowa and Nevada. 

And the stories from Michigan that cycle are priceless, from electing delegates in 1986 all the way through a rump state convention with Robertson at the center. But again, Robertson's team was able to exploit the delegate selection game to their advantage. It did not lead to the nomination, but it did lead to influence. And the 1988 Iowa Republican caucuses are only part of that story.

It should also be noted that RNC rules have progressively made this caucus strategy more and more difficult.


...
In the endorsement primary, former President Donald Trump rolled out 50 endorsements from West Virginia state legislators on Wednesday. FHQ did some endorsement math with a similar DeSantis endorsement wave, so it is only fair to do the same here. Trump's 50 endorsements come from 120 possible Republican legislators in the Mountain state.

Not to be outdone, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis gained the support of 20 state legislators (out of 121 Republicans across the state House and Senate) in Oklahoma. The list included three representatives who are part of the House leadership team.

And the campaign of Vivek Ramaswamy signed on former Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz as one of its co-chairs in the Hawkeye state. Schultz previously served in similar roles for the Santorum and Cruz campaigns in 2012 and 2016, respectively. Both went on to win the caucuses. Ramaswamy also reeled in the endorsement of Iowa state Senator Scott Webster (a defection from DeSantis).


...
In the travel primary, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, fresh off his campaign launch, is swinging through eastern Iowa on Thursday and Des Moines, Ankeny and elsewhere on Friday.

And President Biden and Ron DeSantis will overlap in northern California later this month. 


...
On this date...
...in 1976, President Gerald Ford fended off former California Governor Ronald Reagan in the New Jersey and Ohio primaries, but Reagan continued his dominance out west, winning the primary in the Golden state and keeping the delegate count close. On the Democratic side, former Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter outlasted the competition in the Ohio primary, but lost to California Governor Jerry Brown in the latter's home state. Carter also won the beauty contest primary in New Jersey while losing the delegate battle to Brown and former Vice President Hubert Humphrey. 

...in 1979, Illinois Congressman John Anderson formally entered the race for the 1980 Republican presidential nomination.

...in 2004, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry won the Montana and New Jersey primaries to close out primary season.



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 2:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , ,
Share |

Thursday, June 1, 2023

Republican Sound and Fury in Nevada Over 2024 Presidential Primary, Signifying Little

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Folks are starting to look more at the 2024 primary calendar and while there is uncertainty as to its final state, it can be narrowed down to a limited number of questions in a handful of states. An update on the calendar at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
FHQ had a number of interesting conversations on the periphery of the news about the lawsuit filed last week by Nevada Republicans to seek relief from (future) enforcement of the new presidential primary law in the Silver state. One can read the brief FHQ take on the matter at the link above, but we would also recommend the piece by Derek Muller at Election Law Blog and the Nevada Independent rundown of things from the Silver state perspective.

It is a strange lawsuit. 

It is strange because, according to the NV Indy report, the Nevada secretary of state's office interprets the code created by the 2021 bill to allow for a party to conduct caucuses in lieu of the newly created state-run presidential primary. Furthermore, legislation also considered and passed during the same legislative session in 2021 unentangled the state from the business of the state parties organizing themselves, something that conflicted with an amendment to that section of the code in the presidential primary bill. But the repeal of those sections overrode the one amendment included in that primary bill.

So why all of the fuss from Nevada Republicans?

Well, for starters, the party is fundraising off of the lawsuit. [That is a screengrab of the splash page when one navigates to the Nevada Republican Party web page as of this writing.] But that is perhaps an unconventional (but increasingly conventional) way to raise funds, via lawsuit.

But also there is a potential national party angle here as well. No, the Republican National Committee (RNC) is not pushing Nevada Republicans to sue, not directly anyway. However, national party rules may present something of a problem to Nevada Republicans should there be a beauty contest primary but also caucuses that would serve as the official method by which the state party would allocate and select delegates to the national convention.

The problem? Consider the situation in Michigan. 

Democrats in control of the state government in Lansing passed a bill earlier this year that was subsequently signed into law moving the presidential primary in the Great Lakes state to late February for 2024. But that is in violation of RNC rules on the timing of primaries and caucuses. That, in turn and in part, may prompt Michigan Republicans to conduct caucuses in order to avoid sanction from the national party. 

But that is a problem. Later and compliant caucuses would necessarily have to follow the noncompliant February presidential primary in Michigan. Yet, RNC rules also require that any statewide vote be used as the contest on which delegate allocation must be based. With the noncompliant statewide primary vote coming first, it would have to be used as the data from which delegate allocation is to be allocated. 

See the issue here? Nevada Republicans, even if they have the cover to conduct caucuses as the Nevada secretary of state's office suggests, would be forced to conduct those caucuses either alongside the state-run primary or before it -- constraining the party's choices -- to avoid running afoul of the RNC rules. 

Or so it would seem. 

The situations in Michigan and Nevada, however, are different. Candidate filing is different. Candidates actually file to appear on the primary ballot in Nevada. They do not in Michigan, where the secretary of state merely creates a list of recognized candidates to appear on the primary ballot. If Nevada Republicans plan to hold caucuses on, say, February 13 -- after the February 6 primary -- and allocate delegates based on that, then the candidates will file with the state party and not with the state to be on the primary ballot. If no candidates file -- or if just one files -- then there would be no Republican primary in Nevada under current law. There would be no earlier statewide vote to conflict with a later official caucus vote. There would be no RNC penalties. 

It would appear, then, that Nevada Republicans already have the answers they need and do not really need the lawsuit. Unless they are just looking to raise funds for the caucuses. But again, this is a strange lawsuit.


...
Allan Smith over at NBC News has a great deep dive on the alleged problems in Republican-aligned canvassing efforts. Look, it is likely that the "problem" is overstated in the piece -- close election losses rarely come down to just one factor -- but that does not mean canvassing on the Republican side does not fall short of what Democrats are doing. And the issue with paid volunteers is particularly important given all of the hiring that outside groups like the DeSantis-affiliated super PAC, Never Back Down, are doing in states on Super Tuesday and earlier on the calendar. 


...
Invisible Primary quick hits:
  • In the staff primary, Donald Trump hired Eric Hollander to oversee operations in Iowa and New Hampshire. Hollander's presidential campaign experience includes being a part of the Cruz operation in South Carolina in 2016 before moving on to lead the campaign in Illinois, a state with notoriously difficult delegate rules.
  • It was nice to see some actual analysis in press coverage of the steep odds a late-entry Glenn Youngkin bid for the Republican nomination would face.
  • Former Vice President Mike Pence will enter the presidential race on Wednesday, June 7 in Iowa. Pence will be a part of a busy week for candidate entry with Chris Christie set to announce Tuesday in New Hampshire and Doug Burgum launching his campaign on Wednesday as well.
  • The busy travel primary week in Iowa continues on Thursday. Donald Trump returns to the Hawkeye state in the wake of DeSantis stops there. Senator Joni Ernst's Roast and Ride is also this weekend in Iowa.

...
On this date...
...in 1976, another late-season series of contests saw split results in both parties' competitive nomination races. President Gerald Ford took the Rhode Island primary while former California Governor Ronald Reagan continued his dominance out west, winning primaries in Montana (beauty contest) and South Dakota. On the Democratic side, Jimmy Carter topped the field in South Dakota, but lost to Idaho Senator Frank Church in Montana and an uncommitted slate (aligned with California Governor Jerry Brown) in Rhode Island.

...in 2004, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry won primaries in Alabama and South Dakota and President George W. Bush won primaries in the Yellowhammer state as well as in New Mexico.

...in 2008, New York Senator Hillary Clinton won the Puerto Rico Democratic primary, but still trailed Barack Obama in the delegate count late in a tight race for the Democratic nomination.

...in 2015, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) officially joined the growing field of candidates vying for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.

...in 2019, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan declines to challenge President Donald Trump for the 2020 Republican presidential nomination.



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 10:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , ,
Share |

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

DeSantis starts as the clearest Trump alternative, but is a repeat of 2016 inevitable?

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Look, this Trump trial is going to be a big deal in the middle of primary season next year. But where it lands on the calendar and how the calendar is very likely to settle make the combination potentially quite disruptive. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
The one common theme in many of the send ups of Ron DeSantis on launch day for his presidential campaign is that the Florida governor is well enough positioned to challenge former President Donald Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, but neither have been strong enough to ward off the entry of other candidates with the conventional qualities of formidable, if not successful, past presidential aspirants. The thought goes -- and there is evidence to back it up -- that those other candidates in or on the verge of being in the race are focused more in recent days on challenging for the mantle of the Trump alternative than they are on actually directly taking on the former president. 

None of this is news. DeSantis has been taking incoming fire in recent weeks from not only the Trump campaign but the other candidates seeking to break out of the single digits in public opinion polling of the race. Understandably, that also conjures up memories of the 2016 Republican presidential nomination contest. But even with the presence of that echo of 2016, DeSantis enters a race for the 2024 nomination with far different dynamics. 

And those differing dynamics center on the former president and not Governor DeSantis. First of all, as the political world was reminded again yesterday, Trump faces criminal charges that he is set to go on trial for at a crucial point on the 2024 presidential primary calendar. That will add an element of uncertainty to the progression of primary season unprecedented in the post-reform era (much less any era of American history). But, by virtue of being a former president (among other things), Trump is also in a far better position in 2023 than he was in 2015. Notably, throughout the competitive portion of the 2016 process, Trump only approached (but did not attain) majority support in the national polls after big victories in the cluster of primaries in the mid-Atlantic and northeast in late April, right before the last of the remaining competition withdrew from the race. 

Look, FHQ does not want to harp on national polls too much, especially seven months before any votes are set to be cast. But Trump has basically been in the same position in the national polls that he was in at the height of his 2016 support all along during the 2024 invisible primary. And in the last month, the former president has crested above majority support. Yes, all of the usual caveats apply. It is May before a presidential election year. Things may change. Additionally, state polls may offer a better idea of where the candidates stand relative to one another in a sequential (not national) contest.

Still, Trump has been and is in a position to claim a lot of delegates under the rules that will govern the 2024 process. And delegates are the currency of a nomination race. His position in 2023 is consistent with or above his best in 2016. Yes, there will be winner-take-all contests that will allow a plurality winner to be awarded all of the delegates in some (but not all) primaries and caucuses after March 15 just like in 2016. But that distinction matters little if Trump is winning a majority of support in those contests. Even if Trump trails off from his current pace and drops below majority support, it may not change the fact that DeSantis is the only candidate to this point who is even flirting with the delegate qualifying threshold in most states (20 percent) with contests before March 15. And in recent days DeSantis has dipped below that mark. 

The point is that the candidate dynamics of 2023 may resemble those of 2015-16 on the Republican side, but they may meet a different set of preferences among the electorate (at least according to polls at this point) and will intersect with a more frontrunner-favorable set of delegate allocation rules in 2024. Neither of those are a repeat of 2016. The end result may be. Trump may end up the 2024 Republican nominee, but there may be similarities and differences in how the process gets to that point relative to 2016.


...
In the endorsement primary, DeSantis nabbed another congressional backer, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA, 6th). Team DeSantis also lined up the support of over 100 former Trump administration officials. The executive branch is huge, but this is no small show of support, especially when the president they all worked for is running for the same position again.


...
A handful of quick hits:


...
On this date...
...in 1984, two days after winning a beauty contest primary in the Gem state, Colorado Senator Gary Hart won the Idaho Democratic caucuses, where delegates were allocated.

...in 1988, Vice President George H.W. Bush claimed victory in the Idaho primary.




--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 10:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Friday, April 28, 2023

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Forfeiting New Hampshire?

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

It is not exactly news that New Hampshire will have the first presidential primary in 2024. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) may have relegated the primary in the Granite state to its customary second position (but behind another primary this time), but every signal from up in that part of New England since December has pointed in one direction: New Hampshire will continue to be first.

Democrats have said it. Republicans have said it. Governors have said it. And most importantly, secretaries of state -- you know, the one who makes the scheduling decision on the presidential primary in New Hampshire -- have said it. 

However, it is also not a mystery that the DNC will not grant a waiver to New Hampshire Democrats to hold anything other than a February 6 contest. Barring a reversal from the state party in the Granite state, then, the DNC is going to levy penalties against the state party during primary season at the very least. It will also assess specific penalties against candidates who campaign in the state.1 So it is not a surprise that the president will likely take a pass on any rogue New Hampshire primary. Biden would be breaking the rules of the party he leads to file for access to the ballot there. 

But that is not forfeiting the primary. That is the wrong frame for this. And it misses the point anyway. Look, the New Hampshire Democratic Party wants three things whether they say them out loud or not. First, well, they want to be first. But they also, despite the calendar rules snub, want Biden to be the Democratic nominee over the alternatives. There are no viable alternatives, and that is where the party's third want comes in: They do not want to further undermine New Hampshire's leverage for attempts at winning an early calendar waiver in future presidential cycles. 

And what would really undermine the state with national Democrats even further for the future is Marianne Williamson or Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. winning the New Hampshire primary next year. One of those outcomes would destroy any remaining credibility Granite staters have for making discerning decisions on presidential nominations on the Democratic side. And if one thinks New Hampshire Democrats want to go to the table with the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee in 2026 and make the case that they should have an early contest in 2028 after Williamson or Kennedy won there in 2024, then FHQ does not really know what to say. But one can say that New Hampshire Democrats -- the state party anyway -- do not relish that possibility. 

New Hampshire Democrats are stuck. They have been stuck since December between state law and new national party rules. But it is under-appreciated just how much that rules change has upset the delicate calendar balance for New Hampshire Democrats. To defy the national party means to further hurt New Hampshire's primary primacy. And that is true whether it is the party breaking the national party rules to go early or voters protesting the Biden-driven calendar changes by pulling the lever for a long shot alternative. 

But the press focus should be less on poking at the "there is not a story on the Democratic side, but let's see if we can find one" angle and more on what the New Hampshire Democratic Party is going to do, stuck between national party rules and a Democratic electorate in the Granite state riled up by the president. That is a story worth pursuing because the decisions made there by the state party may make a great deal of difference for 2028 when there will be an active Democratic nomination race. 


...
Never Back Down, the super PAC aligned with the nascent DeSantis bid for the Republican presidential nomination rolled out a robust slate of endorsements in Michigan on Thursday. Yes, Trump has run laps around the Florida governor on congressional endorsements from his home state, but 19 members of the Michigan House -- just more than a third of the Republican caucus in the lower chamber -- is nothing to sneeze at. 

The catch is how much value those endorsement ultimately end up carrying. New leadership in the Michigan Republican Party seems to be on the fence about the primary or caucus question for 2024. On the one hand, 19 state legislative endorsements might be a meaningful signal ahead of an early primary in the Great Lakes state (if granted a waiver from the Republican National Committee), but may be less valuable in a caucus setting, especially if participants are limited to state convention delegates already chosen. Unless those legislators are among the delegates or are connected to delegates who are participating, the endorsements may mean very little. 

Yeah, the Michigan situation is a mess. But that primary or caucus distinction matters.


...
In the travel primary, Donald Trump was not the only 2024 presidential candidate in New Hampshire on Thursday. Nikki Haley was there, too, and has another town hall there Friday. Former Vice President Mike Pence will be in Utah today for a roundtable at Utah Valley University. Pence is the second potential candidate to visit Super Tuesday Utah in recent days. The other, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, wraps up his trade mission abroad in London. Vivek Ramaswamy continues his bus tour of South Carolina.


...
Over at FHQ Plus...
  • Wyoming Democrats have a date for their 2024 caucuses (or is that party-run primary?) and Rhode Island appears to be on a fast track to a new presidential primary date next year. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


...
On this date...
...in 1992, Both President George H.W. Bush and Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton were dominant in wins in the Pennsylvania primary. But The New York Times account had this aside: "Still, the voting in Pennsylvania only underscored the new phase of the campaign, in which Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush begin to take each other's measure -- while keeping a wary eye on Ross Perot, the Texas businessman considering an independent campaign for the Presidency."

...in 2020, it was to have been the date of the Acela primary -- presidential primaries in Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island -- but covid forced all six states to shift to later dates. In the end, only Ohio was active, concluding the vote-by-mail in the Buckeye state's presidential primary on this date.


--
1 This was incorrect in the NBC News piece: "The rules apply to Williamson and Kennedy as well, but they've indicated they're willing to accept the DNC's unspecified penalties for rule violations since they're running anti-establishment campaigns anyway."

Rule 21.C.1.b covers that. "A presidential candidate who campaigns in a state where the State Party is in violation of the timing provisions of these rules, or where a primary or caucus is set by a state’s government on a date that violates the timing provisions of these rules, shall not receive pledged delegates or delegate votes from that state." What is unspecified is that the DNC chair can go beyond that penalty if rules are broken and keep candidates out of primary debates, for example. But there are not going to be any Democratic primary debates for the 2024 cycle.



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 10:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)