The Electoral College Map (10/2/12)

On the eve of the first presidential debate between President Obama and Governor Romney, we were treated to new survey data from eight states. And it was a pretty good day for the president with comfortable leads confirmed in several deep blue states, a slight edge in the one Romney toss up state (North Carolina) and a closer than expected Romney lead in Missouri.

New State Polls (10/2/12)
State	Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Obama	Romney	Undecided	Poll Margin	FHQ Margin
Florida	Suffolk	9/27-9/30	+/- 4.0%	600 likely voters	46	43	8	+3	+1.30
Maryland	Baltimore Sun/OpinionWorks	9/25-9/27	+/- 3.5%	804 likely voters	57	34	--	+23	+21.05
Missouri	Survey USA	9/25-9/27	+/- 2.9%	1145 likely voters	45	48	6	+3	+7.03
Nevada	We Ask America	9/25-9/27	+/- 3.1%	1078 likely voters	53	42	3	+11	+4.88
New Mexico	Rasmussen	9/27	+/- 4.5%	500 likely voters	51	40	2	+11	+10.17
North Carolina	Survey USA	9/29-10/1	+/- 4.2%	573 likely voters	49	47	2	+2	+0.89
Rhode Island	WPRI/Flemming	9/26-9/29	+/- 4.38%	501 likely voters	57.3	33.1	7.4	+24.2	+25.30
Virginia	Roanoke College	9/19-9/28	+/- 4.0%	589 likely voters	47	39	10	+8	+3.22

Polling Quick Hits:
Florida:
That we get new data out of Florida on a daily basis makes more sense than the rather high frequency of survey work coming out of reliably blue Massachusetts, but the two states do have one thing in common. The individual polling results aggregated are more often than not confirming/calibrating rather than of the sort that fundamentally changes the outlook of the race. The difference is that there is and has been a tight race in Florida all along and a clear Obama advantage in Massachusetts. The new Suffolk poll of the Sunshine state fits that bill. At Obama +3, it is right in line with the range of polling results to have emerged from the state.

Maryland:
FHQ is glad to have the data, but this is merely a confirming polling result. Nothing to see here folks. With or without the new poll from the Baltimore Sun, Maryland is in the Obama column.

Missouri:
We cannot keep coming back to the post-Akin noise argument about Missouri polling. That said, the polling has varied there, but has calmed down since the congressman made his "shut that down" comments in August. Though the polling has been relatively light in the Show Me state, the Romney lead there is in the 3-7 point range with the two of the last three polls indicating something closer to the low end of that range. The FHQ weighted averaging formula currently has the state at the top end of that range, firmly within the Lean Romney category.

Nevada:
My first thought in seeing the Obama +11 result from We Ask America out of the Silver state was that it reminded me of the last minute surge toward Obama in the state in polling and on election day. In the 2012 context, however, that margin feels a little high compared to other recent surveys there, and on top of that, the 2008 shift occurred later in the race than where we are now. October polls can be a bit noisy and this one seemingly settles nicely into that area: noise.

New Mexico:
Another day and another low double digit polling margin in the Land of Enchantment. This time the new information is from Rasmussen. New Mexico, close in 2000 and 2004, just has not materialized as a toss up (or even lean) state in 2012. In that way, it has been more like 2008 than either of those previous elections. It has swung back to the GOP some, but not nearly enough to bring the state into a more competitive light.

North Carolina:
Any (October) day that has a poll showing Obama ahead in North Carolina is -- zero-sum -- a win from the Obama perspective and a loss on the Romney side. That isn't to say that the president will win the 15 North Carolina electoral votes. In fact, Romney has consistently held the advantage in the FHQ averages. Instead, the importance of North Carolina is figuring into the strategic calculus of the race. Romney resources expended there are resources that are not being spent in states that Romney has to turn red over the last handful of weeks of the campaign.

Rhode Island:
See Maryland, but with the caveat that this is the first survey conducted in Rhode Island gauging respondents' opinions on the presidential horse race. The resulting data, however, does little to alter the thinking here at FHQ regarding the state of the race in the Ocean state. It is blue and is way out on the Obama end of the Electoral College Spectrum. ...still.

Virginia:
Further south in Virginia, Roanoke College has posted a poll finding Obama up eight. The key here in the "why +8" is that while Obama's share of support in the survey is consistent with other recent polling in the Old Dominion (not to mention the FHQ weighted average level of support), the Romney share of response is well below his established weighted average level of support. Five points lower. For context, no poll has shown Romney below 40% in Virginia since -- and this was the only other time -- Marist/NBC found the governor 17 points behind the president in early March. The eight point margin from Roanoke is perhaps a bit high compared to other recent polling in the state. ...and it is almost completely a function of Romney's position in it.

Methodological changes and resultant map/spectrum shifts aside, the same picture of the race that existed last week seems to be reiterated this week as the race heads into debate season. There were some minor changes at the margins of the three FHQ categories of states when the cutpoints were lowered, but the same story continues to be told. Obama has the lead in all of the toss up states save North Carolina. Those are not insurmountable advantages, but they have been consistent. And that must be the most troubling thing to Romney campaign. Heading into the debates, Romney should gain simply by being on the same stage with the president, but that may not necessarily be the type of, sigh, "game change" the governor will need to alter the course of the race.

Needless to say, the map remains unchanged today and the only shift on the Electoral College Spectrum involves Maryland and Massachusetts changing positions for the second consecutive day. The remaining seven states in which new information was introduced held the line relative to a day ago.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3 (6)2	WA-12 (158)	NV-6 (257)	MO-10 (166)	ND-3 (55)
RI-4 (10)	NJ-14 (172)	OH-183 (275/281)	MT-3 (156)	KY-8 (52)
NY-29 (39)	CT-7 (179)	VA-13 (288/263)	IN-11 (153)	AL-9 (44)
HI-4 (43)	NM-5 (184)	IA-6 (294/250)	GA-16 (142)	KS-6 (35)
MD-10 (53)	MN-10 (194)	CO-9 (303/244)	SC-9 (126)	AR-6 (29)
MA-11 (64)	OR-7 (201)	FL-29 (332/235)	TX-38 (117)	AK-3 (23)
IL-20 (84)	PA-20 (221)	NC-15 (206)	LA-8 (79)	OK-7 (20)
CA-55 (139)	MI-16 (237)	SD-3 (191)	NE-5 (71)	ID-4 (13)
ME-4 (143)	WI-10 (247)	AZ-11 (188)	WV-5 (66)	WY-3 (9)
DE-3 (146)	NH-4 (251)	TN-11 (177)	MS-6 (61)	UT-6 (6)
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 won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics. 3 Ohio is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

The same is true for the Watch List with one exception. New Hampshire rounded up to a 5 point margin yesterday and was still technically eligible for the list. Today, however, the gap was just a shade above 5 points and the Granite state goes off the list as soon as it came back on. On the list or not, New Hampshire is still among that quartet of states (Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin are the others.) that Romney would like to bring into play rather than fighting it out in a constrained group of toss ups where there is little or no margin for error.

The Watch List1
State	Switch
Indiana	from Strong Romney	to Lean Romney
Iowa	from Toss Up Obama	to Lean Obama
Minnesota	from Strong Obama	to Lean Obama
Montana	from Strong Romney	to Lean Romney
Nevada	from Lean Obama	to Toss Up Obama
North Carolina	from Toss Up Romney	to Toss Up Obama
Ohio	from Toss Up Obama	to Lean Obama
Virginia	from Toss Up Obama	to Lean Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Nevada, for example, is close to being a Toss Up Obama state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that toss up distinction.

Please see:

Frequently Asked Questions about FHQ graduated weighted average methodology.
&
An Update on how to read it in 2012.

Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/1/12)

The Electoral College Map (9/30/12)

Catch Up Time

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

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: Rhode Island

This is the thirty-first 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.


RHODE ISLAND

For a state that is strictly proportional in terms of its delegate allocation, Rhode Island has some interesting contours. Sure, it is true that FHQ has said that about a great many "proportional" states, but the elections statutes in the Ocean state are clear in laying out the parameters of the presidential primary process and any resultant delegate allocation. In that way, Rhode Island is like neighboring Massachusetts or nearby New Hampshire. But instead of a 10% threshold for receiving delegates in New Hampshire, the threshold, as in Massachusetts, is set at 15% (see Rule 3.02).^{2 3}

Rhode Island delegate breakdown:

• 19 total delegates
• 10 at-large delegates
• 6 congressional district delegates
• 3 automatic delegates

At-large and congressional district delegates: Mathematically, it will work out that a candidate who receives 40% of the vote will receive approximately 40% of the delegates from Rhode Island. Getting to that point, though, is not as easy. Another of the contours of the Rhode Island Republican delegate allocation is that instead of treating the total 16 delegates as a pool of delegates, they are divided across the two congressional districts. Each congressional district is allotted eight delegates which are then allocated to candidates based on their statewide share of the presidential preference primary vote. [This was different four years ago when there was an odd number of total at-large/congressional district delegates that had to be unevenly apportioned across districts.] If Romney, for instance, receives 40% of the vote, he will receive three delegates from each of Rhode Island's two congressional districts (about 40% of the delegates). Of the delegates filed by the Romney campaign in Rhode Island, the top three will be taken from each district's list.

Automatic delegates: All three automatic delegates are free to select a presidential candidate of their preference, and all three automatic delegates have endorsed Mitt Romney.

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

² Rhode Island Republican Party delegate selection rules:
2012 RIGOP Delegate Selection Process

³ Of course, if one looks at either Title 17.12 or Title 17-12.1 of the Rhode Island General Laws, there is no mention -- anymore (???) -- of "proportional" or "15%". [If you see any mention of either in the statutes, drop me a line. I've looked through them a few times now and have been unsuccessful.] Regardless, those are the rules the Rhode Island Republican Party is utilizing for its 2012 delegate allocation.

Recent Posts:
2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Connecticut

Race to 1144: MN, MO & WY Conventions

Another Weekend, Another Mixed Bag for Romney in Caucus State Delegate Allocation

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

Second April Presidential Primary Bill Signed in Rhode Island

A great many links came into my inbox yesterday about the presidential primary bill that Rhode Island governor, Lincoln Chaffee (I), had signed into law Tuesday. However, none of the items ever specified which bill had been signed. As such, it was difficult to determine whether the bill in question was the little-discussed presidential primary bill signed on July 1 (S 399) or the unsigned H 5653. Rhode Island's General Assembly web site today provided the answer, indicating it was the latter that Chaffee had signed. As I indicated last week, the second, just-signed bill was superfluous in light of the fact that S 399 had already moved the 2012 presidential primary in Rhode Island. Yet, H 5653 was among the extensive group of bills signed on July 12.

An updated 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar can be found here.

Recent Posts:

Message to News Outlets: Cite Your Sources

Cuomo Signs Bill Moving New York Presidential Primary to April 24

West Virginia Republicans Eye Super Tuesday (March 6) State Convention for Delegate Allocation

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

Rhode Island Presidential Primary to April 24

[Click to Enlarge]

Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chaffee (I) on Friday, July 1, signed SB 399 into law. The bill moves the Ocean state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April, bringing the state in line with the primary in Pennsylvania. Legislation to move presidential primaries to the same date has been passed and is awaiting gubernatorial approval in Connecticut, Delaware and New York. All five states, blue states in 2008 and under nearly unanimous Democratic control, should all benefit from the bonus delegates associated with later (post-March) primaries and additional bonuses based on the coordination of primaries.

The companion House bill (HB 5653) has been transmitted to Governor Chaffee as well, but seems superfluous at this point with SB 399 having now moved the primary back.

An updated 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar can be found here.

Recent Posts:

Ohio Presidential Primary to May 8

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/1/11)

More from Secretary Kemp on Coupling Georgia's Presidential Primary with Florida's

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

Rhode Island Senate Passes Companion April Presidential Primary Bill from the House

In what will likely (hopefully!?!) the last presidential primary bill passed on a very busy legislative day, Rhode Island brought up the rear. The state Senate in the Ocean state, a night after having passed the House-amended version of its own primary bill (SB 399), passed HB 5653. Both bills would move the Rhode Island presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April to coincide with primaries in Connecticut, Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania.

On a 36-1 vote on the eve of the adjourning, the Rhode Island General Assembly sends to Governor Lincoln Chaffee (I) the second of two presidential primary bills.

Recent Posts:

Delaware House Makes Quick Work of April Presidential Primary Bill

Ohio House Concurs with Elections/Presidential Primary Bill, Passes on to Governor

New Jersey Senate Unanimously Passes Bill Eliminating Separate Presidential Primary

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

Rhode Island Senate Passes House-Amended, April Presidential Primary Bill

The Rhode Island Senate on Tuesday, June 28, passed by a vote of 34-2 a measure to shift the Ocean state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April. S 399 originated in the state Senate and was passed in April with no provision addressing the scheduling of the presidential primary. The House added that amendment to the bill and passed the package last week. Initially, the legislation was on the calendar for a vote on Wednesday, but with time running out in a legislative session due to adjourn at the end of the month on Thursday, the Senate got to it early.

S 399 now heads to Governor Lincoln Chaffee (I) for his consideration. The move would place the Rhode Island primary on the same date as the presidential primary in Pennsylvania next year. Legislation has already been passed in both Connecticut and New York to move those states' primaries to April 24 as well. Legislation eying the same date is also active in Delaware. Together, the moves would set up a five state regional primary in late April.

--

Hat tip to Philip Marcello at the Providence Journal for bringing news of the early vote to FHQ's attention.

Recent Posts:

Prominent Utah Legislators Don't Appear to Have a Desire to Appropriate Money for a Presidential Primary

There Won't Be a Stampede to the Front of the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Where Georgia's Presidential Primary Might End Up

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

Rhode Island House Unanimously Passes Amended Senate Primary Bill

After passing HB 5653, the Rhode Island state House quickly followed that by unanimously passing the state Senate's presidential primary bill, SB 399, as well. Both bills were amended in the Judiciary Committee on the House side to shift the Ocean state's presidential primary back to late April and had some trivial corrections added on the floor. The Senate-passed version, now amended and identical to the House bill, returns to the Senate to be reconsidered.

The Senate has just under a week to complete consideration of the bills before the Rhode Island legislature adjourns next week as the month ends.

Recent Posts:

Rhode Island House Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to April

Ohio Senate Committee Passes May Presidential Primary Legislation

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (6/22/11)

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

Rhode Island House Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to April

By a 71-1 vote on Thursday afternoon, the Rhode Island state House unanimously passed an amended version of HB 5653. The bill would move the Ocean state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April. This moves Rhode Island one step closer to a proposed regional primary that would include Connecticut, Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania.

The bill will now move on to the Rhode Island state Senate for consideration in the upper chamber.

Recent Posts:

Ohio Senate Committee Passes May Presidential Primary Legislation

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (6/22/11)

In Florida, Some Chatter Behind the Idea of a Thursday Presidential Primary

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

Rhode Island House Committee Amends House and Senate Elections Bills to Move Presidential Primary to April

On Tuesday, June 21, the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee recommended the passage of H 5633 and S 399, two bills meant to bring the BayOcean state's presidential primary process into compliance with the federal MOVE act. However, the committee amended the bills, changing the date of the presidential nominating contest from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April. This is the first action in Rhode Island toward the goal of an April 24, 2012 regional primary based on the chatter from Connecticut. The legislation would bring the state's contest in line with those in Pennsylvania, Connecticut (if legislation is signed), New York (if legislation is signed) and Delaware (if legislation is passed and signed).

[Click to Enlarge]

Both Rhode Island bills are on the WednesdayThursday House calendar for consideration and potentially votes by the full lower chamber.

This legislation will be added to the Presidential Primary Bills Before State Legislatures section in the left sidebar.

Recent Posts:

And then there was New York: Last February State Rapidly Moves Bill Through Legislature

Alabama Presidential Primary to March 13

Louisiana Senate Passes March Presidential Primary Bill, House Concurs

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

Hints of an April 24 Regional Primary from CT Secretary of State

Here's the press release from Connecticut Secretary of State, Denise Merrill:

Secretary Merrill: 2012 Presidential Primary Likely to Move to April 24th in House Vote

House Passage of HB 6532 Puts Connecticut on Path to Have Unified Presidential Primary with Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island

Hartford: Secretary of the State Denise Merrill today noted that unanimous House passage of House Bill No. 6532, “An Act Concerning the Presidential Preference Primary,” sets Connecticut on a path to move the date of the 2012 Presidential Primary to back to Tuesday April 24, 2012. Current state law pegs the Connecticut Presidential Preference Primary to the first Tuesday following the first Monday in February, and the last such primary took place on February 5, 2008. Since then, both the Democratic and Republican national committees have provided state parties with incentives to move their primaries to later dates to avoid the front-loading of the Presidential selection process. Both state Democratic and Republican party leadership have agreed on the date of April 24, 2012 as an acceptable date for Connecticut’s next Presidential Preference Primary, a date which may result in a regional primary with the neighboring states of Pennsylvania, New York, and Rhode Island.

“I am happy to see both parties have agreed on the April 24^th date for our Presidential Preference Primary, and I call on the State Senate to approve this measure quickly so we can begin to plan for this important election,” said Secretary Merrill, Connecticut’s chief elections officer. “Pushing the primary date back a little will allow Connecticut to have more regional clout, especially if our neighboring states also move their primaries to that day. This helps both state parties and the voters, who are already paying close attention to the critical process of choosing our President.”

House Bill No. 6532 had originally named a date of March 6, 2012 to hold the next Presidential Primary in Connecticut, a date shared by the state of Massachusetts. The date was moved further back to April 24^th due to further incentives from the national parties and in order to avoid coinciding with the Connecticut Mastery Tests taking place in schools, which could have created logistical problems as many polling places are public schools in Connecticut.

--

Hmmm.

This is an interesting follow up to FHQ's discussion of the amendments added to the Connecticut bill that would move the presidential primary to April 24. It is even more interesting in the face of the impending bill in Delaware (This would force the Delaware primary even further back into the shadows in the eyes of the presidential contenders.). Let's look at this regional conglomeration a little more closely. Pennsylvania will not have to do anything. The Keystone state is already scheduled for April 24. Connecticut and Delaware are both already eying that date in actual or future legislation.

But moves in New York and Rhode Island are news to FHQ. Given the fact that New York law schedules the Empire state's presidential primary for the first Tuesday in February, it is still among the states that, under national party rules, has to change the date of its contest in order to comply with those rules. In other words, New York is a state FHQ has been observing rather closely since the first of the year. No legislation has been proposed in either chamber in the New York legislature. And it should be noted that while Democrats control the governor's mansion and the state House, Republicans hold a narrow majority in the state Senate. On the surface, then, there would be a potential partisan roadblock to a move to April. That said, mention of that roadblock should be tempered by the fact that New York Republicans -- like their counterparts in Delaware, Georgia, Ohio and Texas and add Connecticut to that list -- have traditionally allocated delegates on a winner-take-all basis. If the Republican Party of New York desires the status quo on that front, members may be more amenable to a move to late April (a month in which New York scheduled its primary for all but one cycle between 1976 and 1992).

In Rhode Island, the story is slightly different. First of all, Democrats control both chambers of the Rhode Island legislature and Republican-turned-Independent Lincoln Chafee occupies the governor's mansion. The latter would not necessarily have a clear reason to sign or veto a bill to move the presidential primary in the Ocean state. Secondly, Rhode Island Republicans do not have the motivation that the above list of states does. The party has traditionally allocated national convention delegates proportionally. The states currently first Tuesday in March position is not a problem for the party then. The state already has proportional allocation and would not have to make a change to stay in compliance with RNC rules. Finally, Rhode Island, while not on FHQ's watch list, has not seen any legislation proposed to change the presidential primary date. There are two bills -- HB 5653 and SB 399 -- that "would make changes relating to the primaries for election of delegates to national conventions and for presidential preference". But neither bill addresses the Rhode Island statute (17-12.1-1) that sets the presidential primary date. Instead, both bills make minor changes to candidate filing deadlines and other smaller details. The original Senate version has already passed and moved to the House. Both bills, then, are in committee in virtually the same form in the House and neither includes any provision to move the presidential primary. Unlike New York and its year-round legislative session, the Rhode Island legislature adjourns late next month.

Obviously, this is something that bears attention over the next few weeks. This would be a fairly significant regional primary and the attendant delegate boost on the Democratic side due to "clustering" would be rather large for already delegate-rich states like Pennsylvania and New York. It would also have the effect on the Republican side -- where all the action is going to be anyway -- of stripping out from the beginning, February/March part of the calendar a grouping of comparatively more moderate states. But FHQ will save the discussion of that impact for another, future post. Stay tuned...

Recent Posts:

Legislation to Move Delaware Primary to April on the Horizon

Ohio House Passes Bill Moving Presidential Primary Back to May

Suggestions Needed: Who Should Replace Mike Huckabee on the Candidate Emergence Tracker?

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

Is Clinton Back? Delegates, delegates, delegates

And the race goes on. As James Carville said on Meet the Press on Sunday--speculating about what Clinton wins in Ohio and Texas would mean for the race--it helps her rewrite the narrative. And it does. Whether it was the ads or backlash against Obama or sympathy for Clinton doesn't matter. What last night's results mean is that the Democratic primary voters are still almost evenly divided as to who their presidential nominee should be. The Obama campaign's contention is that it still maintains a sizable lead in the delegate count and that the results from the four primaries last night do not significantly affect that lead. However, with the wins she managed yesterday, Clinton now has something to back up the argument that all Obama does is win in small and/or red states. All the while she's winning the states that are important to the Democrats in November.

The race now shifts to Wyoming this weekend and Mississippi on next Tuesday. On paper, both look like Obama territory. Wyoming is a caucus state and Mississippi has a high African American population on par with other states Obama has won (Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina). But there is a catch. And for Clinton, it easily extends this race to Pennsylvania. [Well, I suppose the press is largely discounting Wyoming and Mississippi anyway; already having shifted the focus to the April 22 contest in the Keystone state.] Those are states and the fact that Obama should win them fits the newly crafted narrative of this race. He wins caucuses, small states and red states. She wins the big prizes. And that can't be welcome news for the Obama camp. If Wyoming and Mississippi are discounted, then his chances of shifting the tenor of this race [again!?!] are diminished in the process. So while Obama may have the delegate lead still, his campaign is now on the defensive.

Oh, and I suppose the supedelegates come into the picture at some point. If the contests between now and next Tuesday can't help Obama, then the report that surfaced yesterday that some number of superdelegates may break for him in the near future might. That becomes a contest of its own; one (and maybe only) that may possibly assist Obama in countering the Clinton wins from last night.

All the while, this race has devolved to certain point of negativity and is unlikely to return. And that brings us back to divisive primaries. If this Democratic race continues the slide into negativity, that affects the party's ability to heal those divisions before the convention and in the time between then and the general election. So McCain sits back and smiles, having wrapped things up officially last night. And who can blame him? The longer the Democratic race strings out, the better his chances in November seem to become.


RESULTS:

Ohio

Rhode Island

Texas

Vermont

I'll be back later with a look ahead to the rules in Wyoming, Mississippi and Pennsylvania. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea of looking at polls of Wyoming Democrats.