The Great Primary Calendar re-shuffle Megathread

[Mr. Morden]

The Ames, Iowa straw poll has been announced for Aug. 13th, 2011:

http://iowaindependent.com/49271/iowa-gop-strong-arms-presidential-candidates-into-ames-staw-poll

Meanwhile, the Nevada GOP has set their caucuses for Feb. 18, 2012:

http://www.lvrj.com/news/date-set-for-nevada-gop-caucus-112037424.html

As Josh Putnam notes:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2010/12/nevada-gop-sets-2012-presidential.html

the Nevada GOP is taking a different track from Iowa, NH, and SC.  Those three states protect their early status by waiting until everyone else has already set their dates.  NV isn't operating that way.  Though they may move back up to January depending on what other states do, for now, they're at Feb. 18.  In March 2007, they initially set their caucus for February 2008, but then later moved up to January, after there was a rush of other state primaries in February.  Same thing may happen this time.

[Mr. Morden]

The subject of the 2012 primary calendar has made it to Politico:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46567.html

The article gets a few facts wrong, but is generally a good read.  Bottom line, as we already know, both the DNC and RNC would like 46 states to vote in March or later, and only IA, NH, NV, and SC to vote in February, with no primaries in January.  But it all depends on all those early primary states agreeing to move later.  It only takes one of them to mess things up.  It does sound like many in the Florida GOP appear willing to move later, even as just a sort of "thank you" to the RNC for picking Tampa for the convention:

Paul Senft, Florida's Republican National Committeeman, said he's received assurances from state legislators that the primary will be moved back to a date approved by the RNC. The proportional delegate distribution in the early contests will ensure that later states still have an influence, he said.

"It came down to a very simple analysis: Why do people want to move up?" he said. "They want to have an impact on the campaign. If they cannot do that because they're required to be proportional, it takes most of the incentive away."

(Personally, I don't buy that.  The Dems have used PR for like 25 years, and momentum was still plenty important in a lot of those contests.  Heck, look at the 2004 race for an extreme example.)

For the state GOP, there's an additional motivation: The party's national convention is scheduled to be held in Tampa. Florida Republicans don't want their hometown convention marred by a battle over party rules, Senft said.

Nonetheless, some lawmakers are making noises about sticking with the early primary, the Miami Herald reported last week.

Michigan is identified as a state likely to keep their now late February primary:

Michigan may present more of an obstacle. It won't likely try for January again, but its difficulty adjusting to the parties' new rules may typify the sorts of dilemmas other states will face.

The legislation that moved Michigan's 2008 primary to January was a one-shot deal. But under current law, its 2012 contest would still violate party rules by being held on Feb. 28.

That date coincides with municipal elections, meaning it would cost the cash-strapped state more if it sought to conduct a separate, later presidential primary. The state's RNC delegation opposed the new RNC scheduling rules.

"To be honest, I think we're going to be in a very difficult position with regard to moving the date," the state's national committeeman, Saul Anuzis, said. "At this point, I think there's a better-than-even shot that Michigan stays in February, as well as many other states."

[A dog on every car, a car in every elevator]

Slipping a mention of proportional representation into an argument that moving to April is good for Florida is the equivalent of Romney mentioning Obama getting economic stimulus ahead of 2012 in his column arguing the tax deal was bad for America.  It betrays his real motives.

If only WTA makes a state important, explain the push to do a 2011 straw poll that awards no delegates at all?  Is it a serious claim that candidates would blow off a January Florida primary because of PR?  Also, on the GOP side in 2008, there was no real "battle": January primary, penalties, the end.  Florida could go in March and still be in compliance with GOP rules so why the push for April?  Seems transparent enough to me.  Romney, gauging Florida to be one of his most winnable states, wants momentum from the 2011 straw poll (as the Ames poll which is riskier for him, this could offset it) but he wants his Florida delegate pot uncut- which could yield him 6X the delegate tally from the state- his allies in the legislature, led by his 2008 FL co-campaign chair, are trying to orchestrate that for him.  While other reps are questioning if such a move gambles with FL's relevance.

[Mr. Morden]

Now that the census numbers are out, we know how many convention delegates each state will get for each party.  Here's the allocation on the Republican side:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/R-Del.phtml

This does not include any penalties that states will incur for holding early primaries, as we don't know what the calendar is yet!

FrontloadingHQ has a calendar of when state legislatures will be meeting in 2011:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/01/frontloading-starts-with-state.html

Some states with February primaries, like Georgia, wrap up their legislative session as early as April of this year.  If they're going to move their 2012 primary, they're going to have to do it before then, unless there's a special legislative session.  Florida doesn't even start its legislative session until March, so we may not know for a while whether IA will once again be backed up to the first week of January in order to keep its first in the nation status.

[Mr. Morden]

A bill has been introduced in the California Assembly that would move the primary from February to June:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/01/05/california-bill-to-move-presidential-primary-from-february-to-june/

Ohio may end up moving its March primary to a later date if redistricting takes a long time:

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2011/01/04/copy/slow-redistricting-could-delay-ohios-presidential-primary.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

I've also heard that VA, MD, and DC are looking to again do a "Potomac Primary", with all three voting on the same day, though that date would probably be later than last time, maybe April.  No link on that, sorry.

[Beet]

Wait, there's a county convention in WY on Jan. 7th There wasn't anything like this in 2008.

[Mr. Morden]

Yes there was.  They were often called caucuses by the media, but they weren't really caucuses in the same sense as Iowa or other states.  They were just a series of county conventions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Republican_caucuses,_2008

[Mr. Morden]

Rubio supports Florida keeping its early primary:

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/2012-campaigns-take-their-first-baby-steps/1144437

And he's not alone:

"We hear more and more talk from Florida Republicans that despite potential penalties from the Republican National Committee, they are intent on once again having an early presidential primary in 2012."

[Poundingtherock]

It seems like Romney's team is completely self-destructive and indecisive about everything.

Because Romney knows his support is paper thin everywhere outside of some parts of the Northeast and some Mormon states, he has to equivocate as to whether he wants Florida ahead or towards the back of the process.

Romney ran one of the worst campaigns in 2008 if you look at the return on his investment ratio ($44 million in debt).  His PAC is well behind Palin's PAC in terms of return on investment ratio as well (though he avoided spending himself into debt this time).  It appears that Romney is set to run another terrible campaign in 2012 and his indecision on Florida is strong evidence that he will implode just like he did running his own campaign in 2008.

[A-Bob]

Indecision is better. That way he can't be blamed for trying to push things around for the sake of his candidacy. I'm sure they have plans if it's later or real early. But all this would do would be a negative for him, the media blames him for sticking his nose in Florida just to snatch the nomination instead of staying out of it, nobody caring, adapting to the situation, and still have the ability to win Florida.

[Mr. Morden]

Two bills have been filed in the Virginia House that would move the primary to the first Tuesday in March:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/01/two-bills-introduced-to-move-virginia.html

[Mr. Morden]

In Virginia, we now have a companion bill in the state senate to move the primary to March:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/01/accompanying-senate-bill-to-move.html

The effort to move the primary later in Virginia appears to be bipartisan.

In Washington, a bill has been introduced by a Democratic state senator to abolish the state's presidential primary, and go 100% caucuses:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/01/14/washington-state-bill-to-abolish-presidential-primary/

So we now have bills pending in both CA and VA to move to a later primary, and a bill in WA to get rid of the primary altogether.  None of the other February primary states have made a move yet.

[muon2]

It was interesting that IL moved to a later date last year. Of course, it had only been moved up to help Obama. However, IL uses the same date for off year primaries as well, and given the disaster in the Dem Lt Gov race, the push to move it back to mid March was swift.

[Mr. Morden]

There are a couple of bills in the New Jersey legislature that were introduced last year, but still alive, though nothing's happened with them for ages.  They would both move the NJ primary back to June:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/01/two-oldies-but-goodies.html

And here's a textbook case of a reporter writing a story on a subject on which he is utterly clueless:

http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_118_1780.aspx

But bottom line, several different options are being floated in Georgia.  They may stick with Feb. 7th and take the penalties.  They may move to what could be the new Super Tuesday of March 6th.  Or they may move to shortly before March 6th, and still take the penalties.  The odd thing is that Thursday, March 1st seems to be an option.  Thursday isn't a typical day for elections, but so be it.

[Yelnoc]

Hopefully they move back to March 6th.  I like seeing my state a major player in Super Tuesday.

[Mr. Morden]

I feel dirty linking to all these news stories that get so many factual details wrong, but here's another one:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/21/arizona-begins-primary-calendar-jockeying/

Cutting through the factual inaccuracies, the bottom line is this.  Like it says on the calendar at the beginning of this thread, Arizona law sets its primary for Feb. 28, but the governor has the option of moving that up to Feb. 7th if she wishes.  While other February primary states are moving their primaries later, to comply with the DNC and RNC rules and avoid sanctions, the Arizona GOP looks set to pass a resolution this weekend that will urge Brewer to move the primary up to Feb. 7th.

Again (setting aside caucuses for a moment), we currently have 12 states with primaries on either Jan. 31 or Feb. 7.  And then there are states like Arizona that are later than Feb. 7, but might move up to that date.  All it takes is one of those states to hold firm with a late Jan. / early Feb. primary, and we'll get IA and NH scheduling their contests for January again.  This is what will most likely happen.  The primaries will most likely start in January again next year.  A year from today, the Iowa caucuses will likely have already taken place, and my guess is that the NH primary will have already happened too.  The media is constantly misrepresenting this point.  They seem to think that the DNC and RNC have somehow automatically moved all those primaries later or something.

[Thomas D]

Hopefully they move back to March 6th.  I like seeing my state a major player in Super Tuesday.

If Newt is running won't everyone else just concede the state to him?

[Yelnoc]

Hopefully they move back to March 6th.  I like seeing my state a major player in Super Tuesday.

If Newt is running won't everyone else just concede the state to him?

Not necessarily.  I don't know many newt-fans here; I think most people don't really care where he's from.  The man has been irrelevant for a decade.  Though, if his campaign base is here and Huckabee runs, the two will probably split the socon vote and whoever the non-socon standard bearer is (Romney? Daniels?) could pick the state up with a plurality.

[Mr. Morden]

Lots of new (minor) updates:

The Arizona GOP ended up not passing that resolution that would urge Brewer to move the primary up to Feb. 7th.

The Florida Democratic Party chair wants the state's primary moved to March, but it's still less than clear that the GOP controlled legislature is going to give him his wish:

link

Oklahoma bill would move primary to first Tuesday of March:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/01/pair-of-pre-filed-bills-propose-moving.html

Idaho bill would move primary up by just one week:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/01/frontloading-in-idaho-sort-of.html


Really, Frontloading HQ is now doing such a good job of tracking all of this that maybe you should just read that instead of reading my posts:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/

I'll just post here when one of these bills actually passes and there's actual movement on the calendar.

[A-Bob]

Hopefully they move back to March 6th.  I like seeing my state a major player in Super Tuesday.

If Newt is running won't everyone else just concede the state to him?

If Huck runs (I see it as unlikely) then no. I mean he was in Congress, it's not the same favorite son type deal as the senator or governor, but if Huck is out, then I don't see anyone else really have a chance for first down there until there's some major game changers (like the rise of Huckabee in 08 and fall of Thompson)

[Mr. Morden]

Here's a list of when some of the early February states are likely to move their primaries to.....in some cases based on bills that are in the pipeline in the respective state legislatures, and in some cases just based on public comments by legislative leaders:

Mar. 6: OK, VA
Apr. 3: MD
Jun. 5: CA, NJ
Jun. 12: DC

WA is likely to cancel their primary, though the caucus may still be in February.  In GA, there has been talk of moving to early March, though that's very uncertain, and they may yet just stick with early Feb.  And of course, in FL, it's unclear what's going to happen.  They might stick with Jan. 31, or else move to either March or April.

Haven't heard anything from other early Feb. states, like NY, MO, or TN.  Utah's legislative session apparently only lasts until March, so we should know fairly soon if they're going to move their primary or stick with Feb. 7th.

Bottom line, I'm guessing that enough states will vacate Feb. 7th that it will no longer be Super Tuesday.  March 6th will probably become Super Tuesday.

[Mr. Morden]

To the list above, add

Mar. 6: TN

as per this story: http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/02/bills-introduced-in-both-chambers-to.html

Again, it looks increasingly like March 6th is going to become Super Tuesday.

The effort to move the primary in TN (as in OK, VA, NJ, etc.) appears to be bipartisan.  There's no serious opposition in those states to moving the primary later.  Florida is a different matter.  The Dems have put forth bills that would move the primary to March 6th, and most of the GOP appears skeptical.  FHQ has a good rundown of the controversy:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/02/florida-primary-are-governor-scott-and.html

Basically, it looks like most of the Florida GOP is happy to leave the primary on Jan. 31.  And since the GOP controls the state government, that's probably what will happen.  (Which means, yes, IA, NH, and SC will all stay in January to stay ahead of FL, and the primaries will start (almost) as early in the year as they did in 2008.

[Alaska Thunderfvck]

Hey look, it's 2008 all over again...except different party:

A deepening standoff between national Republicans and top party leaders in Florida has the potential to blow up the 2012 presidential primary calendar — and do lasting damage to the GOP in the nation’s largest swing state.

At issue is the early date of Florida’s presidential primary election, currently set for Jan. 31, 2012. As of right now, it’s the first primary scheduled.

That’s in blatant violation of Republican and Democratic National Committee rules, which say only four states — Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada – can hold primary elections before the beginning of March.

But despite the pleas of GOP officials in Washington, the Republican leaders of Florida’s legislature say they have no intention of shifting the date in a way that could diminish the Sunshine State’s influence in 2012. Key officials signaled they would accept nothing less than going fifth on the primary calendar — not leapfrogging the four early states, but clearly marked off from the other 45.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49832.html

[Mr. Morden]

Hey look, it's 2008 all over again...except different party:

Yes, well, there's no reason for it to get as heated as the 2008 DNC situation, because (in this case) Florida doesn't really care that much about the delegate penalty.  They'll take the 50% delegate cut, if it means they can go early and have influence on the nomination.  In 2008, FL and MI lost 100% of their delegates on the Democratic side and most of the Democratic candidates boycotted both states, so it was a lot more messy.

And I doubt Florida will be the only state to go earlier than the RNC's window is supposed to allow.  Perhaps a half dozen or so other states will probably end up going early too.  If the RNC (or DNC) thought that their 2012 primary calendar plan was actually going to succeed in moving the start of the process into February, then they're fools.

[A dog on every car, a car in every elevator]

The real way to delay the start would be for opinion and party leaders in later states to shun the winners of early states, that is, to offset the momentum with stigma.  And the best way would be for later states to unite in their resentment at Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina and uniformly call on candidates to not campaign in those states.  Candidates being asked about the arbitrary privilege of early states would be a little bit like Obama watching the protests in Egypt- you have to be careful not to alienate the dictator(s) if they stay in power or the uprising if they don't.