From today’s Evans-Novak Political Report:
Front-Loaded Primary: In a previous edition, we discussed the change that could result from front-loading the Presidential primaries. As many as 19 states may hold primaries on the same day, February 5, with only the Iowa caucus, the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries, and the Nevada Democratic caucus preceding it (some state legislatures are in the process of moving up their primaries). There are two possible, opposite scenarios here. One of them is that this setup could augment the importance of the early primaries, allowing them to choose the winner almost unilaterally.
1. Under this scenario, it would be nearly impossible for any candidate to mount credible campaigns in 19 different states during a presidential primary. Therefore, anyone who can dominate the early primaries enters that “Super-Duper” Tuesday with more credibility than anyone else.
2. That is what happened in 2004. Although the situation was somewhat different, recall the shift that occurred between the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire. Democrats were looking for an anti-Howard Dean candidate. Just weeks before the caucus, it was by no means clear who could beat Dean in Iowa. In the final two weeks, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, thanks to a compelling story of service in Vietnam and smart Election Day tactics (as well as the fundamental weakness of Dean’s organization and its lack of understanding of Iowa), overtook Dean suddenly and won decisively.
3. As soon as the Iowa result established him as the anti-Dean, Kerry — up until then a candidate with nothing special to single him out from the pack — experienced a sudden and positive lift elsewhere. As of January 15 in New Hampshire, Kerry had been running third against Dean, trailing by 20 points, with retired Gen. Wesley Clark in second place. After Iowa, however, Kerry surged ahead in New Hampshire, cannibalizing much of Clark’s support and topping Dean by 12 points.
4. The point here is that Kerry, in the midst of a very open field, caught momentum as the alternative candidate as soon as he was able to prove himself in one of the early contests. This is a scenario which could easily come about on either side early next year — particularly on the Democratic side if Hillary Clinton remains the putative frontrunner there.
5. The second scenario: a split decision on February 5 that keeps many of the candidates alive. This would cause a diminution of the importance of the early primaries and heighten the importance of late primaries that have not been truly meaningful for years. If large states such as California, Michigan, Florida and Georgia all go different ways, the race could remain lively for months.
6. California’s contest could be especially lively since this time delegates will be awarded by congressional district.
They ought to sell these at Catholic Medical Center.
Time’s Joe Klein has some interesting observations on the question of how Hillary Clinton and John McCain lost the sense of inevitability that many saw in their campaigns.
One point I think he gets dead wrong is his analysis of her position on Iraq and how it plays among voters.
“Most voters don’t care if Hillary Clinton says ‘I was wrong’ about Iraq. They know she was wrong, and they sense she regrets it. After all, she’s against the surge and for a phased withdrawal. She knows more about national-security issues than most of her Democratic opponents do, and when she talks about what to do in Iraq, she makes sense. That should be all that matters. But there are about 873 people on the left edge of the Democratic Party, plus assorted anti-Clinton consultant trolls like Morris, who want to torment her over this. And she, inexplicably, is allowing herself to be tormented.”
Judging from the questioning Clinton has had in Iowa and New Hampshire, I’d say most Democratic primary voters care very much whether she says she was wrong about Iraq. They want her to say she was wrong, and her refusal to do so gives them even more reason to think that she’s trying to have the issue both ways. It is not just far-left activists and anti-Clinton operatives who are bringing up her vote. It’s rank-and-file Democrats.
After winning his Oscar last night (absolutely no surprise), Al Gore will be the subject of great political speculation this week. Will he run for President or won’t he? Even his buddy Leonardo DiCaprio doesn’t know. But my brand new, patent-pending Gore-o-Meter will tell us all whether Gore is running long before he makes an announcement one way or the other.
Here’s how it works. The Gore-o-Meter will keep track of Al Gore’s weight over the next seven months. If Gore slims down to his political fighting weight, he’s running. If he keeps his post-politician pounds, it means he’s plenty happy winning Oscars and Nobel Prizes, hobnobbing with the stars and being adored by Le Car lovers, pseudo-intellectual Europeans, and liberal college students everywhere.
I suspect that Gore won’t run because he’s discovered where the real power in America lies: In Hollywood. Hollywood can change people’s attitudes about political and cultural subjects more quickly and thoroughly than government can (not on every subject, but on topics Gore cares about, like environmental snobbery). Why get back into campaigning, fund-raising, rubber-chicken dinners, etc., all to land a thankless job that will make you die earlier, when, instead, you can enjoy all of the benefits of having been president — making millions giving speeches, running around with celebrities and being fawned over by half the population of the Western world — without enduring the stress and headaches of actually having the job?
The New Republic is switching to a less ideological magazine, basically shaking free of its liberal roots, editor Franklin Foer tells The New York Times, and the Times misses the story.
The Times story is headilned “New Republic to cut back production schedule.” It leads with “The New Republic, the thinning left-leaning weekly magazine whose circulation has plunged in the era of the Web, is overhauling itself with a new configuration of owners, who are investing in a new look for the magazine and cutting back its publication schedule to every two weeks.”
Just another story of a print publication adjusting to the Internet era. But that’s not the story. Down at the fifth paragraph we find this:
“His goal, Mr. Foer said, is for the magazine to ‘transcend ideology’ and to become what he calls The New Yorker of politics.
“‘There’s a massive vacuum in political journalism when it comes to magazines writing about politics, the culture of Washington and presidential politics,’ he said.”
Woah. The best liberal political magazine in the country is going to “transcend ideology” and seek a broader appeal? That’s a big story and the Times missed it.
Not that The New Yorker is non-political or non-ideological. But if Foer’s suggestion is what it seems, this is a noteworthy development in the world of political journalism. Maybe the Times should’ve put a political reporter instead of a business reporter on the story.
So reports the Des Moines Register, among others.
Guess he won’t be coming here next week.
Sen. Barack Obama released this statement today in response to Britain’s plan to begin drawing down troops from Iraq:
“Tony Blair’s announcement made it clear that one of our greatest allies recognize the fact that there is no military solution to this war. Just about everyone in the world understands this except the White House and a few of their friends running for President,” said Senator Barack Obama. “What’s worse is that 14,000 of our National Guard members are leaving for Iraq for the second time before they were supposed to, before they’re ready, and before they have the proper equipment to do the job they’re being sent for. We shouldn’t be sending more troops to Iraq, we should be bringing them home.”
Obama is wrong in his estimation of who thinks there’s a military solution in Iraq. There are a few more people who do. They’re the ones planting roadside bombs and shooting down choppers. The military solution seems to be working pretty well for them.
Nick Clemons, 33, executive director of the state Democratic Party, will soon leave his post to run Hillary Clinton’s campaign in New Hampshire. Clemons has spent this decade organizing, managing and helping Democratic candidates and activists. He was a campaign manager for former Manchester Mayor Bob Baines and ran John Kerry’s 2004 campaign in the state. State Dem Chairman Kathy Sullivan credits Clemons with leading Democrats to victory in New Hampshire last fall. He’s considered a real catch for the Clinton campaign, as he brings the former first lady a wealth of knowledge, experience and contacts in the Granite State. He’s also quite the baseball fan.
Even gearing up for a Presidential campaign, Clemons has a couple of books on the bedside table. They are:
The Old Ballgame: How John McGraw, Christy Mathewson, and the New York Giants Created Modern Baseball, by Frank Deford. “This is a book about how Christy Mathewson and John McGraw shaped turn of the century baseball,” Clemons says. “McGraw was a throwback to baseball’s rough and tumble days, a win at all costs player who became a win at all costs manager. Mathewson was a college-educated pitcher who ushered in a more genteel era and became America’s first national baseball superstar. An excellent read as I patiently wait for the baseball season to begin.”
The Road, by Cormac McCarthy. “This is a look at a father’s love for his son set amidst a bleak future after an ambiguous apocalypse has occurred. A very moving story.”
Five Days in Philadelphia, by Charles Peters. “An examination of the candidacy of Wendell Wilkie, who was the Republican nominee for President in 1940. Wilkie was an internationalist who gave FDR the cover he needed to continue aiding the Allies during WWII before America officially entered the war. Wilkie has to be one of the most important runners-up in Presidential election history.”
The Plot Against America, by Philip Roth. “A look, through the eyes of a Jewish-American family from New Jersey, at what may have happened to America had Charles Lindbergh been elected president in 1940. Fascinating book that follows the paths of many ‘what-ifs’ at a critical time of American history.”
Dennis Kucinich finds his base at — where else? — NH colleges and universities. If college students couldn’t vote, this guy would have no campaign at all.
Washington Post columnist David Broder slams the rush to push Presidential primaries earlier and earlier.
Broder hates the idea of having four big-state primaries in early February, saying, “This is madness. There is no way that candidates can really communicate their qualifications, their aspirations and their policies to millions of people in widely scattered locales in a week’s time or less. The campaign will be reduced to 30-second TV spots, sound-bite debates and airport tarmac rallies.”
Exactly right.
Not a single member of the U.S. House has read the full, 90-page National Intelligence Estimate, though many of them cite it in debates, The Hill reports.
GOP Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter says he has a “major announcement concerning the South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary” tomorrow at 11:30 a.m. at the state capitol building in Columbia.
Must be pretty important. Maybe he’s supporting the Confederate battle flag. Nah, it’s probably not that important.
UPDATE: Evidently Hunter’s “major announcement” was the naming of three campaign supporters: the Horry County auditor, a state representative and a doctor who once said of evolution, “I mean you’ve got to be stupid to believe in evolution, I mean really.”
Wow! He’s got the Horry County, S.C., auditor! He’s golden!
If that’s a major announcement, his campaign is in even worse shape than I thought.
