The Electoral College Map (7/28/16)

Latest Update

Polling Quick Hits:
If Wednesday brought red state polls, (late Wednesday and early) Thursday brought a series of surveys from traditionally blue states.

California
One could look at the new PPIC survey of California and at first glance see Clinton up 16 points before moving on. That isn't the wrong conclusion. However, there are a couple of factors to point out about this one. First, both Clinton and Trump dropped relative to their positions in the last poll from PPIC in May. And it should come as no surprise that the reason is due to the addition of Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. Second, the addition of the third party candidates is noteworthy because they hit Trump more than Clinton from May to July.

This is a phenomenon worth keeping tabs on. Some have found the third party candidates drawing more from Clinton in national polls and there have been hints of a similar trend in battleground state polling as well.  Still, there are not a lot of surveys out of reliably red and blue states at this point. That raises some potentially interesting questions. Notably, if the California trend holds elsewhere, does that mean minority partisans are more likely to consider their options while majority partisans stick with the presumptive statewide winner? Yes, yes. It the in-house transition from one poll to another, but it poses an interesting question.


Delaware:
Further east, Fairleigh Dickinson has the first look at the state of the race in the First state. Like polling in other states, the picture is one of the two major party nominees underperforming their counterparts from 2012. The undecided number is high (12 percent) as is the support in the survey going to Johnson and other (14 percent). Together, that represents a big chunk of the respondents in the poll. Nonetheless, the earliest glance at Delaware is one that has it within the Strong Clinton category at FHQ.


Oregon:
Back west in the Beaver state, Clout Research weighs in with another poll. Clout is the only survey shop to show Trump close in Oregon. And as was the case with the California poll above, the addition of third party candidates from May to July has weighed on Trump support more than Clinton's. It is still close through Clout's lens, but Trump's narrow May lead is now a small deficit (3 points) in July with Johnson and Stein included. Comparatively, the other polls in the state are more generous to Clinton, showing a wider margin more in line with where Oregon has ended up in November's past.


Pennsylvania:
The only true battleground state survey of the day comes from the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Suffolk's first trip into the field there shows a Clinton lead (+9) consistent with the recent results from NBC/Marist. But while it is a bit rosier in the wider context of polling in the Keystone state, that may be a function of the data being gathered during the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. What is certain is that the poll further solidified Pennsylvania's position just inside the Toss Up Clinton category here at FHQ. It is locked in a cluster with New Hampshire and Virginia -- two states that displaced Pennsylvania as the tipping points in the electoral college spectrum -- just a fraction of a point from the Lean Clinton category (see Watch List below).


Vermont:
It is hard to know where to start with the initial poll of the Green Mountain state from VPR/Castleton. It is hard not to notice that Clinton is running about 30 points behind Obama 2012 in Vermont. But, but the same token, it is just as difficult not to see that Trump is in third in the state behind both Clinton and "someone else". Then again, it is also not a stretch of the imagination to determine who might be the stand-in for "someone else" for most respondents in this poll. Although he is not named, favorite son, Bernie Sanders is very likely depressing that Clinton number as the nomination process comes to an official close this week.

NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2016 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42 (7)	NJ-14 (175)	VA-133 (269 | 282)	UT-6 (158)	LA-8 (55)
MD-10 (17)	DE-3 (178)	NH-43 (273 | 269)	AK-3 (152)	SD-3 (47)
RI-4 (21)	WI-10 (188)	IA-6 (279 | 265)	IN-11 (149)	ND-3 (44)
MA-11 (32)	NM-5 (193)	FL-29 (308 | 259)	MO-10 (138)	ID-4 (41)
VT-3 (35)	OR-7 (200)	NC-15 (323 | 230)	TX-38 (128)	NE-5 (37)
CA-55 (90)	CT-7 (207)	OH-18 (341 | 215)	KS-6 (90)	AL-9 (32)
NY-29 (119)	ME-4 (211)	AZ-11 (197)	TN-11 (84)	KY-8 (23)
IL-20 (139)	CO-9 (220)	NV-6 (186)	SC-9 (73)	WV-5 (15)
MN-10 (149)	MI-16 (236)	GA-16 (180)	AR-6 (64)	OK-7 (10)
WA-12 (161)	PA-20 (256)	MS-6 (164)	MT-3 (58)	WY-3 (3)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum. 2 The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he or she won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Trump won all the states up to and including Virginia (all Clinton's toss up states plus Virginia), he would have 282 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Clinton's number is on the left and Trumps's is on the right in bold italics. To keep the figure to 50 cells, Washington, DC and its three electoral votes are included in the beginning total on the Democratic side of the spectrum. The District has historically been the most Democratic state in the Electoral College. 3 New Hampshire and Virginia are collectively the states where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. If those two states are separated with Clinton winning Virginia and Trump, New Hampshire, then there would be a tie in the Electoral College.

NOTE: Distinctions are made between states based on how much they favor one candidate or another. States with a margin greater than 10 percent between Clinton and Trump are "Strong" states. Those with a margin of 5 to 10 percent "Lean" toward one of the two (presumptive) nominees. Finally, states with a spread in the graduated weighted averages of both the candidates' shares of polling support less than 5 percent are "Toss Up" states. The darker a state is shaded in any of the figures here, the more strongly it is aligned with one of the candidates. Not all states along or near the boundaries between categories are close to pushing over into a neighboring group. Those most likely to switch -- those within a percentage point of the various lines of demarcation -- are included on the Watch List below.

*Due to the way in which states with no polling are treated in 2016 by FHQ -- uniform swing -- South Carolina has seen its "average" rise. In the last month, as more polling data has been accrued, that average uniform swing has shrunk from nearly three points to just a shade more than one point toward Clinton. That development has pushed South Carolina closer to the Strong Trump category and onto the Watch List below.

The Watch List1
State	Switch
Alaska	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Arizona	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Arkansas	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
New Hampshire	from Toss Up Clinton	to Lean Clinton
New Jersey	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Pennsylvania	from Toss Up Clinton	to Lean Clinton
South Carolina	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Tennessee	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Utah	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Virginia	from Toss Up Clinton	to Lean Clinton
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/27/16)

2016 Democratic National Convention Presidential Nomination Roll Call Tally

The Electoral College Map (7/26/16)

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

2016 Republican Delegate Allocation: DELAWARE

This is part forty of a series of posts that will examine the Republican delegate allocation rules by state. The main goal of this exercise is to assess the rules for 2016 -- especially relative to 2012 -- in order to gauge the potential impact the changes to the rules along the winner-take-all/proportionality spectrum may have on the race for the Republican nomination. For this cycle the RNC recalibrated its rules, cutting the proportionality window in half (March 1-14), but tightening its definition of proportionality as well. While those alterations will trigger subtle changes in reaction at the state level, other rules changes -- particularly the new binding requirement placed on state parties -- will be more noticeable. 

DELAWARE

Election type: primary
Date: April 26 
Number of delegates: 16 [10 at-large, 3 congressional district, 3 automatic]
Allocation method: winner-take-all
Threshold to qualify for delegates: n/a
2012: winner-take-all primary

--
Changes since 2012
The aim often in states with small delegations is to maximize the impact of a contest by using winner-take-all rules (rather than proportionally dividing up a small number of delegates). That had traditionally been the case during competitive Republican cycles with the primaries in Washington, DC as well as in Delaware. Republicans in the First state were able to continue that tradition in 2012 when Democrats in control of the state government moved the primary from early February to late April. The late April date fell outside of the proportionality window and allowed Delaware Republicans to allocate the full allotment of delegates to the winner.

That has been the way of things in Delaware stretching back to 1996 when the Delaware primary was created. It was winner-take-all in 2012 and will be again in 2016. That is a long way of saying that nothing has changed in Delaware for the 2016 cycle.

Well, one thing has changed. Rather than allocating 17 delegates as was the case four years ago, First state Republicans will only allocate 16 delegates to the winner of the April 26 primary.


Thresholds
As Delaware is a winner-take-all contest -- the fourth on the calendar and first since Arizona -- there are no thresholds to qualify for delegates.


Delegate allocation (at-large, congressional district and automatic delegates)
This, too, is easy enough to interpret. At a minimum, the plurality winner of the Delaware primary will be allocated all 16 of the national convention delegates apportioned to the state by the RNC.


Binding
According to Article XI, Section 3 of the the Delaware Republican Party bylaws:

"On the first ballot for the National Party's presidential candidate at the Republican National Convention, each delegate or alternate entitled to vote shall vote for the candidate who wins a plurality of the votes cast in the presidential primary..."

The only exception to that is in the event that the winning candidate in Delaware withdraws from the race prior to the convention and/or releases his or her delegates. In that case, the rules unbind the delegates, allowing them to vote for a candidate of their preference. However, given that the Delaware primary is on the back half of the calendar and the field of candidates has winnowed, it is less likely that the winner will relinquish his delegates prior to the first ballot vote.

A slate of 16 delegates is selected by the Delaware Republican Party Executive Committee, presented to and voted on by the state convention. Importantly, Article XI, Section 4 of the state party bylaws states that, "Presidential candidates shall not nominate or propose any delegates or alternate delegates."

As such, Delaware is another example of a state where the candidates and their campaigns have no direct influence over the delegate selection process. In fact, in Delaware, the candidates are at the mercy of the state party with respect to the selection process.


--
State allocation rules are archived here.


--

Recent Posts:
2016 Republican Delegate Allocation: CONNECTICUT

Following LePage Signature, Maine Now Has a Presidential Primary

On Democratic Party Rules Changes for 2020

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Race to 1144: Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Primary

Source:
Contest Delegates (via contest results and rules, and RNC)
Automatic Delegates (Democratic Convention Watch)

Delegate breakdown (post-CT, DE, NY, PA & RI primaries):


Changes since Minnesota and Missouri district conventions (4/21/12):

• Romney: +150 delegates (New York: +92, Connecticut: +25, Delaware: +17, Rhode Island: +12, Pennsylvania: +3, Virgin Islands: +1)
• Santorum: +/- 0 delegates 
• Paul: +4 delegates (Rhode Island: +4)
• Gingrich: +/- 0 delegates 

Notes:
1) It should be noted that the delegates are difficult to classify in both Nevada and Vermont as both sets of automatic delegates are bound and proportionally allocated with either all of the delegates (Nevada) or with the at-large delegates (Vermont). Those six delegates are in the bound/pledged category in the spreadsheet above but are considered "contest delegates" in the bar chart at the top. It would not be surprising to see those six delegates among those who signed pledges to Romney at the RNC meeting in Scottsdale this past week when and if that list is made public.

2) Mitt Romney swept the delegates in New York (statewide and across all 29 congressional districts), Connecticut (statewide and across all 5 congressional districts) and Delaware.

3) In Rhode Island, Mitt Romney won 63% of the vote and 75% of the total, non-automatic delegates at stake. Ron Paul won 24% of the vote and qualified for delegates by surpassing the 15% threshold for receiving delegates. That netted the Texas congressman 4 delegates; 25% of the total, non-automatic delegates.

4) Pennsylvania is a bit tricky. Though delegates are unbound, some have expressed a presidential preference. The Romney site points to previous endorsements from three delegates directly elected in the primary on Tuesday (see Gerlach, Shuster and English). Additionally, the Ron Paul site has an official list of Pennsylvania delegates that identifies five of the 59 delegates elected on Tuesday are aligned with Paul. The Newt Gingrich site has no such endorsements. However, Gingrich-related sites do have lists of delegates aligned with those candidates. There is also another fabulous thread on another conservative site that breaks this down in even greater detail. The numbers there do jibe well with the Romney, Paul and Gingrich site endorsements. That count -- which FHQ will wait until it is independently verified -- would yield Romney 26 delegates (which counts the four in the spread sheet above), Paul 5, Gingrich 3 and Santorum 2 (or 3). Another 12 or 13 delegates are uncommitted while 10 more are county party-endorsed candidates, former national delegates or alternates or elected officials. That latter group is obviously made up of more establishment/elite figures within the Pennsylvania Republican Party.

5) Mitt Romney has also picked up the lone remaining uncommitted delegate (of two originally) in the Virgin Islands, giving the former Massachusetts governor 8 total delegates in the territory. Thanks to Matthew Wilder Tanner for the link.

6) Two of the unpledged delegates coming out of the Colorado conventions a week ago are Ron Paul supporters. Don't be surprised when and if more of the other 12 unpledged Colorado delegates reveal themselves to be aligned with Paul. If anyone has links to any of these delegates revealing their preferences, please feel free to forward them to me in the comments section.

7)  The allocation of the delegates in Georgia is based on the most recent vote returns published online by the office of the Georgia Secretary of State. The allocation here differs from the RNC allocation in Georgia. The above grants Gingrich one additional delegate (which has been taken from Romney's total). Due to the way the Georgia Republican Party rounds fractional delegates, the FHQ count was off by one delegate (+Romney/-Gingrich). The congressional district count is unaffected (Gingrich 31, Romney, 8 and Santorum 3), but the way the at-large delegates are allocated to Gingrich and Romney -- the only candidates over 20% statewide -- is a bit quirky. Gingrich's portion of the vote would have entitled him to 14.6 delegates and Romney's 8.0. Under Georgia Republican rules, Gingrich is given 14 delegates and Romney 8. That leaves nine delegates unclaimed because the remaining candidates did not clear the 20% threshold. The candidate with the highest "remainder" is awarded the first delegate and the candidates over 20% trade turns until all of those delegates are allocated. Remember, Gingrich did not round up to 15 delegates (14.6), but that 0.6 gives him a larger "remainder" than Romney. The former speaker, then, is allocated the first of nine delegates. With an odd number of delegates leftover, Gingrich would have a fifth turn after Romney's fourth and that would end the allocation of those "extra" delegates. Gingrich would claim five to Romney's four. Of the 31 at-large delegates, Gingrich is allocated 19 and Romney 12. Please note that for winning the statewide vote, Gingrich is allocated the three automatic delegates. That makes the final allocation Gingrich 53, Romney 20 and Santorum 3. The RNC, though, has a different interpretation.

Recent Posts:
A Few Notes on the RNC Meeting and the 2016 Rules

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Pennsylvania

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Delaware

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Delaware

This is the thirty-second in a multipart series of posts that will examine the Republican delegate allocation by state.¹ The main goal of this exercise is to assess the rules for 2012 -- especially relative to 2008 -- in order to gauge the impact the changes to the rules along the winner-take-all/proportionality spectrum may have on the race for the Republican nomination. As FHQ has argued in the past, this has often been cast as a black and white change. That the RNC has winner-take-all rules and the Democrats have proportional rules. Beyond that, the changes have been wrongly interpreted in a great many cases as having made a 180º change from straight winner-take-all to straight proportional rules in all pre-April 1 primary and caucus states. That is not the case. 

The new requirement has been adopted in a number of different ways across the states. Some have moved to a conditional system where winner-take-all allocation is dependent upon one candidate receiving 50% or more of the vote and others have responded by making just the usually small sliver of a state's delegate apportionment from the national party -- at-large delegates -- proportional as mandated by the party. Those are just two examples. There are other variations in between that also allow state parties to comply with the rules. FHQ has long argued that the effect of this change would be to lengthen the process. However, the extent of the changes from four years ago is not as great as has been interpreted and points to the spacing of the 2012 primary calendar -- and how that interacts with the ongoing campaign -- being a much larger factor in the accumulation of delegates (Again, especially relative to the 2008 calendar).

For links to the other states' plans see the Republican Delegate Selection Plans by State section in the left sidebar under the calendar.


DELAWARE

Here we are staring an April 24 series of primaries in the face and the 2012 presidential primary calendar has its first real, honest-to-gosh, winner-take-all primary. Well, the First state will be the first Republican contest to allocate/bind all of its delegates to the winner of its presidential preference primary without some sort of caveat. In Florida and Arizona, all of the delegates were allocated to Mitt Romney, but both states were penalized. Both not only lost half of their delegates but their automatic delegates lost their convention voting privileges. Maryland allocated all of its delegates to Romney as well, but the former Massachusetts governor had to win each of the Old Line state's congressional districts to do so. In Washington, DC, Romney also won all of the delegates. Well, all of the non-automatic delegates from the District were bound to him while the automatic delegates remained unbound free agents. The situation was similar in Puerto Rico with the exception that the allocation was conditionally winner-take-all/proportional.²

But Delaware is the first state to allocate and bind all 17 of its delegates -- including automatic delegates -- to the winner of today's closed primary.

Delaware delegate breakdown:

• 17 total delegates
• 11 at-large delegates
• 3 congressional district delegates
• 3 automatic delegates

At-large/congressional district/automatic allocation: The winner of the primary -- whether by plurality or majority -- wins all 17 delegates from the state of Delaware.

--
It should be noted that Newt Gingrich picked up the endorsement of Delaware Republican National Committeewoman Priscilla Rakestraw. However, should someone other than Gingrich win the Delaware primary, Ms. Rakestraw will be bound to the winner through the first ballot at the Tampa convention regardless of her preference.

--
¹ FHQ would say 50 part, but that doesn't count the territories and Washington, DC.

² If you read that paragraph closely, note that Romney has done quite well in states that have allocated their delegates on a winner-take-all basis. In those states where conditionality rules have been triggered, Romney has been the beneficiary.


Recent Posts:
2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Rhode Island

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Connecticut

Race to 1144: MN, MO & WY Conventions

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (8/3/11)

Delaware's presidential primary move to April 24 means another calendar update:

[Click to Enlarge]

Reading the Map:

As was the case with the maps from past cycles, the earlier a contest is scheduled in 2012, the darker the color in which the state is shaded. Iowa, for instance, is a much deeper shade of blue in January than South Dakota is in June. There are, however, some differences between the earlier maps and the one that appears above.

1. Several caucus states have yet to select a date for the first step of their delegate selection processes in 2012. Until a decision is made by state parties in those states, they will appear in gray on the map.
2. The states where legislation to move the presidential primary is active are two-toned. One color indicates the timing of the primary according to the current law whereas the second color is meant to highlight the most likely month to which the primary could be moved. [With the exception of North Carolina, the proposed movement is backward.]
3. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are shaded on the map according to the latest possible date these states would have if Florida opts not to move their primary into compliance with the national party rules. Iowa Republicans and Nevada Republicans and Democrats have decided to accept the party-designated dates, but FHQ operates under the assumption that both will move to a point ahead of the earliest exempt state should one or more move or maintain a February or earlier date.
4. States that are bisected vertically are states where the state parties have different dates for their caucuses and/or primaries. The left hand section is shaded to reflect the state Democratic Party's scheduling while the right is for the state Republican Party's decision on the timing of its delegate selection event.

Reading the Calendar:

1. Caucus states are italicized while primary states are not. Several caucus states are missing from the list because they have not formalized the date on which their contests will be held in 2012. Colorado appears because the caucuses dates there are set by the state, whereas a state like Alaska has caucuses run by the state parties and as such do not have their dates codified in state law.
2. States that have changed dates appear twice (or more) on the calendar; once by the old date and once by the new date. The old date will be struck through while the new date will be color-coded with the amount of movement (in days) in parentheses. States in green are states that have moved to earlier dates on the calendar and states in red are those that have moved to later dates. Arkansas, for example, has moved its 2012 primary and moved it back 104 days from its 2008 position.
3. The date of any primary or caucus moves that have taken place -- whether through gubernatorial signature or state party move -- also appear in parentheses following the state's/party's new entry on the calendar.
4. States with active legislation have links to those bills included with their entries on the calendar. If there are multiple bills they are divided by chamber and/or numbered accordingly.
5. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina appear twice. The earlier entry corresponds with the latest possible date these states would have if Florida opts not to move their primary into compliance with the national party rules. The second, later entry for each of the non-exempt states reflects the position the national parties would prefer the earliest states to hold their delegate selection events.

2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

December 2011

Monday, December 5:

Iowa caucuses¹

Tuesday, December 13:

New Hampshire¹

Saturday, December 17:

Nevada caucuses¹

South Carolina¹

A note on the placement of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

An additional note on WHY ON EARTH Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are placed in December.

January 2012

Tuesday, January 31:

Florida (bills: House 1, 2/Senate) (moved to no date: 5/19/11)

February 2012

Monday, February 6:

Iowa caucuses (moved: 2/8/11) (based on national party rules)

Tuesday, February 7:

Alabama

Arkansas

California

Connecticut

Delaware

Georgia (bills: House) (moved to no date: 5/13/11)

Illinois

Minnesota Republican caucuses (bills: House/Senate) (moved: 3/1/11)

Missouri (bills: House 1, 2, 3/Senate)

Montana Republican caucuses

New Jersey (bills: Assembly 1, 2/Senate 1, 2)

New York

Oklahoma

Tennessee

Utah

Saturday, February 11:

Louisiana

Tuesday, February 14:

Maryland

New Hampshire (based on national party rules)

Virginia

Washington, DC

Saturday, February 18:

Nevada Republican caucuses (-28) (moved: 12/16/10) (based on national party rules)

Nevada Democratic caucuses² (-28) (moved: 2/24/11) (based on national party rules)

Tuesday, February 21:

Hawaii Republican caucuses (+88) (moved: 5/16/09)

Wisconsin (bills: Assembly, Senate)

Tuesday, February 28:

Arizona³

Michigan⁴ (bills: House)

South Carolina (based on national party rules)

March 2012

Tuesday, March 6 (Super Tuesday):

Colorado caucuses (+14) (bills: House) (moved: 5/27/11)

Idaho Republican caucuses (+70) (moved: 7/16/11)

Massachusetts⁴ (bills: House)

Minnesota Democratic caucuses (-28) (moved: 3/17/11)

Ohio

Oklahoma (-28) (bills: House 1, 2, 3/Senate 1, 2) (moved: 5/3/11)

Rhode Island

Tennessee (-28) (bills: House 1, 2, 3/Senate 1, 2, 3) (moved: 5/9/11)

Texas (bills: House/Senate)

Vermont

Virginia (-21) (bills: House 1, 2/Senate) (moved: 3/25/11)

Sunday, March 11:

Maine Democratic caucuses (-28) (moved: 3/27/11)

Tuesday, March 13:

Alabama (-35) (bills: House 1, 2) (moved: 6/9/11)

Hawaii Republican caucuses (+67 and -21) (moved: 5/14/11)

Mississippi

Utah Democratic caucuses (-35) (moved: 3/25/11)

Tuesday, March 20:

Colorado caucuses

Illinois (-42) (bills: Senate) (moved: 3/17/10)

Saturday, March 24:

Louisiana (-42) (bills: House) (moved: 6/29/11)

April 2012

Tuesday, April 3:

Kansas (bills: House 1, 2/Senate -- cancel primary) (canceled: 5/25/11)

Maryland (-49) (bills: House/Senate 1, 2) (moved: 5/10/11)

Washington, DC (-49) (bills: Council) (moved: 4/27/11)

Saturday, April 7:

Hawaii Democratic caucuses (-46) (moved: 3/18/11)

Wyoming Democratic caucuses (-28) (moved: 3/16/11)

Saturday, April 14:

Idaho Democratic caucuses (-67) (moved: 5/1/11)

Kansas Democratic caucuses (-67) (moved: 5/24/11)

Nebraska Democratic caucuses (-63) (moved: 3/5/11)

Sunday, April 15:

Alaska Democratic caucuses (-68) (moved: 4/4/11)

Washington Democratic caucuses (-64) (moved: 4/30/11)

Tuesday, April 24:

Connecticut (-77) (bills: House) (moved: 7/8/11)

Delaware (-77) (bills: Senate) (moved: 7/27/11)

New York (-77) (bills: Assembly/Senate) (moved: 7/13/11)

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island (-49) (bills: House/Senate) (moved: 7/1/11)

May 2012

Saturday, May 5:

Michigan Democratic caucuses (-67) (moved: 4/13/11)

Tuesday, May 8:

Indiana

North Carolina (bills: Senate)

Ohio (-63) (bills: House) (moved: 7/5/11)

West Virginia

Tuesday, May 15:

Idaho (+7) (bills: House) (moved: 2/23/11)

Nebraska

Oregon (bills: House)

Tuesday, May 22:

Arkansas (-105) (bills: House) (moved: 2/4/09)

Idaho

Kentucky (bills: House) (died: legislature adjourned)

Washington (bills: House 1, 2/Senate -- cancel primary) (canceled: 5/12/11)

June 2012

Tuesday, June 5:

California (-119) (bills: Assembly) (moved: 7/29/11)

Montana (GOP -119) (moved: 6/18/10)

New Mexico⁵ (bills: Senate) (died: legislature adjourned)

North Dakota Democratic caucuses (-119) (moved: 4/21/11)

South Dakota

Tuesday, June 26:

Utah (Republicans only) (-140) (moved: 6/5/11)

¹ New Hampshire law calls for the Granite state to hold a primary on the second Tuesday of March or seven days prior to any other similar election, whichever is earlier. Florida is first now, so New Hampshire would be a week earlier at the latest. Traditionally, Iowa has gone on the Monday a week prior to New Hampshire. For the time being we'll wedge South Carolina in on the Saturday between New Hampshire and Florida, but these are just guesses at the moment. Any rogue states could cause a shift.

² The Nevada Democratic caucuses date is based on both DNC rules and the state party's draft delegate selection plan as of February 24, 2011.

³ In Arizona the governor can use his or her proclamation powers to move the state's primary to a date on which the event would have an impact on the nomination. In 2004 and 2008 the primary was moved to the first Tuesday in February.
⁴ Massachusetts and Michigan are the only states that passed a frontloading bill prior to 2008 that was not permanent. The Bay state reverts to its first Tuesday in March date in 2012 while Michigan will fall back to the fourth Tuesday in February.
⁵ The law in New Mexico allows the parties to decide when to hold their nominating contests. The Democrats have gone in early February in the last two cycles, but the GOP has held steady in June. They have the option of moving however.

--

Recent Posts:

Wisconsin Assembly Committee Unanimously Passes April Presidential Primary Bill

RNC Chair Makes Clear Rules Will Be Enforced on Early, Non-Compliant Primary/Caucus States

Delaware Governor Quietly Signs Presidential Primary Bill, Moving Election to April 24

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.