Democratic Change Commission Set to Reconvene in St. Louis on August 29

On Friday, the Democratic Party announced the upcoming second meeting of its Democratic Change Commission. [The full press release is appended at the conclusion of the post.] The first meeting in June was a matter of fact-finding for the members of the group as opposed to a full-scale, reform-intensive discussion. And while new ground wasn't broken then, the next meeting on August 29 will take things one step further by incorporating the recommendations of those interested in weighing in on the presidential primary reform process.

[Click to Go to Form]

Again, this isn't anything new. We knew at the end of June that the Change Commission would be meeting again on August 29, but the public recommendation part of this meeting is an interesting way to open up the process. Granted, the party can and probably will pick and choose which suggestions are ultimately discussed. Still, this is a nice use of technology to get input from the party faithful and those interested in an altered nomination process.

Click on the form above to go to the actual form and provide suggestions of your own. The deadline for submissions is Friday August 21. The meeting is scheduled for August 29 in St. Louis.

Here at FHQ we have had a rather robust discussion concerning primary reform throughout the tenure of this blog, but if you're so inclined, include your suggestions for reform in the comments section below. We've debated the various plans on an on-again-off-again basis, but what are your personal preferences for presidential primary reform?

Hat tip to Don Means at the National Presidential Caucus for the heads up on the press release.

--------------------

August 7, 2009

Contact: Caroline Ciccone – 202-863-8148

DNC’s Democratic Change Commission Invites People From Across the Country to Submit Their Ideas for Changes to Presidential Nominating Process

To submit ideas, click on: http://www.democrats.org/page/s/changecommission

Next Meeting to Be Held in St. Louis August 29

Washington, DC—Today, DNC Chairman Tim Kaine, along with Congressman James E. Clyburn (D-SC) and Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), co-chairs of the Democratic Change Commission, invited people from across the nation to assist the Change Commission by submitting their suggestions and ideas for making changes to the presidential nominating process via the Commission’s website, http://www.democrats.org/page/s/changecommission, by Friday, August 21, 2009. These suggestions will be discussed at the next Change Commission meeting to be held Saturday, August 29, 2009 at the Crowne Plaza St. Louis-Downtown Hotel in St. Louis, Missouri.

The Democratic Change Commission was established last year and is tasked with recommending changes to the Party’s 2012 presidential nominating process. It is charged with addressing three issues: 1) changing the window of time during which primaries and caucuses may be held 2) reducing the number of superdelegates and 3) improving the caucus system. The Commission must issue its report and recommendations to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee no later than January 1, 2010.

Chairman Kaine said, “America was founded in order to create a government that is of, for and by the people and what developed is one of the strongest democracies in history. Our election system is fundamental to the strength of our democracy and of our country as a whole. That’s why the Change Commission aims to make sure the Presidential nominating process is as inclusive as possible and why we are asking people to submit their thoughts and ideas and be a part of the process.”

Congressman Clyburn said, “As the Change Commission studies these three issues, we are interested in hearing recommendations from folks across the country. We encourage voters to submit their thoughts as we work to make the process of selecting our nominee as inclusive and accessible as possible.”

Senator McCaskill said, “In this last election, we saw an unprecedented level of involvement and interest in the Democratic Presidential Nominating Process. We hope voters will maintain their enthusiasm and help us determine how best to prepare for future elections.”

Information provided to the Commission via the website by Friday, August 21, 2009 will be distributed to the Commission members at their upcoming meeting on August 29 in St. Louis, Missouri. The meeting is open to the public and press. Details on the meeting location are below:

Next meeting of the Change Commission

Saturday, August 29, 9:30 am

Crowne Plaza St. Louis-Downtown Hotel

200 North Fourth Street

St. Louis, Missouri

------------------------

Recent Posts:
The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter (July 2009)

FHQ is back...

State of the Race: Virginia (7/31/09)

The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter (July 2009)

For the last couple of months FHQ (or @FHQ) has been tracking the Twitter feeds of some (or most) of the prospective 2012 Republican presidential candidates (see the May and June updates). And yes, it's time for a belated update covering the changes from July (and the first 5 days in August).

[Click to Enlarge]

I'm not going to over-analyze this because most of the patterns from the previous iterations earlier in the summer were sustained in July. Newt Gingrich, I think, qualifies as a chronic Twitterer, and as such, has built up quite a following. None of the other possible candidates come close to matching the former speaker's following. And that still has the effect of skewing how the other candidates are perceived with Gingrich included. So let's take him out and see where everyone stands (...other than well behind the Georgian):

[Click to Enlarge]

From this view, Sarah Palin is the new Newt Gingrich. Her post-resignation announcement didn't do anything to hurt her Twitter following, as she saw a more than 100% increase over her total number of Twitter followers entering the month. Of course, with the now former Alaska governor's resignation becoming official on July 26, her @AKGovSarahPalin feed is no more. Now, I've been out of the loop this last week because of my move, but I haven't seen any news of her reappearing on Twitter with a new feed account name. Obviously, as long as Palin is without an account, she can't be accurately counted in these monthly updates and that also introduces the issue of how to account for her new feed and its following once it is up and running. She will, after all, be starting from scratch and it may take her time to clear that 100,000 follower barrier again.

Other than Palin and Gingrich, though, Bobby Jindal and Mike Huckabee continue to have solid followings with Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty further back. Everyone else is lagging. Yeah, John Ensign is in Pawlenty territory in terms of his following, but the Nevada senator and Mark Sanford are still being considered here only to see how their scandals affect their standing in the Twitter-verse. Neither are serious candidates for president in 2012 at this point, if either ever was to begin with in the first place.

[Click to Enlarge]

But here's the thing about all this: Followings are somewhat dependent upon how often someone is tweeting (and who they are). If we shift to observing the number of tweets each candidate has per day (based on the number of days since the candidate began using Twitter), we again see Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich at the top, well ahead of the other prospective Republican presidential candidates. And while that may be the case, we don't really get a sense of how much bang for the buck each candidate is getting from using Twitter. For that we need an index that compares the tweets per day data above to the number of followers; something FHQ will call the Follower Ratio. This controls not only for the time aspect (how long each candidate has been using Twitter), but the number of other Twitter users following them as well. The higher the follower ratio, then, the more a candidate is getting out of the service. For instance, you can tweet all that time, but if no one's watching, what does it matter (The old, if a tree falls in the forest question.)? Once we take those factors into account, what do the usages of Twitter by the prospective 2012 Republican presidential candidates look like?

[Click to Enlarge]

Gingrich is still up there, but suddenly Sarah Palin has dropped off. The former Alaska governor is not getting the same level of return on her tweeting investment as the former speaker. Yet, now Bobby Jindal and Mitt Romney have improved positions vis a vis the other potential candidates. In other words, for what each is putting into Twitter, they are getting a fairly good return on that usage. Each has a pretty good following considering both Jindal and Romney put next to nothing into Twitter. For Jindal, that means a tweet every four days or so and for Romney, a tweet approximately every eleven days. While they aren't tweeting with Gingrich-like frequency, they are getting a good return on a small investment. Couched in slightly different terms, there seems to be a good level of interest in both Jindal and Romney's Twitter feeds despite the fact that they only rarely update them. Contrast that with someone like Mike Huckabee, who tweets almost twice a day, but doesn't have the following to match that rate. It would be interesting to compare that figure to various PAC contributions to see whether the interest on Twitter in any way correlates to the interest in contributing. Looking at the PAC receipts, the ordering matches up: Romney > Palin > Huckabee.

In any event, this ratio will be something to keep our eye on over time.


Recent Posts:
FHQ is back...

State of the Race: Virginia (7/31/09)

State of the Race: New Jersey (7/31/09)

FHQ is back...

...emerging from a pile of broken down cardboard boxes, bubble wrap and electronics cords. We've got some post-move catching up to do around here.


Recent Posts:
State of the Race: Virginia (7/31/09)

State of the Race: New Jersey (7/31/09)

Last Athens Post

State of the Race: Virginia Governor (7/31/09)

[Click to Enlarge]

And now the race in the Old Dominion.

Survey USA weighed in on the race for the first time since about a week before the June 9 Democratic primary that handed Creigh Deeds the gubernatorial nomination. While the results were solid for the Democrat (against Republican Bob McDonnell) in that poll, they are not in this recent poll. Like New Jersey, this is another poll this week that shows both Republicans in better positions than both their Democratic counterparts. Let's look at the toplines and then I'll comment:

Bob McDonnell: 55%
Creigh Deeds: 40%
Undecided: 5%

Margin of error: +/- 4.3 points
Sample: 526 likely voters
Conducted: July 27-28, 2009

For starters, there's no doubt that McDonnell has a lead in this race, but this result is well outside of the margins we've seen in any other poll (other than the Daily Kos poll around the same time as the first Survey USA poll) in the time since Deeds got the Washington Post's endorsement in the Democratic primary race in May (when Deeds became viable as a general election candidate). This is definitely a Republican-laden sample. I don't know that the 38/32 Republican to Democratic split in the sample is all that uncharacteristic of Virginia. It is probable that such a sample could be drawn there, but it still feels a bit out of the ordinary. My point is driven home by the "who'd you vote for -- McCain or Obama" question. The split there was 52/43 in favor of McCain -- in a state Obama won 53-46 last November.

You may also notice that McDonnell has jumped out to a fairly sizable lead in FHQ's weighted average of the race. Meanwhile, Chris Christie has maintained about a ten point advantage over Jon Corzine in the New Jersey race despite the fact that Christie has been above that margin in quite a number of polls recently. The difference between races is the number of polls conducted. There have been far more polls in New Jersey than in Virginia and that translates into more volatility in the Virginia numbers. The Virginia race, then, is more vulnerable to outliers like the one this Survey USA poll represents.

Regardless, in these two races, the polls this week have had a Republican flavor with both candidates stretching their leads over their Democratic competitors.

[Click to Enlarge]

Recent Posts:
State of the Race: New Jersey (7/31/09)

Last Athens Post

FOX Poll: 2012 GOP Primary--The Romney/Huckabee Dead Heat Continues

State of the Race: New Jersey Governor (7/31/09)

[Click to Enlarge]

Let's play some catch up on the 2009 governors races. First, New Jersey. On Tuesday, Public Policy Polling released its first batch of new numbers for the race in the Garden state since late June and not much has changed.

...for Chris Christie.

The Republican held steady around the 50% mark in both the June and July iterations of the poll, but incumbent governor, Jon Corzine, dipped from what had been his high water mark in the June poll (41%) all the way back to 36% in July. And no, PPP doesn't ask a question with independent Chris Daggett included. In other words, this is Corzine's position before Daggett is even considered.

The relevant data:

Chris Christie: 50%
Jon Corzine: 36%
Undecided: 14%

Margin of error: +/- 4.2 points
Sample: 552 registered voters
Conducted: July 24-27, 2009

A few notes:
1) PPP is seemingly the only polling outfit still using a sample of registered, and not likely, voters in this race. I don't think that Corzine would have gained all that much on Christie if likely voters had been sampled, but there could have been some differences. If anything, though, the spread in the poll likely would increased in a likely voter sample given the state of the race.

2) Another thing to eye here is that the sample size from PPP's June poll (1094 registered voters) was cut in half in this poll. Again, this isn't a killer for the poll, but it is a noticeable difference from the June poll that could explain some of the changes witnessed.

3) The 1977 Brendan Byrne comparison may be dead. The position the former Democratic governor was in 1977 was more advantageous than Corzine's now (among registered voters). With less than 100 days left in the race, it is incumbent (no pun intended) upon Corzine to mount some sort of charge. As it is now, he's headed in the wrong direction.

[Click to Enlarge]

Recent Posts:
Last Athens Post

FOX Poll: 2012 GOP Primary--The Romney/Huckabee Dead Heat Continues

Modified Delaware Plan

Last Athens Post

Well, FHQ is off to North Carolina. After over 650 posts in Athens, GA, it is time to bid adieu and move our head quarters to Virginia Foxx's 5th congressional district in the Winston Salem area of the Old North State. Fare thee well, Classic City. You've been good to us.

[What that means for the rest of the day is that it will probably be tonight or tomorrow before I get to the New Jersey numbers that are due out of Public Policy Polling within the next hour or two.]


Recent Posts:
FOX Poll: 2012 GOP Primary--The Romney/Huckabee Dead Heat Continues

Modified Delaware Plan

The Week Ahead

FOX Poll: 2012 GOP Primary--The Romney/Huckabee Dead Heat Continues

Yesterday, Fox released an update of their May survey on the 2012 Republican presidential primary field. Here are the numbers of interest:

Romney: 22%
Huckabee: 21%
Palin: 17%
Giuliani: 13%
Gingrich: 9%
J. Bush: 1%
Pawlenty: 1%
Sanford: 0%
Other: 1%
Too early: 10%

Margin of error: +/- 6 points
Sample: 303 Republicans (national)
Conducted: July 21-22, 2009

[Click to Enlarge]

There's nothing shocking about these results. As most of these polls have demonstrated, Romney, Huckabee and Palin lead the pack. However, we can also glean from the inclusion of Giuliani among the list of candidates, that name recognition probably matters an awful lot. The former New York mayor and Newt Gingrich are below the trio at the top, but above some of the lesser-known candidates and those named Bush. As I've continued to say, there are some well-formed options at the top, but some of the other options are not as well-defined at this point. Tim Pawlenty seems to be signaling a presidential run both by not seeking a third term as Minnesota's governor and by assuming the vice chair position within the Republican Governors Association. I suspect we'll see Pawlenty's name rise over the course of the next couple of years.

Everyone else is stationary for the most part since the May poll by Fox. Interestingly, those responding that it is too early to tell rose from 7% to 10%.


Recent Posts:
Modified Delaware Plan

The Week Ahead

Presidential Primary Reform Week: Reading Room

Modified Delaware Plan

[Click to Enlarge]

The premise: Small states go first, large states go last.

The rules: Iowa and New Hampshire receive an exemption to continue going at the front of the pack. Following the lead-off, the ten smallest states hold simultaneous delegate selection events (primaries or caucuses) with the remaining states are split into three groups based on size. If the smallest states were to go during March, the small-to-medium states would go in April, the medium-to-large states would go in May and the largest states would bring up the rear in June. States could not go any earlier than their designated month, but could opt to hold a later contest if that was the custom in the state.

The history: This plan in its original form made some headway during the 2000 election cycle within the Republican Party. Its advance was quashed at the GOP convention that year to avoid a floor fight over the issue. The plan was later altered to provide Iowa and New Hampshire with the exemption depicted in the map above. Without that exemption, New Hampshire would end up in the group of smallest states while Iowa would hold its caucuses during the month designated for the small-to-medium states.

The pros: The Delaware Plan (modified or otherwise) would allow for retail politics and the potential for the building of a grassroots candidacy (during the election year). That is intended to maintain a certain level of competition in the process.

The cons: Obviously, densely populated areas are disadvantaged by this plan, and thus urban issues are potentially secondary in such a campaign (What kind of nominee does that produce?). Also, states organized by size are not all clustered together. That would potentially have the effect of advantaging the candidates with the most money to organize in and visit each of those states (Would that produce a result any different from the current system?).


Recent Posts:
The Week Ahead

Presidential Primary Reform Week: Reading Room

Oops! A 2012 GOP Primary Poll FHQ Missed and Another Rant on the Over-Interpretation of These Polls

The Week Ahead

The big news this week, at least for regular readers, is that FHQ is hitching up its wagons and moving this week. I have no idea how big a damper this is going to put on the flow of posts around here, but I can speculate that it will probably be down at least somewhat until the new FHQ HQ is up and running. So bear with me.

That said, you can probably expect a few things:

• Some residual work from last week's Presidential Primary Reform Week series should surface at various point.
• PPP is polling the New Jersey governor's race this week. Those results should be out Tuesday, and that's great, but they also plan to ask about the "potential impact of Barack Obama and Sarah Palin coming to the state to campaign for their party's gubernatorial candidates" would have. Now, I'd be willing to bet that there is a New Jersey 2012 trial heat question somewhere in there too. Call it a hunch.
• Finally, we left off in a similar post last week talking about the Sotomayor confirmation vote. This is the week for that, though. The same rules apply: Who will vote for her? Who will vote against her? And will that have future electoral ramifications for members of the Senate? Some members are already out with their decisions (ruining the fun), but others are holding on to their choices (and also ruining the fun because the choice is known).
  

And I'm sure there will be some surprises along the way as well.


Recent Posts:
Presidential Primary Reform Week: Reading Room

Oops! A 2012 GOP Primary Poll FHQ Missed and Another Rant on the Over-Interpretation of These Polls

Presidential Primary Reform Week: The National Association of Secretaries of State's New President

Presidential Primary Reform Week: Reading Room

This is part five in a series of posts this week dealing with presidential primary reform. As a refresher you can also look at FHQ's earlier synopsis of several of the various reform proposals that have been talked about and/or considered. The maps are a little clunky, but will suffice for now. I'm planning a revamping of them in the not too distant future. You can also find part one (National Primary with a Twist) here, part two (Two Birds, One Stone) here and the first installment of part three (Fair and Representative Presidential Primaries Act of 2009) here (second installment here). Finally, part four (covering the implications for reform based on the National Association of Secretaries of State change-over of power) can be found here.

I wanted to close Presidential Primary Reform Week with a heads up on some great reading out there on the subject. Yes, if you've tuned into this series of posts since last Monday, you've already been given a lot to look at and read, but there are a couple of books (one already out and one to-be-released book) that are on my wish list for the near future -- in times that are less dissertation-dominated.

The first book is an edited volume -- Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process by Steven S. Smith and Melanie J. Springer -- that the Brookings Institution released earlier this year. In fact, a made a similar claim about this book being on my wish list about a year ago before it hit the shelves. Eerie, isn't it? The entire process is seemingly broken down, but the book ends with chapters from Larry Sabato calling "reform by constitutional amendment," Thomas Mann dissecting the reform fallout from 2008 and Dan Lowenstein discussing congressional intervention in the process. I've mentioned the Lowenstein chapter before and it bears mentioning here again. It is the piece that breaks the system of reform down from a legal perspective and has the most usefulness for our discussions here. Highly recommended reading.

The details are sketchier for Barbara Norrander's new book on reform. It is, depending on where you look, it is due out either in September or next year sometime. However, around FHQ, this will be highly anticipated reading. Norrander has made a career in political science out of researching the nomination process (just look at her publications and this thorough list of primaries literature on her website -- pdf) and her upcoming book on reform shouldn't disappoint. Well, it won't disappoint me, anyhow. Here's the publisher's blurb on the book, Can Presidential Primaries Be Reformed?:

"Many people complain about the complex system used to nominate presidents. The system is hardly rational because it was never carefully planned. Because of the dissatisfaction over the idiosyncrasies of the current system, periodic calls arise to reform the presidential nomination process. However, the last major series of reforms from the 1970s produced many unintended consequences. Further, many of the current reform proposals are actually solutions for lesser problems and solutions for more major problems are highly unlikely to be enacted.

The main theme of the book is to be careful what you wish for. Reforming the presidential nomination process is as complex as the current system. In this book Norrander explores how presidential candidates are nominated, discusses past and current proposals for reform, and examines the possiblity for more practical, incremental changes to the electoral rules."

"Be careful what you wish for." Sounds like something uttered around these parts.

Anyway, both of these books get FHQ's seal of approval. If you're interested in learning more about the process, you probably won't have to look any further. Happy reading.

Recent Posts:
Oops! A 2012 GOP Primary Poll FHQ Missed and Another Rant on the Over-Interpretation of These Polls

Presidential Primary Reform Week: The National Association of Secretaries of State's New President

ABC/WaPo Poll: 2012 GOP Primary--Huckabee Back on Top, but...