Tuesday, July 18, 2023

New Hampshire blinders in the Democratic nomination race

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Michigan Republicans had everything in place with respect to their 2024 delegate selection plan. ...until they didn't. The plan adopted by the state party last month hit a snag with the RNC and will require a tweak. But the state party has options. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Al Hunt had an eye roll-worthy opinion piece up at The Messenger over the weekend and it was the 315 billionth one since December to inform readers about how the Democrats' Biden-led calendar changes for 2024 have "backfired, spectacularly" in New Hampshire. And again, this was not revelatory. There has been a steady stream of stories and opinion pieces in this genre that have followed the same basic formula: accentuate the negative in the only story outside of the president's age to move the needle in a nomination race that looks like a yawner, only gather quotes from folks inside of and tied to the state of New Hampshire and assume the worst for the president. 

Look, if folks have caught even a whiff of one of these Biden/New Hampshire stories since late last year, then they will likely understand that upsetting folks in a battleground state may have implications for the president in the general election next year. That has been and remains clear. 

However, Hunt, like many before him, has chosen the New Hampshire-centric path that leads to hypothetical chaos (or some lesser form of uncertainty in the 2024 Democratic nomination race). And that path always seems to place some variety of blinders on those who spin these yarns of incumbent woe. 

Folks miss that New Hampshire Democrats are not without options in this saga. Like other state parties, New Hampshire's Democrats can opt out of a state-run presidential primary in favor of some party-run contest to allocate national convention delegates. The Democratic Party in the Granite state has the very same free association rights under the first amendment that all parties across the country do regardless of any state law on the subject. Perhaps, then, the state party could diffuse the situation by going along with the calendar rules supported by folks from 55 of 57 states and territories and adopted by the Democratic National Committee for the 2024 cycle. [It honestly is like that Politico piece from May was never reported. It certainly was not internalized by very many.]

But even if New Hampshire Democrats continue along the route of defiance, does that necessarily mean that the Biden campaign will topple like a house of cards on the evening of (probably) January 23? Is a non-loss by the president in an unsanctioned primary really the death knell for Biden in 2024? It could be. But it could also very well be that the South Carolina primary comes along eleven days later on February 3 and starts a string of (actual delegate-allocating) victories for the president, things become boring and attention goes where it most always does when an incumbent is seeking renomination: to the other party's active contest. But, of course, Hunt did not reckon with that possibility. 

Neither did he consider the long-term implications of New Hampshire Democrats' defiance in the short term. Again, what if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or Marianne Williamson wins a New Hampshire primary, the ballot of which the president is not on? That is not embarrassing for Biden. That is embarrassing for New Hampshire Democrats. The state party would lose face and set itself back even further for future discussions of the calendar for 2028, a cycle that will actually matter on the Democratic side. It is shaping up to be competitive. 

Iowa Democrats still have a chance to mess this up, but this is what separates them from New Hampshire Democrats in this calendar kerfuffle. Iowa Democrats are seemingly playing the long game. If they go along with the 2024 calendar rules and manage to pull off a successful mail-in presidential preference vote, then the party will have a leg to stand on in pitching a return to the early calendar for the Hawkeye state in 2028. They may be rejected again, but that is still a firmer foundation from which to argue than "we defied the national party the whole way in 2024 and some conspiracy theorist won our meaningless primary." The membership of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee may change substantially between now and 2026 when the calendar decisions are made for 2028, but unless the entire committee is made of DNC members from New Hampshire, then Granite state Democrats are very unlikely to find a receptive audience for their early calendar pitch. 

But Hunt does not consider that either. And it is understandable. It is not a flashy story at the moment (if it ever is for more than just FHQ and, like, seven other people). But at some point, Hunt and others will get beyond this initial set of questions about the Biden/New Hampshire situation and dig a little deeper. One can only hope.


...
This addendum from Seth Masket to the most recent wave in his survey of Republican county party chairs includes a graphic that is just fascinating to look at. It charts the percentage of county party chairs considering various candidates against the percentage who do not want a particular candidate nominated in 2024. As he notes, there are caveats, but it does give a sense of the direction of movement in the race. And Tim Scott noticeably moved in a positive direction. The junior senator from South Carolina saw his consideration numbers go up and his against nomination numbers trail off. Neat graphic. Seth continues to do solid work over at Tusk. 


...
From around the invisible primary...
  • In the staff primary, the DeSantis campaign trimmed its payroll over the weekend, cutting loose a dozen staffers. That drew parallels to Jeb Bush and Scott Walker and others who have busted out of the gates with hype to spare only to find themselves in a similar position: not meeting expectations (that they did not set), scaling back only to scare skittish donors which leads to further scaling back. Wash, rinse, repeat: doom loop. [Look, it is another troubling sign in a series of them for DeSantis and company in recent days. It may or may not be premature to write the obituaries of the Florida governor's campaign. But the simple truth of the matter is that DeSantis remains well positioned to do well in the 2024 race. [Well may mean something other than winning the nomination.] The governor has raised a lot of money -- with some caveats -- has the (endorsement) backing of a fair number of elected officials and has experienced staff in the broader campaign orbit. On those measures, DeSantis is well ahead of every other nomination aspirant but one.]
  • In the money primary, Mike Pence and Chris Christie turned in FEC reports that fell below $2 million. For what it is worth, both entered the race for the Republican nomination just last month. 
  • Wall Street donors are opening up their checkbooks for Trump alternatives, but that money is going to multiple candidates. 
  • The chatter may be there, but Georgia Governor Brian Kemp is not running for president. ...again. 
  • DeSantis has been in the Palmetto state the last two days and Chris Christie will make his first stop in South Carolina on Thursday, July 21.


...
On this date...
...in 1984, former Vice President Walter Mondale is formally nominated in a roll call vote at the Democratic National Convention in San Francisco.

...in 1988, the Democratic National Convention kicked off in Atlanta.



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 2:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Saturday, July 15, 2023

[From FHQ Plus] Yes, Iowa still matters

The following is cross-posted from FHQ Plus, FHQ's subscription newsletter. Come check the rest out and consider a paid subscription to unlock the full site and support our work. 

--

Iowa Republicans have set a caucus date for 2024. That got some folks thinking about the caucuses place in the presidential nomination process:

“What if Iowa doesn't matter?”

That was a question Chris Cillizza recently posed. And FHQ gets the point. Cillizza is suggesting that either Trump will win the lead-off caucuses next January or will lose and do what he did in 2016, cry foul at the process before moving on to a more hospitable format -- a primary -- back east in the Granite state. 

And that point is well taken. It is a narrower variation on the 2024 is a repeat of 2016 line that has become standard in the discourse of the Republican presidential nomination race this time around. However, that does not mean that it is off base. It may be!

But where FHQ parts ways with Cillizza is on a broader distinction perhaps.

Of course Iowa matters. 

Of course Iowa will matter. Win or lose, things may play out with Trump in the lead role just as Cillizza suggests, but it does not mean that the caucuses will not matter. They will matter in the way that they always do. The caucuses will winnow the field.

But how will Iowa (and New Hampshire) winnow the field? That may be the more operative question heading into primary season next year. Do the early contests literally winnow the field, forcing candidates from the race or do they effectively winnow the field, significantly diminishing the chances of candidates outside the top tier (however that is defined at the time) to near-zero levels?

We may never get a good answer because often, at least in recent cycles, it has been a little bit of both. Viable, office-seeking candidates, like Kamala Harris or Cory Booker on the Democratic side in 2020, who do not want to be winnowed by Iowa or New Hampshire -- those who see the writing on the wall during the invisible primary -- will drop out before the calendar even flips over to the presidential election year. Others, call them the all the eggs in the Iowa or New Hampshire basket candidates, such as Chris Christie in 2016, are among those left to "force" out at that point. 

Often, however, candidates do not neatly fit into one or the other of those categories. While Harris and Booker bowed out in 2020, other viable candidates soldiered on through Iowa, New Hampshire and into or through the other early window states in the Democratic order leading up to Super Tuesday. And that is a story as much about field size as it is about money available to keep those campaigns afloat. 

Yet, it is also a story of zombie candidates, effectively winnowed but still in the race and gobbling up not only vote shares in subsequent primaries and caucuses but potentially (depending on the rules) delegate shares. And that is where these early contests matter. They shape or do not shape the field left to fight over votes and delegates on down the line. No, some to a lot of those candidates-turned-zombies after Iowa or New Hampshire may not even qualify for delegates, but their presence affects how and how many delegates the candidates who do qualify end up being allocated. 

So, no, Iowa may not matter in identifying the eventual Republican nominee in 2024 (not Cillizza's point) and it may not matter where Trump (and/or the winner) is concerned. But it and any other early contests, not to mention the invisible primary, will shape the field that moves forward and how. It will affect the way subsequent rounds of the delegate game are played. That is important. That matters.


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

Friday, July 14, 2023

The DeSantis-is-sinking stories may be oversold to some degree, but...

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Trump either wins Iowa or plays the victim card next January. Does Iowa even matter in 2024? Yeah, the caucuses in the Hawkeye state still matter. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
There has been a lot of ink spilled in the last week or two about the shape the DeSantis campaign is in a little more than a month since the Florida governor launched his bid for the Republican nomination. Donors are nervous. Deck chairs are being moved. Murdochs are looking elsewhere. Poll numbers are plateauing if not trending downward. And that collective picture could portend an ominous swing into debate season starting next month. Or it could be blip on the radar, a summer lull. Time will tell that tale, but DeSantis remains the clear second option in the current field, albeit not as clear as it may have once been. He continues to bring in money at a pretty good clip. And for some reason he continues to draw in a fair number of endorsements. He may not be best positioned in the race for the 2024 Republican nomination, but he is well positioned even despite the current (real or perceived depending on the metric used) slide.

But here is the thing: DeSantis is now flirting with the threshold for qualifying for delegates that will be used in a lot of states. He is on the wrong side of 20 percent in the latest Morning Consult national poll. No, the Republican nomination process is not a national primary, but not being able to meet delegate qualifying thresholds will kill a campaign quickly once votes begin to be cast. 

...if the ship is not righted. 

There are still six months until the Iowa caucuses and the first few states -- at least as the rules are understood at this point -- have low bars to claim (small shares) of delegates. There is no formal threshold in Iowa, it is set at 10 percent in New Hampshire and Nevada's rules in previous cycles have set the threshold below five percent. But the winner-take-all by congressional district method South Carolina Republicans use is not forgiving and neither are rules in the Super Tuesday states, the majority of which have the maximum 20 percent threshold. 17 percent for DeSantis still puts space between him and the rest of the field, but it is far enough behind Trump right now that the Florida governor is in danger of missing out on delegates when it counts next March and beyond. 

Still, much can happen between now and the voting phase and that could be good or bad for DeSantis.


...
Not surprisingly, New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan is giving January 23 a good look for an eventual landing spot for the presidential primary in the Granite state. That has made sense since South Carolina Republicans settled on a February 24 date for their primary, clearing enough space in front of the South Carolina Democratic primary for both Iowa and New Hampshire in January next year. But there is a question that has to be answered first before Scanlan is able to pull the trigger later this fall on that late January date. 


...
From around the invisible primary...


...
On this date...
...in 1972, South Dakota Senator George McGovern accepted the Democratic presidential nomination in the wee hours of the morning of July 14 in Miami.

...in 2007, former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore dropped out of the race for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. 



--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 2:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , ,
Share |

Thursday, July 13, 2023

The Trump Campaign has been very disciplined on endorsements during the 2024 cycle

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Colorado Republicans have been on a bit of a ride in terms of how they have selected delegates to the national convention over the last several cycles. The state party has a proposal to take another evolutionary step for 2024, a proposal that would empower the candidates and their campaigns in the selection process. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Donald Trump got endorsements earlier this week from all six Republicans members of the Michigan delegation to the US House. It is another show of institutional force in a race the former president leads by a wide margin (as measured by surveys, fundraising or endorsements). But it served as another datapoint in an interesting split in the endorsement primary at the moment. As in Florida earlier this year, Trump dominated his next nearest competitor, Ron DeSantis, in the congressional endorsements from the Sunshine state. Team DeSantis countered with wave of state legislative endorsements from Florida Republicans. 

The tit-for-tat between the two has been the same in the Great Lakes state. DeSantis made the first move back in April when Never Back Down rolled out a raft of state legislative endorsements. And now Trump has responded by locking down the congressional delegation. Again, it is interesting. Trump has the upper hand, but DeSantis retains the ability to hold his own in ways that allow him to make the case to not just stay in the race but to show he has the potential to be in for the long haul.

Of course, just because a candidate can stay in for the long haul does not mean he or she will. The point is, despite all the negative chatter around DeSantis in recent days, he and his campaign remain well-positioned in the race for the Republican nomination. But the Trump campaign is markedly disciplined in this cycle on the endorsement front. Often when there is an event approaching, the former president's team will released another round of endorsements from the state in which the event is being held. Team Trump did that in Tennessee earlier this year in the lead up to a Republican gathering and again in Pennsylvania ahead of the Moms for Liberty event in Philadelphia recently. So while the recent chatter may be about the foibles of the DeSantis campaign, it is also a function of what the Trump campaign has done (and done well). 


...
FHQ is late to this one, but I thought Jonathan Bernstein's piece earlier this week at Bloomberg on the chaos that Republicans are inviting in their 2024 debates process was very good. 


...
From around the invisible primary...
  • In the money primary, South Carolina Senator Tim Scott is the latest 2024 Republican to post his fundraising haul from the second quarter. For the last three months concluding at the end of June, Scott pulled in $6 million, roughly on par with what Nikki Haley raised during that time. And Scott has a hefty super PAC warchest as well. 
  • There may be more on the way for the junior senator in the Palmetto state. Big money Republican donors are starting to kick the tires on Scott with DeSantis in a real or perceived holding pattern.
  • And one more on Scott: Both he and Chris Christie have hit the donor threshold to qualify for the first Republican primary debate next month. 
  • Much of the current negativity around the DeSantis campaign may be legitimate. It may also be overblown. Campaigns at this level are often on a knife's edge. But whether it is real or not, one of the things to eye (as a real operationalization of that) is how much emphasis Team DeSantis puts on Iowa. Yes, Trump and DeSantis have been "eyeing Super Tuesday states," but that is not anything that is new. However, if the DeSantis campaign and affiliated groups begin to put all or most of their eggs in the Iowa basket, then that could be a sign that the campaign's options (on a number of fronts) are waning. Wooing evangelicals in the Hawkeye state (before a gathering there) may or may not be evidence of that. But it is something to watch in the coming days.  


...
On this date...
...in 2015, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker officially entered the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.



--
Recent posts:




Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email. Oh, and find us on Threads: @fhq.plus.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 2:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , ,
Share |

Tuesday, July 11, 2023

Nevada GOP Primary/Caucus Lawsuit Shot Down in Carson City

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
The Nevada Independent has the latest on the Nevada Republican Party effort to end the newly established presidential primary in the Silver state:
"A Carson City judge has denied a motion by the Nevada Republican Party to block the state from holding a presidential primary election next year in favor of a caucus.

"Judge James Russell issued the ruling from the bench Monday, denying the state party’s lawsuit filed in May challenging a 2021 law moving the state away from a presidential caucus to a primary election."
And NVGOP Chair Michael McDonald indicated late Monday that the party is "prepared for a long fight." But the question continues to be why? The lawsuit and any prolonged legal battle over the primary are entirely unnecessary. 

Don't want the primary? Don't use it. [Nevada Republicans retain the right to opt out of the state-run presidential primary.]

Don't want a Republican primary at all? Don't have the candidates file for it. [The quickest and easiest route out of the primary and to the caucuses that the state party apparently wants is to encourage candidates who actually want delegates from the state to file for the party-run caucuses and not the primary. There will only be a Nevada Republican presidential primary if more than one candidate files with the state.]

The bigger news than the inevitable flop of the lawsuit in the Silver state is confirmation that the Nevada Republican Party intends to hold caucuses in 2024. The lawsuit suggested that that was the case, but the party never really came out and said that. They did over the weekend via their spokesperson in a CNN piece about the Iowa caucuses date. And Chair McDonald further confirmed that intention in his comments on Monday to The Nevada Independent:
McDonald added that the party still intends to hold a caucus in February to allocate the state’s presidential delegates, and is now seeking to avert a state-run primary election to avoid confusing voters and prevent a “huge waste of taxpayer money.”
The question is where on the calendar do these proposed Nevada Republican caucuses end up? Saturday, February 10 -- after the state-run primary -- is a likely destination. That would carve out a spot for the caucuses a little more than two weeks after the (still unsettled but increasingly likely) January 23 New Hampshire primary and two weeks before the South Carolina Republican primary. 


...
Yes, it was inevitable that Republicans would try to use the Democratic National Committee calendar changes against Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire. The candidates have been quick to do that in the Granite state. And New Hampshire Democrats are fretting about what that portends for the general election. 

The concern? According to The Messenger, independent voters venturing over to the Republican primary and staying with the party in the fall.
The concern from some New Hampshire Democrats is that independent voters will participate in a more crowded and important GOP primary over the Democratic contest, then stick with the GOP in the general election.

“My biggest fear is that if they become invested in participating in the Republican primary, it's going to be much more difficult to pull them back over for the general election,” said Jim Demers, the state’s former House Democratic Whip. “That’s something we’ve never had to deal with before.”
But the thing is that most of the independents lean toward one party or the other and will behave that way in the general election regardless of the primary in which they opt to participate. However, might that matter if the pure independents opt for the competitive Republican primary in January next year and stick with the Republican nominee in November? It could if Biden dips below his seven point margin in New Hampshire from 2020 in 2024. 

Of course, New Hampshire Democrats have been making this argument since December. Here is what FHQ said then...
Furthermore, they argue that those same independents may stick with the GOP in a general election, potentially tipping the balance against Democrats in a narrowly divided state, and by extension, possibly costing the party Senate control and/or electoral votes.

All of that is true. Those things could happen. But it could also be that President Biden seeks reelection, ends up running largely unopposed, and New Hampshire independents flock to the competitive Republican presidential primary anyway. Is it a gamble for the president and the DNC to potentially irk a sliver to a lot of New Hampshire voters by coming down hard on the state Democratic Party for fighting to maintain its traditional position? It undoubtedly would be if it is not already. But are independents, Democratic-leaning or otherwise, going to vote for a Republican nominee in the Trump mold (or Trump himself) over Biden because of the primary? The answer is maybe (or if one is in New Hampshire, YES!). But that seems to be a gamble the president and those around him are willing to take in this fight. There are very few scenarios where New Hampshire's four electoral votes serve as the tipping point in the electoral college. It is possible although less probable than other, bigger states. And neither New Hampshire US Senate seat is up until 2026. Is that gamble worth it? Time will tell that tale.
The bottom line is that this New Hampshire thing is going to go on for a while with the DNC. And Republicans will try to use that against Democrats in the Granite state. But the battle is over a decreasingly small sliver of pure independents.


...
From around the invisible primary...


...
On this date...
...in 2020, Louisiana held its twice-delayed presidential primary. Biden and Trump won in their respective contests.



--
Recent posts:




Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email. Oh, and find us on Threads: @fhq.plus.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 
Posted by Josh Putnam at 12:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , ,
Share |

Friday, June 30, 2023

Outside groups working against Trump

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Last week FHQ cited reporting that Americans for Prosperity, the political group intertwined with the Koch network, was knocking doors in New Hampshire. The group is presumably circulating the same literature in fellow early state South Carolina as well. That may or may not have been an expense as part of the $70 million the group has raised to spend against Donald Trump in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination race.

After all, nothing on that door hanger is particularly anti-Trump, but it does jibe with the initial steps the New York Times reports that AFP is taking in their process:
As they wait for the Republican field to winnow, top network officials are trying to pull off a difficult feat: changing who votes in Republican primaries. The network has a vast army of door-knockers, backed by tens of millions of dollars, who fan out across competitive states each election cycle to support candidates.

During these early months of the Republican presidential primaries, the network is dispatching these same activists to engage voters who are open to supporting somebody other than Mr. Trump. They are beginning a conversation with those voters, collecting data on them and raising doubts about Mr. Trump’s chances of winning a general election. They intend to return to these voters’ doors closer to the primaries to try to persuade them to vote for the network’s preferred candidate.

...
South Carolina Senator Tim Scott has made a new ad buy for Christian radio stations across Iowa. The $350,000 expenditure to air the ad, "Sanctity of Life," is meant to play up Scott's record of standing against abortion. 
Scott is competing in a crowded Republican field of 13 candidates including former President Donald Trump. The winner of past Iowa Caucuses gained the support of evangelicals, the largest voting bloc within the Republican base in Iowa. 
“Senator Tim Scott is a Christian conservative who believes that life is a gift from God. Scott has a 100 percent pro-life voting record, and he fought to put three new conservative justices on the Supreme Court, sending Roe v. Wade to the ash heap of history,” the ad’s narrator states. “As president, Tim Scott will protect our most fundamental right, the right to life itself.”

...
And Colorado has a new/old, totally unsurprising date for its presidential primary. Governor Polis and Secretary of State Griswold set the date of the contest for Super Tuesday March 5 next year in a press release on Thursday, June 29. Polis also placed the primary on Super Tuesday for the 2020 cycle as well, the first for the at-the-time newly reestablished presidential primary.


...
On this date...
...in 2015, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie entered the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.



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

Thursday, June 29, 2023

A different kind of non-endorsement in the Republican presidential race

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • One of the early tests of campaign organizational mettle will be in how able the candidates are in getting on the ballot across 57 states and territories in late 2023 and early 2024. Those hurdles often separate the wheat from the chaff in a competitive presidential nomination field. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
Normally, FHQ would not necessarily pay much attention to the musings of a random Republican congressperson from Nebraska. But Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE, 2nd) recently offered some interesting comments on the 2024 Republican presidential nomination race. Yes, the congressman has been outspoken and skeptical of Donald Trump, and earlier this month followed the lead of a few others in the US House and Senate who have unendorsed the former president.

But Bacon's comments on Wednesday highlighted anew the freezing effect that Trump's presence in the race and hold over a loyal segment of the Republican primary electorate continues to have:
“It is so important to have someone who unites more people than divides.”
...
“Someone like Tim Scott is an example. I haven’t endorsed him, but he has a message I really like right now. It’s about America’s best days are ahead, and about bringing people into the party — and the Reagan rule that if you’re with me 80% of the time, we’re on the same team; I don’t hate you.”
Perhaps, like South Dakota Senator Mike Rounds, Bacon is kind of sort of pre-endorsing the junior senator from South Carolina. Maybe he is still considering the non-Trump options (which is understandable). There remains a great deal of uncertainty in the race. But by not sending a direct signal of support for Scott, Bacon is also sending a signal. It is a non-endorsement that may elevate Tim Scott in some sense, but not nearly to the extent the Palmetto state senator wants or needs at this point in the race. And that would only seem to further buttress Trump, whether the former president is actually freezing would-be endorsers or not. 

...
The border issue animates the Republican Party base and Eagle Pass in Texas has become a popular stop for presidential candidates, upping the Lone Star state's value in the travel primary as primary season in 2024 approaches. It does not hurt that Texas has a Super Tuesday primary.


...
Jonathan Bernstein has a solid piece on Robert F. Kennedy Jr. up at Bloomberg. As he notes, presidential primaries define parties, but in elevating Kennedy, media on the right may only be redefining the Republican Party rather than hurting President Biden's chances on the Democratic side.

And Philip Bump has a nice companion item over at The Washington Post that shows that while Kennedy's support has not really increased since he entered the Democratic nomination race, his favorability has. 

...among Republicans (as they have sunk with Democrats). 



...
On this date...
...in 2012, Fred Karger's long shot bid for the Republican presidential nomination came to a close. 



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

Wednesday, June 28, 2023

A mid-week Invisible Primary Roundup

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Idaho Republicans voted over the weekend to hold caucuses next year contingent on there not being a March presidential primary in the Gem state. And there appears to be no momentum to bring the state legislature back for a special session to fix that. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
  • General election match ups were polled -- the first in the series (so there is no direct comparison) -- and President Biden was comfortably ahead of both Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis by the same 49-40 margin. Trump and DeSantis both ran further behind Trump's 2020 vote share in the Granite state (45 percent) than Biden did his (53 percent). Yes, it is one poll in one state 16 months before the next general election, the participants in which have not been identified yet. But that difference does not exactly suggest that Biden will be penalized in New Hampshire for the 2024 calendar shake up on the Democratic side. That is something to continue to eye (but probably in 2024).
  • Speaking of delegate allocation, neither Kennedy nor Williamson are close to qualifying for delegates in New Hampshire mired in the single digits in this survey. It does not speak to a groundswell of support for a Biden alternative (in a state where the president may not be on the primary ballot).

...
There are by no means no perils in Democrats changing the early state lineup on the 2024 presidential primary calendar, but this piece overstates just how "messy" things are. Folks, let the process play out. There is no date for the Iowa Democratic mail-in preference vote. If it comes in noncompliant, then one can cross the "mess" bridge. And seriously, Iowa Democrats are playing the game differently than their counterparts in New Hampshire. 

And New Hampshire? Well, that may end up being a mess and it may not. Perhaps Democrats in the Granite state will go the way of a (compliant) party-run process in the end. No, that is maybe not likely, but that possibility does exist and goes unmentioned in that piece. It is not just the DNC who can budge in this process. New Hampshire Democrats could defuse the situation as well.


...
Over at Tusk, Seth Market has a peek inside the news coverage of the Republican nomination race. And it is kind of revealing.


...
Ad spending has topped $70 million in the Republican presidential race. Who is spending where? Trump is on cable, DeSantis is focused on Iowa and South Carolina -- Never Back Down has this ad running during the nightly news on the regular in the Palmetto state in recent days -- and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum is throwing a lot at New Hampshire. 


...
From around the invisible primary...
  • In the endorsement primary, another raft of state legislative endorsements came the way of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. 19 legislators, including the House Majority Leader Josh Bell threw their support behind DeSantis. So did Supreme Court Justice Phil Berger, Jr. 
  • South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem does not appear inclined to join the growing field of contenders for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, noting that "right now" there is no path for someone other than Trump. [This really cannot be considered winnowing. Although Noem's name was mentioned in those assessing possible candidate for 2024, she never really did the sorts of things that prospective candidates do.]


--
Posted by Josh Putnam at 5:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , ,
Share |

Tuesday, June 27, 2023

DeSantis and Trump battle to influence state-level delegate rules for 2024

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • There may be some missing pieces at this point in the invisible primary, but there is a general idea about where the 2024 presidential primary calendar will end up. However, what about filing deadlines? When do candidates and their campaigns have to clear hurdles to get on the ballot in the various primaries and caucuses next year? All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
It is not exactly news that Donald Trump and his campaign have been working state parties in order to assemble as advantageous a set of state-level delegate selection rules for the former president as possible for 2024. The Washington Post ran a story in February that covered similar ground and also brought up Idaho and Michigan as battlegrounds on that front. 

But that is not to say that there is nothing (or nothing new) in the story about Team Trump pushing for rules changes on the state level up at Reuters today. One just has to dig and parse a bit to get at it. 

Yes, Nevada is in the mix, but questions about whether the early contest in the Silver state would be a primary or a caucus are not new. In fact, the primary calendar filling out still hinges on that decision to some degree. A lesser degree than before South Carolina Republicans weighed in recently, but the decision Nevada Republicans will make still matters. 

And Missouri is a bit of a wildcard as well. The legislature's inability to restore the presidential primary for 2024 in the Show-Me means that there is some mystery in -- if not jockeying by the candidates to influence -- what rules Missouri Republicans settle on in the coming weeks and months. 

Those states make some sense. Each was, has been or will be up for grabs in terms of what the delegate selection rules will look like. 

But Alabama? 

That is an interesting one. It is one that the DeSantis campaign is eyeing and over the threshold to win delegates. Importantly, Alabama Republicans have used a system that requires candidates to win 20 percent in order to qualify for delegates in recent cycles. [The Yellowhammer State was a truly winner-take-all state before 2012.] Yet, 20 percent is the maximum at which a state party can set the qualifying threshold. If there is any change there, then it will be to a lower level than 20 percent. 

That is noteworthy and hints at some underlying strategic direction from Team DeSantis that has not really been adequately explored out there. Part of that lies in the qualifying thresholds that the Florida governor is flirting with in some cases. But another is the assumption that caucuses are good for Trump. That could turn out to be the case. The former president did not necessarily excel in the format in 2016, but the complexion of state parties have changed some in the time since, moving toward Trump in some respects. And that suggests that there may be a real battle in caucus states like the above once the calendar flips to 2024. Until then -- or October 1 anyway -- the lobbying continues.


...
The headlines today all seemed to read that Trump had expanded his lead in first-in-the-nation New Hampshire. And indeed the former president pulled in just south of 50 percent in a pair of new polls released from the Granite state. But FHQ scrolled down a little further to see where everyone else was. 

Why?

Delegates are on the line. No, the New Hampshire primary has never been about delegates. There will only be 22 at stake there some time in January next year. But here is the thing: Trump has a sizable lead, and it is just the former president and DeSantis who qualify for delegates. Even with a fairly low 10 percent qualifying threshold, no one else would be in the running for delegates out of the Granite state. Trump would take somewhere in the range of 16-17 delegates and DeSantis would take the rest. No, it is not about the delegates in New Hampshire, but even Jeb Bush got three in 2016. 

And this is yet another illustration of just how much oxygen the pair are taking up in the race for the Republican nomination. It is crowding others out even though it is somewhat lopsided at this moment in the invisible primary. 


...
From around the invisible primary...

...
On this date...
...in 2011, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann officially launched her bid for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. 

...in 2019, Democratic presidential candidates gathered for the second of two consecutive nights of debates in Miami, the initial primary debates of the 2020 cycle. 

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

Monday, June 26, 2023

DeSantis Deemphasizing New Hampshire?

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...
  • Are Iowa Democrats creating a calendar headache for the national party? A closer look at the delegate selection plan from Democrats in the Hawkeye state being found noncompliant. Plus a glance at the decisions Idaho Republicans made over the weekend. All the details at FHQ Plus.
If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.


In Invisible Primary: Visible today...
...
There are still six plus months until the likely New Hampshire primary, so FHQ will not make a mountain out of this molehill. But it is interesting that Team DeSantis has pulled back a bit in New Hampshire in recent weeks. It is not a withdrawal. This is no skipping story. But at the same time, it is not necessarily a strategic blunder for DeSantis to potentially deemphasize the Granite state in his pursuit of the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. 

The early calendar is not about delegates, but New Hampshire offers the fewest delegates of the four early states and allocates them proportionally with a 10 percent qualifying threshold. That is a low bar for a handful of candidates to possibly clear and divvy up a few more than 20 delegates. DeSantis will likely need a win early, but it could be that libertarian-leaning New Hampshire is not the best fit for the culture warrior role DeSantis appears to be filling. It would not necessarily be a bad move not to go all in in such a state. There may be wins and the delegates to be had elsewhere. 

No, New Hampshire will not be a state to skip. If the battle turns into one over delegates in the long run, then it may be a state where someone like DeSantis takes what he can get and moves on to better opportunities in other states. That is not a skip, folks. DeSantis and company will be in the Granite state. The coming weeks and months will tell us whether he will be all in there or not. 


...
Amy Walter had a good one late last week at Cook Political Report about 2024 not being 2016 on the Republican side. FHQ weighed in on the subject when DeSantis jumped into the race. But Walter adds some solid detail on Trump's positioning now versus then.


...
Yes, super PACs are raising and spending a lot of money in the 2024 presidential race. Sure, they are, in some cases, pushing the legal limits on what they can do. But the super PAC era is very much an evolutionary one. And it remains an open question whether those entities can be as efficient and effective as traditional campaigns in some of those duties. That stands out as the primary hypothesis that will be tested this cycle on the presidential level where super PACs are concerned. Can they be as effective? Will they be as effective?


...
From around the invisible primary...

...
On this date...
...in 2019, Democratic presidential candidates gathered for the first of two consecutive nights of debates in Miami, the initial primary debates of the 2020 cycle. 

Posted by Josh Putnam at 5:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , ,
Share |
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)