Campaign compression in 2008

Karl Rove:

...

Two days after Iowa's contest on Thursday, Jan. 3, Wyoming Republicans will caucus on Saturday, Jan. 5. New Hampshire holds its primary on the next Tuesday, Jan. 8. On Jan. 15, Michigan votes, followed by Nevada's caucuses and the South Carolina Republican primary on Jan. 19. Hawaii Republicans start a two-week voting period Jan. 25 and South Carolina Democrats vote on Jan. 26. Florida goes to the polls Jan. 29 and Maine Republicans caucus on Feb. 1. Then, in a rush, there will be 23 contests on Tuesday, Feb. 5. What candidate can effectively campaign in more than a handful of the 32 states voting in the first month?

In the presidential 2000 race, 25% of the delegates were selected by March 7, 50% by March 14, and 75% of the Democratic delegates by April 4 and 75% of the Republican delegates by May 2. This time around, the 25% and 50% thresholds will be crossed on Feb. 5, and by March 4 over 75% of the delegates will be selected.

Cutting the length of the primary season by more than half by jamming the contests together raises the likelihood of a bandwagon developing for the candidate who wins the first few contests. This would allow a candidate to sweep to victory in the subsequent contests that rapidly follow because all that voters will see is his (or her) face on the evening news and in the papers.

Remember: Few Americans have seen these candidates up close, except voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. In an abbreviated primary season, the weight these early state voters carry is even more exaggerated. Both parties could end up with a candidate chosen in haste and repented of at great cost.

If primaries and caucuses were spread out with weeks, not days and hours, between them, then voters in more states could learn more about the candidates. Candidates would have more time to come back from an early loss to a contender who was briefly the flavor of the moment in one state.

Candidates would also benefit from having more time to think about the big, important things they want to do for the country. The process side of politics is now undermining the intellectual side. It was revealing that at a health-care forum last March, Sen. Barack Obama admitted he didn't have a health-care plan but promised to have one by this January.

In addition, the current process increases pressure on candidates to narrowly focus on the concerns of their party's activists in the early states. This crowds out other important things that tell the voters who they are. It's hard for candidates to resist. For example, then Texas Gov. George W. Bush spoke early in the primary season about rallying the armies of compassion to confront hopelessness of spirit and condition. This wasn't a "base theme." Rather, it was an appeal to all Americans. His primary opponents criticized his focus on compassion. But Mr. Bush rejected any retreat from the theme, an action that served him well in the general election. Now, because of the calendar, many candidates feel forced to devote much of their rhetoric and time to appealing to a faction in their party.

Is it really good or fair for so much of America to outsource its candidate selection to activists in a handful of the states at the front of this clipped process?

...

Karl rove has earned his reputation as a political genius, but I have to take issue with him on some of his points. I don't think compression is the problem. The Brits have a 10 week election cycle as a general rule, but the party representatives select the nominees to put forward. I think the real problem is the race to be first moves the process up too far from the actual election. If the first primary could be no further than six months before the scheduled election day, that would be a good start. I think there should be a rotation of states who get to go first. So that a few states do not have an exaggerated influence on the race.

I also think that this year's compression may change the dynamic making the influence of the early states potentially less than in the past. Because of the rapid pace, for example, if Huckabee surges in Iowa, he will have only a few hours to take advantage of it in New Hampshire, and a few days to put together an organization in large states that vote in the next few weeks. Better organize, and financed candidates will have a chance to swamp him with ads and get out the vote efforts in states where he can not take advantage of the retail politics of Iowa. Given more time, he might actually do better in those states.