The Great Primary Calendar re-shuffle Megathread

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

To start with, I'll try to post what I understand the "current" calendar to be in the near future.  I'll get to that soon, and edit this post appropriately.  In the meantime, here are two versions of it:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2010/06/2012-presidential-primary-calendar.html
(that is a very useful blog on this topic btw)

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/events.phtml?s=c

Neither one of those blogs get everything right concerning South Carolina.  Frontloading gives a more likely date for the South Carolina GOP primary, but neglects the fact the parties can, have, and likely will, have their primaries on different dates.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Unless the truly unexpected happens and Obama faces a real primary challenge, the SCDP is not going to make waves and will not be going before the February 28 date the DNC has set as their earliest possible date.  Indeed, instead of Feb 28, they might even decide to go on June 12 so as to have their presidential primary coincide with primary for the other offices.  Not that I think they will, but it wouldn't shock me in the least.

The date of the Republican primary is similarly easy to figure out.  So long as Florida remains at Jan 31, SC will go on Jan 28.  If Florida goes at least one week later, the SC GOP primary will be on Feb 4.  (Too many states currently on Feb 7 to expect any other dates from the SC GOP.  Of course, if some other State tries to push back into January, SC will make certain they go before them.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

To start with, I'll try to post what I understand the "current" calendar to be in the near future.  I'll get to that soon, and edit this post appropriately.  In the meantime, here are two versions of it:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2010/06/2012-presidential-primary-calendar.html
(that is a very useful blog on this topic btw)

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/events.phtml?s=c

Neither one of those blogs get everything right concerning South Carolina.  Frontloading gives a more likely date for the South Carolina GOP primary, but neglects the fact the parties can, have, and likely will, have their primaries on different dates.

Like me, FHQ is only tracking the GOP calendar.  The Dem. calendar is unimportant (unless and until Obama gets a serious primary challenger).

But FHQ gives February 28 (the earliest date the Democrats can and be compliant) as the date the GOP might move to, but the GOP only requires SC be after Feb 1.  Unless everybody on Super Tuesday moves to March, which won't happen, the absolute latest the SC GOP primary could happen is Feb 4.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why is that a given?  In 2008, SC positioned itself 10 days before Florida rather than 3.  Why isn't that a possibility for 2012?

[/quote]
Back when the 2008 date was set, several states were still considering moving earlier, and Nevada had already scheduled its caucus for the same date as South Carolina chose for its primary.  They went for 10 days before because they wanted to be (along with Nevada) not just the first in the South, but also the first after Iowa and New Hampshire.  (As it was, Michigan later changed to before South Carolina.)  Nevada has moved its caucuses to mid-February and at the moment, no State is considering moving its contest into January.  If the present circumstances hold, South Carolina has no reason to not be considerate to Iowa and New Hampshire, especially if Florida moves its primary later.  Feb 4 would fall within the RNC guidelines,

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If Florida moves later, then I agree SC would go on Feb. 4th to stay within RNC rules.  If Florida stays on Jan. 31st, then SC might just as easily move to the 21st as 28th, just in case.  It gives SC more of a buffer on either side, and decreases the probability that some candidates will try to sidestep SC in favor of FL.

The sidestep argument holds more weight than the buffer argument.  They tried a buffer last time and it failed as Michigan still ended up going before South Carolina.  In any case, we'll know for certain if South Carolina goes on Jan 21 no later than  Oct 21.  (Current state law specifies that a party has to inform the SEC (State Election Commission) at least ninety days before of the date they intend to hold the primary, but exactly ninety days before, Oct 23, is on a Sunday, so they'd need to inform them on the Friday before that.)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Apparently, the speculation is that this might be a bid to join Florida on Jan. 31st, but Georgia wants to wait and see how the current clash between Florida and the RNC plays out before committing to that date.

If Florida stays on January 31 and Georgia joins it, then South Carolina will go for January 21.  They might have gone for just a three day window if it was only Florida to worry about, but not if Georgia joins them.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There is a slight chance that the SC GOP will hold a caucus instead of a primary.

(link - The State)

It looks certain that Haley will issue a line-item veto on the appropriation for a State run presidential primary. It looks probable that the Democrats along with some Tea Party Republicans will vote to sustain that veto. That doesn't rule out the possibility that the SC GOP won't raise the money to hold a primary on its own, and while I think it likely they will, it isn't certain.

The only thing that might derail the GOP primary would be if the Attorney General rules that the State Election Commission cannot rent out its equipment to the GOP for a party-run primary, but I doubt Wilson will do that.  I just can't see the SC GOP being able to get the voting machines needed if it has to bring it in from out of state.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Elections Commission can run GOP primary, Attorney general says
(link - The State)

As I thought, Wilson okayed the GOP paying for a statewide primary if it can raise the funds, which I think it will be able to do so.  Still, that'll be around $600,000 the GOP wishes it could spend otherwise.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

SC: The state parties set their own primary dates, and I believe they can wait as long as they want before announcing the date.

They have to set the date 90 days before the primary is held, so I can say for certain that the SC primary will not be held any earlier than September 28 of this year.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note this only applies to a State funded primary.  If the GOP raises funds to hold a primary without State assistance, it can hold it whenever it wants to.  Not they will likely do so now that Haley's line-item veto of the appropriation has been overridden.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Arizona legislature has already adjourned for the year, so they can't move the primary later than Feb. 28th.  They can only move *earlier*, if Gov. Brewer decides to do so.

And Feb. 28th is unlikely for SC, since I think they also hold their primary on a Saturday.

While it is traditional by now for the Republicans to hold it on a Saturday, there's no requirement to do so.  The only day of the week it certainly will not be held on is Sunday, as we've got too many polling places located at churches to make that possible.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I will be shocked if the SC GOP primary is not held on a Saturday, no matter when it is held.  That is the traditional day of the week to hold the Republican Presidential Primary.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why is Christie sitting on the NJ bill?  Alternatively, when is the NJ Assembly going to meet next?  It's been almost long enough that all that is needed is for the lower house to meet for the NJ bill to become law without Christie's signature.  (when they first meet on or after August 13)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Here's my question to the RNC: Why can't Florida be the first primary in the country?  First, it is an important swing state, being the biggest one out there.  Second, it has a large Hispanic population, which is important because whoever the nominee is will need to have more of their support than McCain did in 2008.  Third, it is a big state, so it will test who has better fundraising power, an important trait for the general election.  And fourth, Iowa and New Hampshire have dominated the process for so long that their voters almost feel entitled.  Let's shake it up a bit.

Having small states go first does enable a wider variety of candidates to test the waters.  If they can attract attention there, they can leverage that into fundraising on a broader level.

However, if the RNC (or the DNC) wants to take back control of their nomination schedule they'll have to start organizing them themselves.  So long as the States are footing the bill, they'll be the ones deciding the schedule.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

A map of the primary/caucus dates so far:



Green = January
Blue = February
Red = Super Tuesday (March 6)
Light Red = March (excl. Super Tuesday)
Yellow = April
Purple = May
Orange = June

What's going on with Missouri?

It has a primary and a caucus.

Why would they do that? Just so they can hold one earlier than the other and double dip?

Nah.  The State GOP doesn't want to lose delegates by going too early, but the State legislature and the governor could never agree on a bill to move the primary date later, so the Missouri GOP won't use the primary results to select its delegates but instead a caucus to be held later.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why is everyone picking on NV and threatening a boycott when it was FL that caused this problem. Plus SC chose to go 10 days before FL, making the problem even worse. If SC went a week before FL, then everyone goes on a Tuesday and everyone gets the same week buffer zone.

South Carolina has traditionally held the GOP primary on a Saturday and that was not going to change n matter what.  When FL moved to the 31st, that forced SC to the 21st, as they were not going to schedule it 3 days before FL under any circumstances. The Democrats were willing to settle for only 3 days before FL in 2008, but not the GOP, and that was in part to downplay any advantage Obama might gain in South Carolina if Hillary did poorly, which she did.

Nevada wants a Saturday caucus, so that forced them to the 14th.  Nevada was willing to share the date with the the SC GOP Primary in 2008 because for them, the Democratic race was the important one given that Romney was expected to easily win Nevada, which he did, and as I said, the SC Dems obligingly gave Nevada a 7 day window. The Democratic nomination is meaningless this time, so that doesn't pertain.

If the mess is to be straightened out, Florida needs to go later.  The nomination race will still be going strong until at least March, so February 21 would give Florida a two week window in which the candidates would concentrate there. That would also allow both SC and NV to go 1 week later and give NH the room in needs to avoid a December primary.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

From The State

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think the lawsuit will succeed or cause the GOP to shift the date.  It is of note is the counties who filed it: Beaufort, Chester, Greenville and Spartanburg. Three of them are GOP strongholds, so this is not a political lawsuit (in the sense of party politics that is).  This is more about yet another unfunded mandate on local governments coming from Columbia.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The debate line-ups are getting boring. When is someone going to drop out?

At this point, not until after Iowa at the earliest, and probably not until after New Hampshire.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's still too soon to say the calendar is set in stone.  The case concerning how the South Carolina primary is to be paid for (and by whom) was heard at our Supreme Court yesterday.  Chief Justice Toal was skeptical of the counties' claims, but Associate Justice Beatty was appreciative. While I think the plaintiffs will be unsuccessful, if the GOP has to conduct the primary itself and use paper ballots, then it is possible that the primary could be delayed since the change requires DOJ clearance.


article in The State

Chief Justice Toal

Associate Justice Beatty

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

According to Wikipedia [citation needed] Ohio is a "semi-closed" primary.  Is that true, and if so, what does that mean?

It's a "closed" primary in the sense that only registered Republicans can vote in it, but if a non-Republican shows up and asks for a ballot they get one as their party registration will be changed to Republican.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

That's another thing I can't stand along with early voting. Republicans should vote in the GOP primary and Democrats should vote in their primary. Independents must wait until election day. This prevents people from rigging each other's primaries. I know states should decide most things, but in this case I'm actually considering favoring the federal government being involved.

If the parties want to control who selects their candidates, they need to start paying for their primaries themselves instead of having the taxpayers foot the bill.  So long as this independent taxpayer is being forced to pay for the political activities of the major parties, then the parties will just have to put up with me voting in their primaries.