How much influence will Florida have?
The big question mark of the primary season is shaping up to be Florida's influence. Set for January 29th, Florida will be the first huge state to vote, a week before other major states like CA, NY or IL join the fray. It seems obvious that whoever wins Florida will have significant momentum going in Tsunami Day on Feb. 5th. And with Clinton and Guiliani the favorites in FL (with leads that exceed their national ones, and with very significant organizational advantages), Florida is being described as their "firewall." If everything goes wrong in the early states -- at least there is Florida coming! A Guiliani campaign memo obtained yesterday by the Washington Post demonstrated his reliance on the Sunshine State; citing newspaper articles that explore Guiliani's FL advantage, the memo explains how the campaign plans on building on this advantage and making sure they close the door on competitors. This strategy is particularly worrysome for Edwards and Romney, the two candidates that rely the most on early states. Edwards faces a make-or-break Iowa, and Romney has built substantial leads in IA and NH. But a win there would not do them much good if they cannot build momentum in later states.
The first problem with the firewall strategy is the shifting calendar. Last week, Michigan leapfrogged ahead of FL to January 15th, which is pushing IA and NH in very early January. MI is the best Romney early state (his father was Governor), and it can certainly rival FL in "big state" status. Does Guiliani (and to a much lesser extent Clinton) really expect to go a full month from January 5th (IA) to January 29th losing contests and still be a frontrunner once he gets to Florida?!
The push forward by these other states could very well be the undoing of Florida's influence. The momentum a competitor would built in those three weeks would likely be very strong - as a point of comparison, Dean's double digit New Hampshire lead in 04 melted overnight after his Iowa debacle. This isn't to say Guiliani won't win the early states, but the drawn-out January calendar certainly puts in question his "I have Florida as a firewall if I lose the early states" strategy.
Now, add to this intrigue the warfare between the national parties and the state parties. Both the DNC and RNC rules state that no primary can be set for before Feb. 5th except for IA, NH, NV and SC. Florida is violating these rules, and the DNC was the first to threaten the state party with sanctions. The DNC announced last week it would strip Florida of all of its delegates. The Florida Dem party has no plans of doing so, and is now threatening to sue the DNC to get its delegates sitted! The RNC has now joined in, with its own plans of stripping Florida of its delegates.
This would end up making FL a "beauty contest," and many campaigns have indicated they would be reluctant to compete if the race offered them no delegates. With 20+ states coming up a week later, campaigns don't have the time or money to compete in a no-delegate primary. This would definitely reduce FL's influence dramatically. Rival campaigns would cede the state to Clinton and Guiliani without a fight and the media would cover the primary accordingly. They might get a slight bump, but it would not help them catch up in delegate numbers - and it would not provide them the strength of a secure firewall.
The first problem with the firewall strategy is the shifting calendar. Last week, Michigan leapfrogged ahead of FL to January 15th, which is pushing IA and NH in very early January. MI is the best Romney early state (his father was Governor), and it can certainly rival FL in "big state" status. Does Guiliani (and to a much lesser extent Clinton) really expect to go a full month from January 5th (IA) to January 29th losing contests and still be a frontrunner once he gets to Florida?!
The push forward by these other states could very well be the undoing of Florida's influence. The momentum a competitor would built in those three weeks would likely be very strong - as a point of comparison, Dean's double digit New Hampshire lead in 04 melted overnight after his Iowa debacle. This isn't to say Guiliani won't win the early states, but the drawn-out January calendar certainly puts in question his "I have Florida as a firewall if I lose the early states" strategy.
Now, add to this intrigue the warfare between the national parties and the state parties. Both the DNC and RNC rules state that no primary can be set for before Feb. 5th except for IA, NH, NV and SC. Florida is violating these rules, and the DNC was the first to threaten the state party with sanctions. The DNC announced last week it would strip Florida of all of its delegates. The Florida Dem party has no plans of doing so, and is now threatening to sue the DNC to get its delegates sitted! The RNC has now joined in, with its own plans of stripping Florida of its delegates.
This would end up making FL a "beauty contest," and many campaigns have indicated they would be reluctant to compete if the race offered them no delegates. With 20+ states coming up a week later, campaigns don't have the time or money to compete in a no-delegate primary. This would definitely reduce FL's influence dramatically. Rival campaigns would cede the state to Clinton and Guiliani without a fight and the media would cover the primary accordingly. They might get a slight bump, but it would not help them catch up in delegate numbers - and it would not provide them the strength of a secure firewall.
2 Comments:
Have there been any elections in which a candidate picked up a large number of states after losing the first few, including New Hampshire and Iowa? I wonder whether the main question here is not whether candidates can maintain their status among the voters but instead among their fundraisers. Even if Guiliani loses early states, like Michigan, can't he assume that people in Florida won't suddenly change their minds against him. (I increasingly think it's unlikely that Clinton will lose any of the early states.)
Most importantly, though, I think your comment about Dean is unfair - it's not comparable. Not only had his influence in the national race already been diminished by the time Iowa came around because of the assumption that Edwards and Kerry were more electable, but his outburst was so surprising and (to the media) inappropriate/exploitable that it pushed his poll numbers down elsewhere. It was not because he had lost Iowa.
By Anonymous, At 29 August, 2007 16:26
michael kors handbags, kate spade, nike air max, michael kors outlet online, nike air max, replica watches, cheap oakley sunglasses, uggs on sale, louis vuitton outlet online, ralph lauren outlet, ralph lauren polo, ray ban sunglasses, michael kors outlet online, michael kors outlet, burberry factory outlet, burberry outlet, oakley sunglasses, louboutin uk, nike outlet, uggs on sale, oakley sunglasses, tiffany jewelry, cheap jordans, tiffany jewelry, prada handbags, michael kors outlet store, louis vuitton, longchamp bags, louis vuitton outlet, gucci handbags, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton handbags, christian louboutin, louboutin shoes, tory burch outlet, christian louboutin, prada outlet, oakley sunglasses, michael kors, uggs on sale, longchamp outlet, uggs outlet, ray ban sunglasses, uggs outlet, replica watches, nike free
By oakleyses, At 28 October, 2015 22:28
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home