"We think the convention has become a bit of a formality," said former Nevada Gov. Robert List, an executive board member who voted to approve the move. "Our nominee will be decided by then. Forfeiting a few delegates is not nearly as important as preserving the very important role Nevada has now as an early voting state."
Tarkanian held out hope Nevada could work something out with the RNC to allow all of its delegates some role at the convention.
GOP Committeewoman Heidi Smith was the only member of the executive board who voted against moving the caucuses to January. She said it wasn't worth losing delegates or violating the rules.Scrap those Nevada in February scenarios and let's get back to the question at hand. While a date for the Nevada Republican caucuses was not set yesterday, the state party chose not to alter the newly enacted rule that links the Republican caucuses in the Silver state with the primary in New Hampshire. That would place the Nevada Republican caucuses on the Saturday following New Hampshire, a violation of New Hampshire state law.
Here again are the likely scenarios:
Option 1 (New Hampshire waits out Nevada and goes 11 days earlier)
Monday, January 2: Iowa
Tuesday, January 10: New Hampshire
Saturday, January 21: Nevada
Saturday, January 28: South Carolina
Tuesday, January 31: Florida
Option 2 (Nevada chooses a non-Saturday to hold caucuses)
Tuesday, January 10: Iowa (BCS championship on January 9 pushes Iowa to Tuesday)
Tuesday, January 17: New Hampshire
Tuesday, January 24: Nevada
Saturday, January 28: South Carolina
Tuesday, January 31: Florida
Option 3 (New Hampshire breaks its own law)
Tuesday, January 10: Iowa (BCS championship on January 9 pushes Iowa to Tuesday)
Tuesday, January 17: New Hampshire
Saturday, January 21: Nevada
Saturday, January 28: South Carolina
Tuesday, January 31: Florida
Option 3a (New Hampshire opts for a non-Tuesday primary date)
Saturday, January 7: IowaThe final calendar, then, hinges on how the showdown between New Hampshire and Nevada is resolved. History and the mechanics of primary/caucus movement are not on Nevada's side. New Hampshire will not break its own law and the legislature there is unlikely to chance it to accommodate Nevada. The possibility also exists for New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner to set the primary in the Granite state for a day other than Tuesday. That option, however, is a stretch in FHQ's opinion. That is why we list it as a suboption and not a separate scenario of its own. New Hampshire doing anything other than holding a primary at least a week prior to any similar contest just isn't in the cards.
Saturday, January 14: New Hampshire
Saturday, January 21: Nevada
Saturday, January 28: South Carolina
Tuesday, January 31: Florida
...and Secretary Gardner knows it.
That is why we should all buckle in and prepare for three weeks of "primaries in December" talk. There will not be December primaries or caucuses, but that doesn't mean that we won't hear the threat of New Hampshire breaking the barrier into 2011 from every corner of the Granite state for the next few days and weeks. That threat is the only tool Bill Gardner has left at his disposal as leverage in this dispute with Nevada Republicans. The question is will Nevada Republicans call his bluff.
And it is a bluff. Nothing would threaten Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina and their privileged positions at the front of the calendar more than for one or more of those states to jump into the calendar year prior to the presidential election. Florida has already -- once again -- raised the issue of the inherent in a set of toothless penalties, but a December Iowa caucus or New Hampshire primary would put on the tables at both national parties a deeper reexamination of the rules around the nomination process if not the process itself.
In other words, it would be terribly counterproductive and shortsighted for any of the early states to break the 2011 barrier. It would potentially be a short-term gain, preserving a position that might not exist in future cycles.
Perhaps.
But the focus should not be on Bill Gardner and New Hampshire. Instead, it should be on Nevada and the state Republican Party there. Look no further than Robert List's comments above. Nevada values their new early status. They don't want to lose that. Losing delegates is fine, but losing that spot is not. The December threat is a bluff, but ultimately Nevada will fold. Time is running out to set a date and Gardner can and will wait to set a date longer than virtually any other state. Iowa may hold out longer, but that's it. Nevada is not on that list. Why? The party still has to organize the caucus process, did not do a solid job of that in 2008 and is off to a slow start for 2012. A shorter run up to the Nevada caucuses is not in the Nevada Republican Party's best interest.
Again, Bill Gardner knows this and will use a steady drumbeat of December New Hampshire primary lines over the next few weeks. That and the backlash from it will likely wear on Nevada Republicans, forcing their hand, and likely triggering a revision of the Nevada Republican party rules to decouple the caucus date from the New Hampshire primary at the already-scheduled October 22 Nevada Republican Party State Central Committee meeting.
Georgia alum just got a shout out on Meet the Press. Awesome! Great work Josh
ReplyDelete- A proud UGA POLS M.A. candidate