Tuesday, March 28, 2023

Invisible Primary: Visible -- South Carolina's Position in the Republican Nomination Process

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

McClatchy's Alex Roarty has a good bit of invisible primary fare from the Palmetto state. Team DeSantis is beginning its build out in South Carolina, a state that figures to be interesting in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination process. Yes, the first-in-the-South primary will be one of the earliest Republican contests. And yes, there are two South Carolinians -- former Governor Nikki Haley and Senator Tim Scott -- and a former president who won the South Carolina primary in 2016 (and who has the backing of the current governor and the state's other US senator) who are vying for (or likely to contest) the nomination in 2024. 

But that does not mean that South Carolina is suddenly Iowa 1992 with Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) running. No, efforts are underway within the broader DeSantis 2024 effort to hire staff in the state, and a couple of state legislators from the conservative-rich Upstate already look to be on board. State Rep. Josh Kimball (R) is aligned with Never Back Down, the super PAC that has been in the news because of all of its recent activity. And state Sen. Danny Verdin (R) has also spoken favorably of the idea of DeSantis running. These are important moves for any candidate who is building an operation in a state where the big names are either already running or lined up behind another candidate. And if they are not big moves then they are among the only moves a candidate can make in building a network in one of the earliest states on the primary calendar. 

Because, here is the thing about South Carolina: it is unique among the early states. While Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada all allocate delegates in a manner proportionate to the results of their contests, South Carolina Republicans do not. The party utilizes and has for years utilized a winner-take-most scheme where the winner statewide and the winners in each of the state's nine congressional districts can take all of the delegates at stake in those jurisdictions. And that is all fine under RNC rules. All four are exempt from the proportionality requirements placed on other states with contests before March 15. 

Any DeSantis ramp up in South Carolina is a nod to both that reality and the potential for a long delegate fight ahead in 2024. A win statewide would likely mean a fairly significant early net delegate advantage coming out of the state and heading into Nevada and beyond to Super Tuesday. That is what favorite sons and daughters, like Scott and Haley, and Trump are banking on. That is what DeSantis is attempting to prevent. The rules matter. That is why, despite South Carolina politicians and a former president/primary winner running, South Carolina will continue to garner attention -- and lots of it -- during the invisible primary in 2023.


...
Governor Doug Burgum (R-ND) for president? Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) to Iowa? Count those two among the invisible primary maneuverings no one expected to start the week. Yet, there was news of both Republicans' activities on Monday. Handicappers may not give either much of a chance at the 2024 Republican presidential nomination -- and to be fair, the Tillis comms team was quick to offer a Sherman-ish statement denying a prospective bid -- but these moves signal that, as Jonathan Bernstein correctly summed it up, "Republican party actors, including politicians, are not acting as if Trump/DeSantis have the nomination wrapped up between them." 

Too true. Neither Burgum nor Tillis may actually formally seek the Republican nomination, but that both are doing things that prospective presidential candidates do is a sign amid all the jockeying for support of donors, of endorsers and of voters. It is a sign that the unprecedented nature of Trump's third run (in the midst of investigations that may bring indictments, if not convictions) brings with it uncertainty. It is a sign that there may be some doubts about the long term viability of a DeSantis run (despite strong organizational signs in the midst of a "bad" week). One or both of Burgum or Tillis may run for 2024, but neither may actually end up running in 2024. Uncertainty about even well-established and well-positioned candidates breeds activity from everyone else with an eye toward the White House. 


...
In the travel primary, Marianne Williamson drops in on the voters of South Carolina on Tuesday (March 28). Former Vice President Mike Pence heads to Iowa again on Wednesday (March 29), and Vivek Ramaswamy was just there this past weekend. Former Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson struck a different tone in California last week than did Ron DeSantis when the Florida governor trekked through the Golden state earlier this month. Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie may have drawn all the headlines in New Hampshire on Monday (March 27), but former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley is also in the Granite state for town halls on Monday and Tuesday.


...
On this date...
...in 2019, Miramar, Florida Mayor Wayne Messam formed an exploratory committee to potentially seek the Democratic nomination. 

...in 2020, the date of the New York primary was changed for the first time due to the pandemic, pushing back to June 2.



Posted by Josh Putnam at 10:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Monday, March 27, 2023

North Dakota Democrats Aim for April 6 Party-Run Primary in 2024

Late last week, the North Dakota Democratic-Nonpartisan League Party released its 2024 draft delegate selection plan (DSP) for public comment. 


Posted by Josh Putnam at 3:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , ,
Share |

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Trump and Evangelicals in 2024

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

Tim Alberta had a nice piece up over at The Atlantic over the weekend about Donald Trump's current relationship with the broader evangelical movement. [Always read Alberta.] The takeaway? The former president seemingly burned some bridges with some Christian leaders after he cast blame on pro-life supporters for Republicans' (mis)fortunes in the 2022 midterm elections. It is a deeply reported story and it makes some sense in a climate in which others in the Republican presidential primary electorate are looking around at their options more than they did in 2019 when Trump was up for reelection. 

But there were a couple of interrelated things that kept coming to mind as FHQ read through the story. First, the folks who were quoted in the piece were almost exclusively elites within the evangelical movement (and if not elites, then leaders in some capacity). And second, there was a divide in that segment of the Republican primary electorate in 2016. As Pew showed then, regular church attendees who identified as evangelical gravitated more toward Ted Cruz. Those who carried the same identity but who were less involved in congregations were more likely to side with Trump. While FHQ is not fond of the 2024 comparisons to the 2016 Republican nomination race, it is worth asking whether this same relationship among evangelicals exists in this current invisible primary. 

In other words, does that 2016 divide persist? Is it being animated anew as the Republican presidential field takes shape for 2024? While church leaders and their most committed adherents may be looking around, put out with Trump after eight years, there may be a sizable pocket of evangelicals who are just as evangelical in their identities but less attuned (or not attuned at all) to leaders in the church who are looking to move on from Trump in the primary phase. It is those folks who may miss a unified(-ish) signal from elites in the evangelical movement. This is another one of those "is Trump closer to 2015 than to 2019" questions worth keeping an eye on as 2023 moves forward. [And it merits mention that evangelical leaders were not exactly breaking down the door to back Trump in 2015 and early 2016. But once the primary phase yielded to the general election campaign, the ties grew stronger.]

...
It is not as if there had been a lot of chatter about Brian Kemp jumping into the race for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. There had been some, but the talk had seemingly never risen above the "plausible challenger, not seriously considering it" stage. Kemp has some of the conventional characteristics of a presidential aspirant: he's a twice-elected governor (in a swing state, no less), he is a proven fundraiser, and (in the eyes of handicappers in and out of the political media) he fits into the anti-Trump "lane" after his tussle with the former president over the 2020 election results. But, as local media had recently pointed out, while the door was not closed, Kemp was not doing the things that prospective presidential candidates do. There were no trips to Iowa, no national speeches, no new books to hawk.

That door now appears closed. Kemp on Friday in an interview with the Wall Street Journal was quick to dismiss any chances of a run for 2024. So scratch Kemp's name from the list. The field, real or imagined, winnows.


...
Despite some of the "Desantis is doomed" talk last week (and it entered the vocal doubt phase over the weekend), the broader effort to support the Florida governor's nascent bid for the Republican nomination added to its ranks. Having already brought on Jeff Roe as an adviser last week, Never Back Down, the super PAC aligned with the DeSantis effort hired a former communications hand from the Trump 2020 campaign. And Erin Perrine was already spinning polls over the weekend. 

At first blush, it may look as if Perrine's move to DeSantis is a defection from Trump. But when one considers that Republican campaign operatives had few choices at the presidential level in 2020, and that the party as a whole was firmly behind the former president in the last cycle, the story becomes one more about this cycle than a departure from the last. After all, Perrine, like Jeff Roe, has been aligned with Ted Cruz in the past. And their collective move to Never Back Down and DeSantis may tell us a lot more about a candidate not running this cycle (Cruz) than a former president who is. Regardless, these are important signals in the staff primary as the hiring wars continue. 


...
On this date...
...in 1984, Gary Hart won the Connecticut primary completing his sweep of states in the northeast..

...in 1988, Michael Dukakis won the North Dakota Democratic caucuses.

...in 2019, Utah joined Super Tuesday for 2020.

...in 2020, the Ohio primary shifted because of covid to a vote-by-mail primary that would conclude in April. Hawaii Democrats did the same in their party-run primary process. And the Pennsylvania primary was moved to June 2, also because of the pandemic.



Posted by Josh Putnam at 10:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , ,
Share |

Sunday, March 26, 2023

California Bill to Change Primary Date Amended

Earlier this week, significant changes were made to a California Senate bill that, upon its introduction, appeared to affect the date of the consolidated primary, including the presidential primary, in the Golden state.

In fact, the original version of that bill -- SB 24 -- struck the entire section of the California code dealing with various aspects of the primary, leaving the date unspecified. In brief, the introduced bill described the legislation like this:
This bill would change the date of the presidential primary and consolidated statewide direct primary described above to an unspecified date.
As it turns out, however, that was a change meant to serve as a placeholder while the particulars of the intended bill were worked out. The newly amended version of SB 24 was released on Monday, March 20 and revealed that the date of the presidential primary would remain unaffected moving forward. In its place, grander language to put a public financing (of elections) system before the voters of California was inserted. 

California, it seems for now, will remain one of the anchors of Super Tuesday alongside the primary in Texas. 


Posted by Josh Putnam at 9:30 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Saturday, March 25, 2023

Bill Eliminating Idaho Presidential Primary Ready for Governor

The leadership of the Idaho legislature had targeted Friday, March 24 as the last day of the 2023 regular session. 

But that did not happen. 

Instead, the state Senate dragged through another legislative day at a glacial pace as the state House stood by, finished with its work and awaiting further action from the upper chamber. 

One matter the Senate was able to dispense with was defining the parameters around which the presidential primary will operate for the 2024 cycle. Those bills -- one to eliminate the stand-alone March presidential primary (H 138) and one to consolidate that election with the mid-May primaries for other offices (S 1186) -- were passed on Thursday, March 23. And since the former bill had earlier passed the state House in it current form, the bill was signed by the requisite parties in both chambers and enrolled, ready to be transmitted to the governor for consideration.

But again, that bill merely ends the separate March presidential primary. It does not build the necessary infrastructure into state code to add a presidential line to the May primary for other offices. That amending action is contained in the trailer bill, S 1186. If the amending bill does not also get a thumbs up from the House, then there would simply be no presidential primary in Idaho for 2024. However, that was not the intent of the original bill, incomplete though it may have been. And that likely is not the intent of legislators in the lower chamber either. 

Nonetheless, S 1186 is not yet on the House calendar for when it is due to reconvene on Tuesday, March 28. New to the chamber, the bill would first have to go through committee, and although it has been referred to House State Affairs, S 1186 is not yet on the panel's docket. FHQ is not suggesting that the trailer bill will not be dealt with. It likely will be. The delay is only a function of the end-of-session logjam. 

But what is interesting is that the state Republican Party opposes the primary's shift to May, and it retains the ability to opt for earlier caucuses as a means of assessing presidential preference among Republicans in the state in 2024. Should the governor sign H 138, then proponents of the bill will have gotten at least part of what they wanted out of the 2023 regular session: they will have eliminated the separate presidential primary and saved the state more than $2 million. But the second part of this -- adding the presidential line to the May primary ballot -- becomes superfluous if the state Republican Party ultimately opts to caucus instead of using the later primary. 

The legislative delay at the end of this session, then, may provide legislators (if not the Idaho Republican Party) some time to consider those options in a way that may affect further progress on S 1186. In other words, that action could be saved for a special session (should one be called) after the Republican state central committee makes any decisions on its 2024 delegate selection process. The party may not want to conduct caucuses, but it also does not want such a late presidential primary. It would appear to be a bit of a lose-lose proposition for state Republicans at the moment. 

Yet, that is all speculative. The state legislature will answer some if not all of these questions as it presumably wraps up its regular session work in the week ahead. 

--
See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 9:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |

Friday, March 24, 2023

Kansas Committee OKs Amended Presidential Primary Bill

During a working session Friday morning, March 24, the state Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee (FSA) convened to markup SB 321, the bill to create a one-off presidential primary election for the 2024 cycle in Kansas. 





Posted by Josh Putnam at 3:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |

Invisible Primary: Visible -- National Scrutiny has Arrived for DeSantis

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

There have been hints of this nestled in all the changing tides stories about Donald Trump's fortunes in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination race, but it has come into clearer focus of late. Governor Ron DeSantis is "trending downward." After riding high as the clearest and best-positioned alternative to the  former president, DeSantis was due for an inevitable down cycle in coverage. 

And those types of stories are starting to trickle out as indictment watch whips itself into a froth. 

Again, all of this was inevitable. Recall that, until now, there was a steady stream of caveats to DeSantis' top challenger status. And they all collectively warned that the Florida governor had not been tested on the national stage. He had not been scrutinized. Well, that was going to come and this may be the first clear wave of it. The crux of it all is that it was going to happen, but how DeSantis responds -- or probably more accurately weathers -- this and subsequent waves of scrutiny and/or the slumping news cycle or two will likely define whether he is able to maintain his perceived positioning as the invisible primary marches on. 

What is difficult for DeSantis and others vying for the Republican nomination is that the indictment circus is likely to take up a lot of the oxygen in the near term, keeping the focus on Trump and less on those seeking to challenge him. It is tougher to counter flagging coverage when most eyes are elsewhere.


...
Actions not words in New Hampshire. Focus less on the repetition of the same tired lines from the Granite state governor and more to what the New Hampshire Democratic Party is now doing as 2024 -- and a likely rogue New Hampshire primary -- approaches. 


...
It has been one of those mid-session weeks in state capitals across the country. Legislation, generally, is moving, but presidential primary legislation is moving in particular. Hawaii, Idaho and Kansas have been active this week in shifting or establishing presidential primaries. 


...
On this date...
...in 1992, Jerry Brown narrowly beat Bill Clinton in the Connecticut primary, starting a short streak of small state victories to end March and start April (the last of his wins that cycle). President George H.W. Bush coasted to victory on the Republican side.

...in 2012, Rick Santorum scored the last of his victories before dropping out in early April with a win in the Louisiana primary. The delegate allocation Pelican state Republicans used that cycle was (and is) a good reminder of the variation that can and does exist across states in the Republican allocation rules. 

...in 2020, it was to have been the date of the Georgia primary, a departure from what had become a string of Super Tuesday primaries. But the coronavirus pushed the election in the Peach state back to June 2020. This was also the date on which the Delaware presidential primary was delayed due to the pandemic.

Posted by Josh Putnam at 10:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , ,
Share |

Thursday, March 23, 2023

Idaho Presidential Primary Bills Pass Senate

The two bills that would eliminate the stand-alone March presidential primary in Idaho and merge it with the May primaries for other offices passed the state Senate on Thursday, March 23. 


Posted by Josh Putnam at 7:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |

Kansas Presidential Primary Push Faces Friday Deadline

The Kansas state Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee convened on Thursday, March 23 to conduct a hearing on the newly introduced SB 321. Brought forth formally just one day prior, the measure would establish a presidential primary election in the Sunflower state for the 2024 cycle. 

The Thursday hearing was revealing for several reasons:
1. This bill is going to move fast if it is going to move at all. Across the legislature, committees face a deadline of Friday, March 24 to complete work on certain bills. SB 321 is among those certain bills. It faces a very quick trip from introduction one day to public hearing the next and finally followed by a working session after which there will be action to either pass the bill on to the Senate floor for consideration or leave it in committee. That working session will fall on deadline day and is still awaiting a fiscal note being delayed by counties who have been asked to quickly ascertain how much an additional election would cost at the local level. 

2. The principal driver behind the effort to reestablish the Kansas presidential primary is the state Republican Party. The state Democratic Party was unaware of the possible change.

3. While the state Republican Party entertained an earlier Super Tuesday date for the primary, March 19 -- the first Tuesday after March 15 -- was chosen in order for the party be able to allocate delegates in a winner-take-all manner. March 15 is important because that is the date before which truly winner-take-all allocation methods are prohibited by Republican National Committee rule. [This is something FHQ raised on social media earlier.]

4. The sponsor of the competing Senate bill to reestablish the presidential primary but pair it with the primaries for other offices spoke in favor of the new legislation. But Senator Caryn Tyson (R-12th, Anderson) urged the committee to consider consolidating the primaries to cut down on the total costs associated with carrying out nominating elections. [The Kansas secretary of state's office at the hearing roughly estimated -- again, without full input from the counties -- that the price tag would come in around $4.5 million. That expenditure may or may not be an issue for legislators.] Tyson continued that her bill was intended as a conversation starter on shifting to a primary and that the first Tuesday following the first Monday in May date was a suggestion based on how little it would overlap with the legislative session. A consolidated primary any earlier would have legislators campaigning and raising funds during the legislative session, a conflict of interest issue that often pops up in states when consolidated primaries are discussed. The cost savings may be tempting to legislators but the campaigning conflict may offset it. The bottom line with respect to Tyson's bill (SB 290) is that it is not going anywhere and the May timing may or may not be workable. One thing consolidation would do would be to permanently schedule all the primaries for a particular time. 

5. On a similar note, as mentioned in the post about the introduction of SB 321, this is a one-off action for 2024. That there would just be a presidential primary in 2024 was confirmed in the course of the hearing. Kansas would revert to a system in which the parties run the process in 2028 and beyond. The consolidation path would avoid that drawback.

6. The state Democratic Party was not present to comment on the bill or whether they would opt into a primary, if available. Kansas Democrats held a party-run primary by mail in 2020.

Given the haste with which this measure has already moved, it is likely that it will come out of committee in some form after the working session on March 24. There may be some changes, but it seems unlikely that any of the thornier issues like consolidation will be addressed. It would open a can of worms in a process that has already been maximally streamlined and can afford no delays given the deadlines facing the committee. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 4:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Hawaii Committee Shakes Up Presidential Primary Bill

The lone surviving bill to establish a presidential primary in Hawaii no longer charts a path toward Super Tuesday. 







Related:



--
See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 12:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)