The American Spectator : Who's On First?

Text Size

Who's On First?

Once again Washington Republicans are telling Florida Republicans what choices to make.

TAMPA -- Considering the overall importance in 2012 of getting Barack Obama back to attempting to organize a community smaller than the United States, you'd think national Republicans would want to keep their eyes on this ball to the exclusion of all else. But, maybe not.

There's appears to be a counterproductive and pointless intramural squabble brewing between the Republican National Committee and one of the biggest and most important Republican states over who's on first.

The whole business is reminiscent of the National Republican Senatorial Committee's 2009 attempt to choose Florida's U.S. Senate candidate. After conservative Republican Marco Rubio announced for the office, the NRCS showered kisses and money all over liberal Florida governor Charlie Crist, then the Democrats' favorite Republican. Crist didn't even remain a Republican through to the election, which Rubio won by 20 points. Learning nothing from this sorry episode, the RNC now wishes to determine when Florida may have its presidential primary.

The Florida Legislature has set the date of the 2012 Florida Presidential primary at January 31. The RNC has taken the eccentric position that the heavens will fall if any state save the favored precincts of New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, and Nevada let their presidential preferences be officially known before the first Tuesday in March. RNC Officials say this is so important they have agreed with the Democratic National Committee to penalize states who attempt to cut the line. The reaction of most Florida Republicans to this is, "Huh? Get outta town!"

It would take a wilier political analyst than I've ever encountered to figure out a way a Republican could win the White House in 2012 without Florida's 29 electoral votes (buffed up from an already hefty 27 before the 2010 census). Not only this, but Tampa will host the 2012 Republican convention, the principal purpose of which is to give the Republican presidential ticket a big national send-off.

So why is the RNC threatening to diss its convention hosts and help the media generate all manner of negative stories by threatening to penalize Florida convention delegates if Florida has its presidential primary earlier that the RNC considers seemly? The folks there don't really want to say.

So far the RNC has been doggedly taciturn on this subject. When I asked why it's so important that four small states that are hardly representative of the nation should be guaranteed spots at the top of the primary lineup, I received two and a half pages of the RNC rules on this subject in impenetrable lawyerese. RNC spokesman Kirsten Kukowski -- a pleasant young woman who's only saying what her bosses tell her to -- gave me press release language about "preserving tradition" and "the integrity of the process" so general, so uninformative, and so narcoleptic that not only did I know no more after hearing her, I purposely made sure not to drive or operate heavy equipment for the rest of the day. It's really tough defending the indefensible (whatever the RNC is paying Kirsten, it's not enough).

I told her I'd like to know how the integrity of the voting process is put off if Republicans in Tampa, Jacksonville, and Orlando have their presidential say before those in Las Vegas, Reno, and Winnemucca. I also pointed out that Nevada only joined the early-bird states in 2008, with South Carolina and Iowa not that much earlier. So the "tradition" the RNC is hamstringing Florida with is hardly a venerable one. But she would say no more.

I also asked Kirsten to be added to the queue to speak with RNC Chairman Reince Priebus on this matter. But she said she didn't like my chances of getting through to him, and in any case he wouldn't say any more on this subject than she just had. So there it is. In the presence of this kind of stonewalling I can only conclude that there is a very flimsy reason to go to the wall for the favored four, or, more likely, there's no reason, it's just a policy.

And it's a policy Florida Republicans don't fancy. Florida has always been great fundraising territory for national Republican candidates, but until 2008 when the Florida Legislature moved the presidential primary to January, and lost convention delegates for doing so, Florida Republicans could only say who they wished to carry their banner after a nominee had been pretty much settled on. They'd like to have a say in the process somewhere commensurate with the importance of the nation's fourth largest state (soon to be third), and a very representative one, which contains every national demographic. A candidate who can win in Florida can win nationally. What better testing ground?

It's too soon to say if this one will be quickly resolved or will fester into a target-rich environment for left-stream media stories and commentary. "How can we trust the Republicans to run the country -- they can't even run themselves."

Florida State Senate President Mike Haridopolos (R-Melbourne) told me Friday he's optimistic that Florida and the RNC can come to an understanding, but says "Florida should go earlier" than it has in the past. He says he's not opposed to the favored four voting before Florida, but does not want to be deeper into the process than fifth. "Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida are bellwether states," He said. "But Florida is the richest nugget of the three by far. So it makes sense for Florida to go earlier, for candidates to spend more of their time here. There should be no threats here either way. We're going to work with our friends in the party."

Katie Betta, a spokesman for Florida House Speaker Dean Canon (R-Winter Park), says Canon is "not bound to the current date," but "doesn't see the date moving much or at all." She says Canon is "not inclined to cast a vote that would make Florida less important in the primary process."

Other Republicans I talked with about this issue, many of whom didn't wish to be quoted by name, were less diplomatic. "It's our grass-roots Republicans who will be hurt the most" if Florida has to wait as long to vote as the RNC wants, a high-ranking Republican official said to me. "Why are we even having this issue?" a Republican political consultant asked. Another characterized the RNC position as "empty threats." The easily distilled message here is: "Florida is big, diverse, and important, and we're not going to wait our turn anymore."

Stay tuned. Most Republicans hope this issue will resolve like the morning dew well before the convention. Right now the most reasonable course would be for the RNC to accommodate a state Republicans must win in 2012 to recapture the White House. President Obama inserted himself early into Wisconsin's budget battle on the side of the unions, but backed out when he realized it wasn't good politics to stick his nose into state business. Is there reason to hope that the folks at the RNC are at least as politically nimble as our rookie President?

About the Author

Larry Thornberry is a writer in Tampa.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (44) | Leave a comment

MikeD| 3.7.11 @ 7:33AM

Apparently the GOP doesn't understand what is necessary to win back the White House. It would not be possible for me to loathe any group more than I loath the democratic party, but I have to admire their ability to march in absolute lockstep. (They may be taking us off a cliff, but they'll be doing it in unison.)

The republicans would do well to learn some of the few positive aspects of the jackasses' tactics, instead of imitating barry's knee jerk reactions to anything that might make him look even worse than he usually does.

The GOP needs to get out of Florida's way and concentrate on avoiding the mistakes they made in the Senate races last November. Without their general incompetence we might have a Republican Senate right now. Maybe they'll learn something, but don't hold your breath.

emo| 3.7.11 @ 6:02PM

Get out of FL's way??? How about every other states' way as well. That way we can have a national primary on Jan 1st. The national GOP sets the rules. The states if they want to participate have to follow them

Alan Brooks| 3.7.11 @ 8:43PM

"Once again Washington Republicans are telling Florida Republicans what choices to make."

AS is a DC area magazine-- you are Northern pointy headed intelleckshuel carpetbaggers.
And NR is in New Yawk! caint hardly get more Yankee than that unless you-all live in Bean Town.

The Rightwing magazine industry is dominated by YANKEES!

Mark Shepler| 3.7.11 @ 7:35AM

It is a mystery Mr. Thornberry how, or why, the national Reps would meddle here after getting their clocks cleaned and image soiled in the Crist/Rubio fiasco. On the bright side, had it not been for their ham-handed interference Rubio's support might not have crystallized so early or as strongly with FL's rank and file Reps. Maybe they're interfering just because they can.

I have six children and sometimes it becomes a matter of principle to me to enforce my prerogatives. If I hear what amounts to a no or feet seem to be dragging way too slow in response to my requests the issue then becomes their obedience, not the original request. And on that I will not relent. There is only one truly capital offense in my household, figuratively speaking, and that is willful defiance. Maybe the RNC views its relationship like that, as a parent to its children, and is standing on its prerogatives, nothing more or less. But we Reps here in FL are not children and they not our parents or betters. Many think they know Longfellow's axiom, "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds". Like many things people think they "know" this is incorrect. He actually wrote, "A foolish consistency is the..." So that's what we may have here.

Their foolish consistency may also have its roots in another issue. The Rubio insurgency was also one of the great early battles between the Tea Party folks and the establishment Rep party. Down here it was seen as such and the respective positions on the issues, the candidates and the very process of the race a test of wills as to who was going control the FL reps or, more accurately, who the FL rep party was going to represent- the establishment, go-along-to-get-along RNC or the new Tea Party dynamism. It took a long time during the 2010 FL Senate race before the national Reps finally got a clue and with the new program.

I think what we have here is another skirmish in that conflict of wills. Are the Reps to remain the insider-baseball crowd or continue the transformation into a truly new, re-energized party of conservatism?

Dave Williams| 3.7.11 @ 12:24PM

Fine post, but it was Emerson who said the "consistency" thing. Right era & country, though.

A. C. Santore| 3.7.11 @ 1:45PM

Emerson wrote that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - emphasis on "foolish."

In my opinion it is a most "foolish" consistency to have the first two states be "caucus" states with "any party" caucuses.

Does anyone believe that that is the best way to select a Republican candidate? Not I!

If I were in charge of the Republican Party, I would find a way to require all states to have a party-only primary election.

No wonder we get weak candidates, when everyone declares the nomination over after a couple of caucus states have announced!

Mark Shepler| 3.7.11 @ 5:43PM

Well, there you are Dave and A.C.,

I thought I "knew" something that I, in fact, did not. I've lived long enough to bear my faux pas' gracefully, despite Dave's back handed compliment. :)

It remains a mystery to me why those caucuses have such an influence. We could each choose to ignore whatever interpretations from on high come of them, no? Just as we ignored the RNC's attempt to short-circuit our 2010 primary and anoint Crist our Senate candidate.

Indeed, I predict we will see more of that in the next election cycle. The Tea Party and fed-up conservatives within the Rep party will not be yoked to the conventional wisdom of the party pros and pols, odds and opinon makers and talking heads. Just as they fell in behind their candidates despite all the pooh-poohing from the insider crowd. It's going to be a very interesting.

samthesham| 3.7.11 @ 6:59PM

Hats off to you for nailing 'willful disobedience' in your children. Being around children might just be a pleasure again if all parents would just be consistent in this regard. School would again be a joy to teach. The bottom line is personal responsibility by you and by your children.
Also, I've had it with the RNC. I will give them no more money after their shameful behaviour with that Scazifavo (sp) woman. I only donate to individual candidates.

Lawrence of Lutz| 3.7.11 @ 8:29AM

The RNC needs to be reminded:This is your last chance to step away from the "me too ism" of the social democrats. Stand up for the individual, or come the next election cycle, a new party will take over. Yes, the democrats may win, but republicans will no longer exist.

emo| 3.7.11 @ 6:04PM

how in the world is enforcing party rules socialist? Where is the socialism here?

Bob K.| 3.7.11 @ 8:51AM

Is the Chairman's name Reince Priebus or Prince Reibus? He certainly is acting as if it were the latter!

Danny Boy| 3.7.11 @ 9:00AM

I don't pretend to have any solutions to the problem of when the primaries are held. I believe however that both NH and IA have state laws which mandate them to have their votes first, so where does this all end? The first primary for the 2016 election held on Nov. 7, 2012?

ds80| 3.7.11 @ 11:48AM

Danny Boy,

I believe however that both NH and IA have state laws which mandate them to have their votes first

... and how is this relevant?

WJ| 3.7.11 @ 12:00PM

Confused that ds80 is confused in how Danny Boy's comment is relevant.

Where does it end in which state is in the first group? That question is relevant.

I think that a national political party should have a strong say in how that political party's primaries are held across the country.

ds80| 3.7.11 @ 12:05PM

NO, the point is that NH's state law(s) and IA's state law(s) re: "we vote first" is not the force of law in another sovereign state.

And for the record, I am not a resident of FL, NH, or IA.

Tim| 3.7.11 @ 9:29AM

The older I get, the more it seems to me that much of this can be attributed to establishment types fearing a loss of status.

"We must hold the line. If we give in on this, we'll find ourselves running primaries after those hicks."

irish19| 3.7.11 @ 12:31PM

There you have it. The RNC wants to keep running things on the basis of whose "turn" it is to run for office. The idea that we, the actual voters, rather than the Beltway Illuminati, might differ, is why the primaries are set up the way they are, and why the RNC wants to keep them that way. The whose turn is it mentality is what gave us McCain, and could have given Fla. voters Crist.
This is not a game! As an old Chicago pol once said, "Politics ain't beanbag."

Nunya| 3.7.11 @ 2:21PM

Irish and Tim, I believe you are absolutely right on. It's just ANOTHER example of how the RNC is completely out of touch with their constituency--how they've moved into the Ruling Class mentality and why they're no better than the Democraps--they just move slower. Instead of reform they're looking to continue down the path that has taken this country to where we are today--more RINO's, more "reaching across the aisle", more of the same BS.

Someone above wrote that they would not send money to the RNC to distribute to candidates, they would send it directly to the candidtates themselves. I for one will NEVER send money to the RNC unless and until they get their collective heads out of their nether-regions and figure out that they are heading in the wrong direction. I won't be holding my breath...

Frisbee| 3.7.11 @ 10:00PM

I agree irish19: whatever process gave us W and then McCain, let's get rid of that process.

gazinya| 3.7.11 @ 10:07AM

This would be the perfect time to let the RNC know we are not going to go along with 'clever' anymore. These 'hats' that thought Scozzafozza was the best and brightest have been undone. If we are to redifine the RNC and the whole Repub Party then we must let these party machinists know that we do not do 'clever'. We do Constitution and that means 'individual states rights'. If enough of us just told the RNC to pug off and not to open their machinist mouth until every state has provided them with THEIR candidate using THEIR process then we may have a chance. We must stop trying to 'out think' the Lucfarians now in authority. They can't be defeated using the same tactic. We must think like 'principle before personality'. We fight against more than just stupid ideas but godlessness and that can be defeated with honor and integrity. If we lose the vote we still have our honor.

Warrior| 3.7.11 @ 10:22AM

Preserving tradition???? How about the RNC standing up for little "r" republican values? How about giving us a some Conservative candidates to choose from instead the of the moderate to liberal big "R" Repulicans. The idiots running the RNC are failing to heed the TEA Party message. They fail to understand that people for the most part have stopped identifying themselves as Repulicans and are independent minded Conservatives.

Maddox| 3.7.11 @ 10:52AM

Absolutely! How about preserving The Constitutional principles that have worked to America's benefit for over 200 years? It wasn't written to empower and enrich Democrats, Republicans, or any government.

Joe D.| 3.7.11 @ 10:39AM

I would have to say all of you states are getting rediculas about who's first, second, etc. Florida is important if for no other reason then 29 Electorial votes. Why don't we have every state on 1/2/??. The candidates have to have time to go to each state and make there case.

Can't we all just get along.

irish19| 3.7.11 @ 12:32PM

Scheduling all of the national primaries within several days is an excellent idea!

Hillel| 3.7.11 @ 10:45AM

Each state makes its own ballots. If Florida passed a law stating that if its delegates were excluded from the national convention, that party's name would not be on the ballot,I think the partys would sing a different tune.

emo| 3.7.11 @ 6:06PM

I think that all FL GOP candidates would lose if that were the case including all those in the legislature dumb enough to pass such a law.

Dixie Pixie| 3.7.11 @ 11:03AM

...."the integrity of the process"....
WTF.....What integrity did the RNC ever have????

In my region, the local and state Republican Committees loyally supported the national leadership in all things.
As a result the voters were given the back of the pack voting slots.
Each election cycle the voters were given the choice of voting for a depleted field of primary candidates after the front runner had enough votes for the nomination.
Obviously the primary election was considered a joke vote as the frontrunner had already sown up the nomination.
Not surprisingly the state delegation arrived at the convention with zero clout as their political support was a freebie.

One day the local Republicans decided they were tired of being ignored by the RNC.
They moved the primary date forward in the election year.
Yes, the RNC threatened the state delegation with the lost of convention votes as if that mattered.

Suddenly because of the move, the states votes mattered in the primary election cycle.
Presidential candidates started to show up after long ignoring us.
With our votes in play , our concerns became important to the national leadership.
We were important because our votes made a difference in the election cycle.

So my advice to the Florida officials in to move the date forward and ignore the RNC.
If they don't the the RNC will ignore the Floridian voters as unimportant.

Been there, done that.
There is nothing worse than being the "back of the pack".
Political loyalty is not rewarded by the RNC.

Tina Trent| 3.7.11 @ 11:35AM

Haridopolos is worse than a RINO -- he's a fraud. Like Rubio, he arranged a highly-paid, set-aside, non-compete (ie. fake) teaching job for himself at an institution for which he determined funding. Then he mysteriously received a giant check from a community college for an unpublished(!) "book" (really a pamphlet) for which he'd already been paid a token grant to write.

Community colleges, of course, aren't normally in the business of paying people to pretend to write books that aren't even published.

So what are Florida voters to do? The party leadership here is embarrassingly (read, petty set-aside graft, fiscal fraud) corrupt and out-of-touch. There are many active local tea party groups throughout the state who have little motivation to tolerate their shenanigans anymore. We lack reputable leadership, though we've been graced with some excellent candidates (not Rubio, who also dipped into the taxpayer pot, but West) But one more slap in the face, and the party is going to create an ugly crisis that may play out at the convention. The last time I spoke with a Party official, he told me that chronic and appropriate discontent on the part of otherwise loyal voters was a serious problem for them.

It is all about a certain class of politicos retaining power. That's apparently more important to them than serving the public.

blackwatch| 3.7.11 @ 11:45AM

whichever states go first we must end the insanity of open primaries and/or no same day party switching, or allowing "independents" to vote for the Republican of choice. Only Republicans who bothered to register as Republicans 30 days or more prior to the primary should be allowed to vote in a Republican primary.

Thank you NOT to the Independent voters of NH for John McLame's epic failure candidacy.

JimH| 3.7.11 @ 12:48PM

Remember, this is not a Federal versus States rights issue. This is an intra-organizational issue. It is as if the state chapter of the Moose lodge had a problem with the national organization. As for the Republicans, the rights of the national organization would be determined by the bylaws of the party, the contents of which I am not familiar. That being said, the national organization is being ham handed in how they are dealing with this. And Florida, where I, a Republican, have resided lo these past 10 years has to realize not everyone can be first. My own notion is that there should be a lottery every four years. Or maybe precedence can be established by the largest percentage of votes for Republican candidates in the previous election.

Al Adab| 3.7.11 @ 2:21PM

The GOP hierarchy often favors the wrong person or the wrong issue for some perceived political gain. The track record is not a good one with a littered trail of lost elections (Dole, McCain) and failed ideas. Even extending to the local level, all too often the Party first in become the favorite when others would serve more ably. It is a common failing. While the other side selects, positions and funds its people agressivly, the GOP suffers internicine battles which increase disunity and endanger otherwise potential gains. Time and again the GOP has failed the Conservative Movement.

CalMark| 3.7.11 @ 2:46PM

Here we go again--the Republicans committing suicide. They're teaming up with Democrats to punish primary election "miscreants" like Florida.

The GOP's treacherous, immoral behavior (interfering with local politics AND collaborating with the enemy) aside, when do Democrats ever agree to anything that harms them? The "Corporate GOP" rushes to make suicidally stupid deals to show how "bipartisan" they are, which the Democrats use to beat their brains in.

GOP "leaders" are nothing but leftist losers not talented or ruthless enough to be Democrats. They seem to like having Democrats in charge. That way, we get socialism without Republicans taking any blame, allowing perpetuation of the phony 2-party system that really takes orders from the DNC. And the talentless nobodies who run the GOP get invited to all the cool parties where they get pats on the back for bipartisanship.

There are few things to admire about the Democrats, but loyalty to their base is one of them. There even fewer things to admire about the GOP, and loyalty to the base is definitely NOT one of them.

Dai Alanye| 3.7.11 @ 2:50PM

This strikes me as a thoughtless article, only concerned with Thornberry's provincial boosterism. It's one thing for the RNC or any Washington concern to pick Florida's candidates, but the party has every right to get involved with matters like primary order. If the competition for first place continues we'll soon have primaries occurring in December of this year.

As a practical question, what could be worse than having big states go first? The primary votes of small states would become meaningless, and candidates wouldn't be tested in the minor contests. Better by far to go in reverse order of electoral votes, with states like Wyoming and Delaware going early in the process. Shove New Hampshire a bit farther down the line, and let South Carolina take its proper turn.

By the time Florida, Texas and California became involved the field of candidates would be well winnowed, and the mistakes and mistaken individuals revealed in all their gooey and disgusting RINO-ish weaknesses.

As far as the Iowa straw poll, let it be consigned to the dustbin of American electoral history. All it amounts to is a vote-buying spree and sop to Hawkeye egos.

loulou| 3.7.11 @ 4:11PM

The RNC is completely irrelevant which is why no one gives them any money.

They need to be focusing on how to keep the Democrats from polluting our primaries to foist another McCain on us. Oh, wait--the RNC worked with the Dems on that one.

tom B| 3.7.11 @ 4:31PM

I have an idea, just do away with the primaries all together and let the news media run a couple of polls then get together and decide who each party should run. Hey laugh, I am joking!!!!

I kind of like the idea of the ststes in different regions of the country to have their primaries together and then rotate each election.

emo| 3.7.11 @ 6:01PM

he conveniently forgets to mention that the Democrat delegates were not seated at the 2008 Dem convention and Obama won Florida anyway. In fact it was both MI and FL moving their democrat primaries that caused Hilary to lose the nomination. If she had won those two states as she would have and had the delegates count, Hillary would be President today.

The point is it is the National GOP's convention. They can choose the rules. If a greedy state doesnt want to play along, their delegates wont be seated. Those are the rules.

emo| 3.7.11 @ 6:11PM

Not a single poster has come up with a rational reason why FL should be allowed to move their primary earlier if it violates pledges the GOP has given to IA, NH and SC. A lot of posters here, in fact nearly all, think this is some type of state's rights 10th amendment issue or a Ruling Class v Country Class issue. It is neither. What posters here are doing allowing their general disgust of the national GOP to cloud their thinking. FL is clearly in the wrong. If they want to play they have to follow the rules the national GOP lays out for them. The Dems invalidated the primaries in MI and FL in 2008. Didnt cause them to lose those states.

missbosslady| 3.8.11 @ 12:54AM

Rational Reason #1: Florida has 29 Electoral Votes.

The End

RJ| 3.8.11 @ 12:42AM

In football, television determines the game time. Maybe politics have fallen so low in seriousness that the media dictates when primary elections are held as part of its entertainment scheduling.

As a Californian, I always hope we go last, after the candidates are already well known and I don't mind that the race is usually decided before it gets to us - it is better for the nation.

missbosslady| 3.8.11 @ 12:52AM

I have been a Floridian for almost 40 years and have watched the state grow from a well kept secret into a mega state. There is a ton of money in Florida!

Sadly, Republicans managed to lose a state, that twice cast their votes for Bush, watching it turn blue in the 2008 Presidential election.

However, we are fast learners and in 2010 we sent Allen West and Marco Rubio to Washington. We also removed Alan Grayson from office as the bonus kicker. Our new Republican governor is looking strong out of the gate and the state house is firmly in Republicans hands.

Florida has become a political must have. The RNC best tread lightly, there is far too much at stake to play games with the Sunshine State, or any other state for that matter.

Who g0es first and who goes last, please, this is chicken sh*t stuff, realtively speaking. Most people will not care about the primary line-up, but the liberal media and polticians will find much fodder in any dissention.

Pelligrino| 3.8.11 @ 3:20AM

My very real concern is one I have posted twice previously after AS articles:

The order of the primaries does matter.

And if your state's primary is after Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, and Florida, well, simply put, you as an American voter do not matter.

There are MANY smarter minds here and infinitely better historians:

Would one of them please post here where the ultimate GOP nominee for US President lost (or finished badly) in Iowa, NH, and the 3-4 states that followed BUT staged a comback in the later state primaries to win?

Everyone knows that we have a perversely lame media; 90% of it to include 'new media' types and even those pretending to be more conservative.

Using silly horse race metaphors, the media & liberal pols equate a New Hamsphire GOP primary win to....winnning big, like taking Ohio, Virginia, and Arizona.

Nope. If you are like 2/3 of the GOP voters intending to participate in your state's primary, you just don't matter. The 'contest' will be decided weeks prior to your state's primary date.

The 24/7 absurd media hype will tell you so; the candidate you prefer will somehow cite no monies in the campaign coffers and will have conceded 3-6 weeks before your poll opens for your vote.

Yes, you've been -- in street parlance -- fully 'dissed.' In this case, disenfranchised.

We really are a very screwy people even though we think ourselves so wise and as the beacon of hope for the free world. Our method for choosing the US president is idiotic.

Incidentally: Why would we be trusting any result out of Nevada after watching its horrible conduct in the US Senate race that culminated in a November 2, 2010 illegal win for Reid?

[I don't mind that Florida goes early this time. Florida and South Carolina are at least somewhat 'sane' states in this first batch.

The problem is: If a candidate finishes no higher than 3rd in the GOP primary in Florida WITH respectable results prior, he or she is out. Mark my words.]

Mike Rogers| 3.8.11 @ 5:32AM

Having moved to NH about 10 years ago, I can tell you why the small states matter - it's simple numbers: In a small state, all the people who care enough to be active can actually meet the candidates, usually more than once, and without great expense.
This is where the candidates can refine their retail politicking and find out whether real people can relate to them and their positions.
Better yet, the Tea party has taken over the GOP machinery of NH, and have guaranteed equal opportunities, not predetermined oucome, which will help to avoid another McCain disaster.
Top marks for astute pol? Tim Pawlenty was the first phone call congratulating the new NHGOP chairman on Jan 22nd.
Top marks for visibility - Herman Cain.
Surprisingly good ground game - Santorum.
Florida can move up, but they will pass NH at the party's peril.
Winning Florida is an exercise in TV buys - winning NH is an exercise in breakfast buys. Do we want the early momentum to simply go to the richest competitors? Do you really want the choice to be between Wrongney and The Trump? I don't!
Come spend a week or a month in NH during the season. Meet 'em all and take back the news to your friends - it's way closer than you'll get to the candidates anywhere else, unless you're a top-tier donor!

David| 3.8.11 @ 2:29PM

Change the rules in every state so that only registered republicans can vote in republican primaries. You can bet the left is getting better and better at learning how to screw up the repub primaries.

Do not give to the the RNC or the Repub Senatorial Campaign Comittee or to its equivalent in the House during the primaries or the general election. The committees have shown they can't be trusted to support the conservative candidates. Give directly to the most conservative individual candidatess