On the 2008 Presidential Primary Schedule
|
|
| Also listed in: ohio4edwards | ohio4gore | ohio4obama |
The 2008 presidential primary season and general election has already become a unique animal. On the Democratic side, we have the opportunity to nominate either the first female or black general election candidate. The campaigns are starting earlier and the media attention has either followed the candidates breathlessly or caused the early entries, depending upon your perspective.
The less frequently discussed issue is the primary schedule.
We've heard the criticism before: the primary schedule is front loaded, causing most states to never have a say in the nominating process. At least two delegate rich states -- Illinois and Florida -- are contemplating moving their primaries to February 5th, the earliest available date for them. California's legislature has already approved moving to Feb. 5.
Eight other states already host primaries on that date. If Florida and Illinois move forward, they will create what essentially is a national primary on 2/5/08.
So, three questions:
1. Since this train appears to have left the station, why isn't anyone in Ohio talking about moving our primary forward? We are, after all, the ultimate swing state.
2. Will the front loaded schedule produce a primary that's over in February 2008, or will it create a horse race for the top two candidates, forcing them to actually campaign in other states?
3. The National Association of Secretaries of State has a plan for a regional primary system [pdf file], dividing the country into geographic regions and rotating the regions hosting the first set of primaries every four years (sort-of BCS style). Would you support this?
I've been worried about the results of several large states moving forward since last month when California first began to make real noise about doing so. I like the basics of the NASS proposal, but it's unlikely it would be in place before 2012, if then.
X-posted at PBD
The less frequently discussed issue is the primary schedule.
We've heard the criticism before: the primary schedule is front loaded, causing most states to never have a say in the nominating process. At least two delegate rich states -- Illinois and Florida -- are contemplating moving their primaries to February 5th, the earliest available date for them. California's legislature has already approved moving to Feb. 5.
Eight other states already host primaries on that date. If Florida and Illinois move forward, they will create what essentially is a national primary on 2/5/08.
So, three questions:
1. Since this train appears to have left the station, why isn't anyone in Ohio talking about moving our primary forward? We are, after all, the ultimate swing state.
2. Will the front loaded schedule produce a primary that's over in February 2008, or will it create a horse race for the top two candidates, forcing them to actually campaign in other states?
3. The National Association of Secretaries of State has a plan for a regional primary system [pdf file], dividing the country into geographic regions and rotating the regions hosting the first set of primaries every four years (sort-of BCS style). Would you support this?
I've been worried about the results of several large states moving forward since last month when California first began to make real noise about doing so. I like the basics of the NASS proposal, but it's unlikely it would be in place before 2012, if then.
X-posted at PBD
With the front load, imagine Edwards polling 1st in left leaning Cali with labor running GOTV, Obama running first in his home state of Illinois, Richardson winning Nevada and in the running for FL, with Hillary using a New Hampshire win to revitalize her campaign and inspire a money dump into Chicago, LA, and SF.
On Feb. 6 we have four candidates with big delegate chunks and three more with scraps. Half of the super-delegates take a big breath and hold onto their pledges... voila, Ohio is relevant once again.
On the other hand, I could get behind a system where a top 4 finish in IA or NH lets you advance, 1 week later there is a regional primary involving any candidate who has not advanced, with the top finishers rounding out a field of eight, who are all on the ballot two weeks later as another region votes. Four candidates advance, based on delegates earned in that round, and losers' delegates are apportioned out to the advancees, based on the relative proportion of delegates won in that round. Two weeks later, the final four appear on the ballot in region number three, and finally, the final two candidates go up for all the marbles in region 4, on the same Tuesday as the play-in game in Dayton.
As for your first scenario, I've seen some speculate that as a likely outcome. I think it's unlikely, but it's possible.