One of my favorite wonky topics is the presidential nominating process, and as it happens, the way it’s shaping up for Democratic in 2024 is unusual, as I explained at New York:
Donald Trump’s 2024 announcement signaled that we are now officially in the run-up to the next presidential election. But there’s a big missing piece of basic election infrastructure, at least for Democrats: The order of states holding presidential primaries is very much up in the air.
Earlier this year, the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which sets guidelines for the nomination process and administers sticks and carrots to get states to comply, announced it would authorize five “early states” allowed to have nominating contests prior to March 1, 2024. The four states that were allowed across this golden rope line from 2008 through 2020 — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina — would have to reapply for privileged status along with everyone else. As many as 20 state Democratic parties expressed interest in vying for these five spots. But because some of the changed calendar positions would require action by the state government, which typically control and finance primaries, the DNC delayed a final selection until after the midterms sorted out who ruled where.
Now Michigan Democrats, who flipped both legislative chambers and hung on to the governorship this month, are galvanizing the 2024 calendar discussion with a clear bid for an early spot, as NBC News reports:
“Michigan Democrats — led by Rep. Debbie Dingell — feel well positioned to join the coveted ranks of the early states, after they made huge gains in the Nov. 8 election. With Iowa facing possible eviction from the early states, many expect Democrats to elevate a Midwest state.
“Democrats now have full control of the Statehouse in Lansing, which would allow them to easily change state laws to support a new date for the 2024 primary.”
The DNC’s previously announced criteria for early states, as reported by CBS News, were diversity (racial, ethnic, geographic, and economic diversity as well as union representation), general-election competitiveness, and feasibility (whether states can move their contest into the early window, if they can run a “fair, transparent and inclusive nominating process,” and the logistical requirements and cost of campaigning in that state). It was an unstated but understood criterion as well that the five early states would represent different regions. So Michigan may be competing for an early-state slot with Minnesota, where Democrats also nailed down a trifecta in the midterms.
Iowa’s traditional first-in-the-nation caucus has looked doomed all along. The state is famously nondiverse and is now solidly Republican in general elections. The “feasibility” of an Iowa event was also called into question by the 2020 fiasco, in which no Iowa caucus results were announced until the next day.
New Hampshire will be harder to dislodge, despite its nondiverse population, because of a state law that authorizes the secretary of state to move the primary date around in order to maintain the position of first primary. But Nevada Democrats are making a sustained effort to leap ahead of New Hampshire by switching to a primary and aggressively advertising their superior diversity and obvious competitiveness. It’s unclear, however, whether Republican Joe Lombardo’s gubernatorial win in Nevada will disrupt efforts to authorize a new state primary.
That points to one of two variables complicating the early-state selection process: By and large, Republicans are happy with the existing order of states. There is no pressure within the GOP to dump Iowa or displace New Hampshire or do anything else unusual. So in states where Republican cooperation is necessary to move things around or make the requisite resources available, Democrats have to convince their partisan enemies to care about it as well. And if the proposed new primary date in any given state violates the RNC’s existing calendar rules, that state’s Republicans could be penalized and lose delegates to their own convention. The prospect of a serious battle for the GOP presidential nomination adds another series of calculations.
It’s a Rubik’s Cube, and that’s largely why the existing calendar for both parties has stayed in place for so long aside from the fact that, in Iowa and New Hampshire, both parties have long cooperated to defend their calendar privileges like crazed badgers.
The other big variable facing Democrats is the broader context: What sort of decisions will Democrats be facing in 2024? At this point, we don’t know for sure whether President Biden is running for a second term, and we don’t know if he’ll face major competition if he does. If Biden has to fight for renomination, how he performed in particular states in 2020 may have some influence on a loyal DNC deciding where he has to run in 2024. That might really doom Iowa, if it’s not already doomed, given Biden’s fourth-place finish there in 2020. And Biden finished fifth in New Hampshire. The DNC likely wouldn’t want to give calendar privileges to the home state of a potential rival.
But decisions have to be made, and the Rules and Bylaws Committee is set to make them when it meets from December 1 through 3 in Washington, D.C.
Despite Strategic Vision’s leanings, the Boca Raton News story has SV admitting that Kerry picked up 5 points in Ohio from the debates. No other specifics were given about their Ohio numbers.
The Newsweek poll that showed Kerry with a lead among men while Bush leads among women simply shows that that poll is absolutely worthless. Anyone with a shred of intelligence knows that the gender gap is about 8-10 points and that there is simply NO chance that Kerry will win the men while losing the women. Can’t possibly be true and any poll that shows otherwise is a complete waste of newsprint. The most ridiculous part is that Newsweek editors print this result with a straight face, without even bothering to mention that if true it would be an immense historic shift in voting patterns!
In answer to the Texeira pronunciation question, on the assumption that Ruy is too busy crunching numbers to respond, I have it on good authority that his last name is pronounced Te-SHER-a.
I will take a stab at the question about the newly registered voters:
According to zogby, Kerry has a small lead among newly registered voters 49-42.
I suspect that most of the undecides among the newly registered voters will go to kerry. I think it will end up being something like 55-45.
http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10022
Hopefully this will help the democrats change the 39D to 35R. to 40D 34R, and with the massive get out the vote effort, maybe even a little better.
Teixeira, a Portuguese (and Brazilian) surname is pronounced “Teshera.”
partial answer to Bob H —
I’m sure you know much of this generally and are looking for specific numbers, but the polls of late have been showing an increasing divergence between ‘sure to vote’ voters — Bush lead, all the way to ‘registered’ — Kerry lead, sometimes substantial. It is difficult to say what level of turnout means which candidate gets what since it depends on WHOSE supporters turn out! A lot of the ‘registered’ voters not turning up as likely are probably recent registrants, including a large proportion of them young and concerned about the draft. THAT demographic’s turnout may well determine the presidential AND the Congressional outcome.
I understand that the number of new registered voters in CO. is so huge that the Sec. of State has said that people will have to work night and day to complete the data entry before 11/2. That augurs well for Ken Salaszar and Kerry/Edwards in that more new voters in that state are more likely to be Dem supporters than not. Anyone have a view on that?
I have been wondering about the simple advantage of always having your name listed first in the publishing of survey after survey. In the asking of the questions the names are usually rotated, but in reporting results Bush is almost always listed first. Bush, then Kerry? Why not Kerry, then Bush?
Hi everyone,
Well, I am very happy to see this poll as I live in Palm Beach County (Jupiter) Florida and I have to say that I was getting very worried about Kerry’s numbers and him not being able to gain any ground on Bush. I also have to say that the Repulicans down here are very hungry for a Bush win and I see more Bush stickers on cars that I do Kerry stickers. I am apart of the democratic club down here and the democrats don’t appear to be very motivated. I can’t believe it since this was such a democratic county. Julia
If you track Dale’s Electoral College Breakdown, the numbers slowly get better and better. He doesn’t post this latest florida result, and if he did Kerry would be ahead. I also agree that the Bush/Rove campaign is spinning in circles right now trying to get a grip! Yes!
Much Kudos to Our Guy for a brilliant performance in the debates with an historical result of turning the race around!
“He would rather protect his rich friends than help you all in the middle class”
That’s a democratic campaign that stands up and fights!
I think this election will be determined by two factors: turnout and fraud. Maybe the high Democratic turnout will cancel out the Republican fraud.
Neither factor can be assessed by polls right now.
New newsweek poll puts kerry down by 2 among reg. voters, and down 50-44 among likely voters.
However, This poll seems extremely strange. It has Bush with a lead among women, and kerry with a lead among men. I somehow don’t believe it.
This election has reached the tipping point. BC04 is flying apart at the seams, the media (pathetic as they are) have juicy stories just landing in their lazy laps — Voter highjinx abounding, more Bush docs, Iraq spiraling and the Dow puckering. Is there enough time? Kerry 52% Bush 46%, Kerry +40 EVs
How does one pronounce
TEIXEIRA?
The new Newsweek poll shows Bush ahead by a few points with registered, more ahead with likely, voters.
What was interesting in the article, and the first time I’ve seen it broken down was this concerning new voters: “Kerry now leads Bush 57 percent to 36 percent among those who identify themselves as first-time voters”
Turnout.
Addy
Can Ruy make some comments about how turnout is likely to affect the race, and what he guesses it might be? Kevin Philips discussed this last night on NOW, and seemed to imply that a 55% turnout combined with Bush approval at 47% or so means Bush is swept into the trash. 55% would seem to favor the good guys?
Altough this post is not about polling I felt it was an important read in attracting conservative swing Republicans.
“The conservative case for Kerry ”
Clyde Prestowitz
Washington, DC
http://tinyurl.com/4g7ov
As a former Reagan-administration official, registered Republican, born-again Christian, and traditional conservative, I am going to vote for John Kerry. So are many other old-line Republicans. Here’s why…
TERROR … Oct.27 …. I’m not afraid of no stinkin terror, I have a handy supply of duck tape & plastic
It’s been noted on another thread already, but the Washington Post poll (ending Oct. 10) shows a tie, both in LV and RV in Florida.
This is all great news to me. In my heart, I think I’d started to concede Florida to Bush. Having it in play is huge. Assuming Kerry gets Pennsylvania (and I saw one report that Bush was pulling out of there to focus on Ohio and Florida), then either Ohio or Florida would likely be enough to put him over the top. It gets a bit tricky with other states, but it would look awfully good. I’m very excited about having two big targets to pursue instead of just one.
Speaking of seniors in the swing states, there are huge numbers of “snow birds” who travel between FL and the northern swing states of OH, PA, MO and WI. And many of them have children who are aware of the health care problem.
It makes sense that Rove wants to keep inserting distractions like Mary Cheney in order to prevent focus from resting too long on any substantive issues.
I guess we should expect that on October 27 there will be a “terror alert”.
Furthermore, Strategic Vision is a Republican pollster. More so than other pollsters, Strategic Vision show stronger support for Bush. Yet even they say that Kerry picked up many points in Ohio, Wisconsin etc
This poll is particularly encouraging, partly because Insider pollster Matt Towery is a Republican. The analysis argues compellingly that health care reform gives Kerry serious traction with seniors, who have the highest turnout rates. I hope the Dem campaign takes note and runs strong health care reform ads in OH, PA and MO, as well as FL.