TAMPA — No one is keen on politicking over the Christmas
holidays. I certainly don’t want to mix political speeches with my
Christmas carols, though a certain kind of eggnog might make some
of the candidates go down better. But this year there may be more
of this than in years past as at least five states have moved, or
are likely to move, their presidential primaries or caucuses into
January.
So far Florida is getting the biggest share of blame for
this doleful outcome after a state panel appointed for the purpose
decided Florida would move its primary forward to January 31. This
has led the traditionally early primary and caucus states of Iowa,
New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, all of which had planned
to have their say in February, to leapfrog into January.
I’m trying not to be a homer here. But Florida gets the
full rap for this mixing of campaigning and cranberry sauce only if
one believes it is written on the heart of Man by the finger of God
that the traditional four must go first.
Other than divine interest, and there’s no evidence of
this so far, no compelling reasons exist for these four small and
untypical states to begin the business of choosing the next
president. In conversations with Republican National Committee
officials and both the Florida State Republican Committee Man and
Committee Woman, I’ve been unable to unearth any reason for this
sequence other than that, “This is how we decided it should be and
it’s a rule.” Also it’s asserted that this sequence is “a
tradition.”
As traditions go, this one is hardly venerable. New
Hampshire has indeed had a long history of hitting in the
presidential leadoff spot. But the Iowa caucuses have been around
for many fewer cycles, and South Carolina and Nevada only for the
last couple. So the argument from tradition is weak.
Another argument politically savvy types give for the
small states going first, though not one I heard from RNC
officials, is that a skilled retail campaigner with limited
campaign cash can make his/her case face to face in the confined
space of Iowa or New Hampshire. Forget TV ads. Packaging doesn’t
help here. Candidates have to convince voters standing right in
front of them.
I saw this up close and personal in the late summer of
2007 when I went to New Hampshire to do some political writing (OK,
I also caught a couple of Red Sox games, but I mostly went for the
politics). In a week I was able to meet and talk with all the major
Republican candidates (the Dems were elsewhere that week). One
weekday I told Mike Huckabee the same joke at lunch that I’d told
Tom Tancredo the night before at dinner. Not sure that I wasn’t a
New Hampshire voter, they both laughed.
There’s something to this retail campaigning business. But
how much? This year the Democrats know who will head their ticket,
and it’s unlikely there will be an underfunded Republican with a
winning case who needs the less expensive platforms of Iowa and New
Hampshire to get on the electoral map. And, with no disrespect
intended to the fine folks in both states, Iowa and New Hampshire
are hardly typical of the nation. There is a higher percentage of
evangelicals in Iowa than elsewhere. New Hampshire is majority
conservative with a strong libertarian streak. There are more
independents in New Hampshire than either Republicans or Democrats.
Both states are whiter than rice, and not just in the
winter.
The arguments for Nevada or South Carolina as early birds
are even weaker. Anyone who suggests that, “As Winnemucca goes, so
goes the nation,” risks being institutionalized.
Florida, on the other hand, is the United States writ
small. Actually, not all that small, with almost 19 million souls
calling Florida home. It’s the fourth largest state, and the
biggest swing state, there being little mystery about which column
California, Texas, and New York will find themselves in after votes
are counted in November 2012.
All the races, economic classes, and other important
political demographics exist in Florida in roughly the proportions
they exist in the nation. Florida is a proving ground with national
significance. A conservative candidate who can win in Florida in
January can win it all in November. And with 29 electoral votes,
more than 10 percent of the total necessary to get to the White
House, there’s no way for a Republican to retire our socialist
president without carrying Florida next year.
Not surprising then, Florida Republicans would like a say
in deciding who will run for president. They’d rather not wait till
the business is settled before they get to vote. Thus January
31.
Considering the importance of all this, we’re entitled to
wonder why national Republicans continue to say they will punish
Florida Republicans if they don’t set a primary date the nationals
consider seemly. The threat is the RNC will strip Florida of half
its convention delegates next August unless Florida slinks back
down the line where national Republicans say it belongs. Keep
writing those big contribution checks to candidates and to the
party, but otherwise do what you’re told, they say. RNC strategy
appears to be to insult and annoy the most important state to the
party’s success next year.
This approach is particularly toxic this cycle as the
Republican convention will be held in Tampa. What a great story
this will be for the main(left)-stream media, “National Republicans
Diss Host.” In how many interviews will Democrats croon, “How can
the Republican Party run the country? It can’t even run its
primaries.” Wouldn’t it be a better idea to try to put the focus on
the conservative candidate coronated at the convention rather than
on a pointless intra-mural squabble?
Barack Obama’s favorability ratings remain in the tank.
There’s little hope of his policies and his administration showing
themselves as anything but pluperfect failures between now and
Election Day. This one appears to be the Republicans’ to lose. But
they appear to be working on it.
Republican candidates get well-deserved hands at political
events when they speak out against pointless and damaging rules and
regulations that impair our economy and diminish our lives. Perhaps
it’s time for national Republican officials to revisit some of
their own.
