Saturday, July 22, 2006

DNC Changes Nomination Process

The DNC may soon make sweeping changes in how Democrats determine their nominee for president. South Carolina and Nevada may soon join New Hampshire and Iowa in holding early contests for the nomination.

From CNN:


If the measure is approved, Democrats will schedule four nominating contests before February 5, 2008, forcing the party's presidential hopefuls to expand their campaign efforts beyond the Hawkeye and Granite states.

The goal is to increase diversity in the nominating process, according to the DNC.
******
The Nevada caucus would fall between the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary, and South Carolina would hold a primary one week after the Granite State contest.


Anyone care to speculate on how this might affect Dodd's chances?


Source

Preston, Mark. "N.H., Iowa could have company on caucus calendar". CNN. 7/22/06

11 comments:

Chris MC said...

No effect at all.

Changes are long overdue. Whether or not these are the right ones remains to be seen.

ctkeith said...

This is Progress,

And one of the things most sane Dems were hoping Howard Dean could get done when we put him in as DNC chairman.

The too White and too rural two states that decided which two people are going to get the nomination of the two major parties was just too stupid to continue.

cgg said...

I agree CTKeith, and I think the current/old system had a lot to do with how our party ended up with Kerry instead of Dean.

GMR said...

I guess one of the advantages about having a long primary season is that relatively underfinanced candidates can go for everything in the first two states. If they win, then they can collect money for the next races.

IF there's a compressed schedule, then the candidate who raises the most money before the primaries start has a huge advantage. Even if he or she loses the first primary, there'll be enough money to continue while the others are scrambling for funds in $2,000 increments.

Kerry had easy access to funds last time, so I'm not sure that a compressed schedule would have helped Dean that much (except after the NH primary, he would have had two fewer state names to yell out, thus perhaps averting the need to do the scream).

Genghis Conn said...

Good. Our primary system is bizarre.

Anonymous said...

so Nevada, with one large transient city is more representative than states with huge small town citizen participation like NH and Iowa...
well Harry Reid delivered sometime as Sen. Dem leader, I suppose

BRubenstein said...

south carolina and nevada are conservative states whose dems tend to be less progressive then iowa and new hampshire....as i see it...it helps moderate dems more...count me as against this move..i for one wanna know where our state party was in lobbying to be near the front line...

progressives would have benefited more if instead of nevada and south carolina they had wisconsin and rhode island or even us.

Count on our state party chair nancy dinardo to be sleeping instead of advancing our interests.

Patricia Rice said...

Brubenstein: You seem to have a problem with anybody that supports Senator Lieberman. I have some bad news for you...Every big Democrat from President Clinton, Chris Dodd, all of our U.S. Reps and more are going to be pouring on the support for Joe in the next few weeks.

When the reasonable thinking people of our party realize how important their vote is and how the liberal left is attempting to hijack our party, Negative Ned and friends will be left out in the cold. Better bundle up Bruce but don't worry, the Green party is saving a nice warm blanket for you and your friends!

BRubenstein said...

Pat Rice...when you leave the party with Joementum please drop off your party card at state central...

The die is cast and no " big gun" coming in here is gonna change many minds.

Pat, if you are so confident that Joementum is going to win then whynot take me up on my wager offer?

Jim said...

This is a great move. While South Carolina and Nevada are politically conservative and moderate, respectively, the change in demographics for the nomination process is groundbreaking.

South Carolina Democrats are heavily African-American, and Nevada has a rapidly growing Hispanic population.

Both the political and demographic changes in moving up these two states will produce some much stronger nominees.

I'm curious as to what effects it will have in 2008. I suppose the politics of these states will help Evan Bayh, but Nevada could give Bill Richardson quite a boost.

Exciting stuff.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

I think the timing of the Nevada thing stinks. Nevada is no longer a cheap market- media buy in Vegas is expensive. It's hard to reach people on the retail level, so you'll just have an electronic warfare state. It's also logistically crazy- could you pick any states further apart?

The timing, the geography, the media market, the nature of politics does one thing- it favors the guy with the warchest. Message being equal, warchest wins.

My choices, if you were going to do this, would be West Virginia, Arkansas, MAYBE Kentucky. They would not produce you a Kerry. They are small states, cheap markets, and in between Iowa and New Hampshire, geographically. Additionally, it would provide a moderate counterweight- BECAUSE SHOULDN'T ELECTABILITY MATTER??