Need-to-Know Video

N2K: The Obama-JSOC Relationship is a Symbol of a Changing President

Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
May 5, 2011, 4:09 p.m.

A We The People/Check Point poll; con­duc­ted 9/29-10/4 by Wood Comm. Group; sur­veyed 400 LVs; mar­gin of er­ror +/- 4.9% (re­lease, 10/8). Tested: Sen. Russ Fein­gold (D) and busi­ness­man Ron John­son (R).

Gen­er­al Elec­tion Match­up

R. John­son 49% R. Fein­gold 41 Neither 1 Un­dec 8

(For more from this poll, please see today’s WI GOV story.)

Ima­gine an elec­tion with so many in­ac­curacies that of­fi­cials de­clare a win­ner; then de­clare a tie; then de­clare an­oth­er win­ner after two weeks. Ima­gine an elec­tion with rules so con­fus­ing that the me­dia is barred from ob­serving and the count takes two full days. Is this some Third World coun­try rig­ging the count, in des­per­ate need of elec­tion mon­it­ors? No — it’s Iowa and Nevada, and this year, it’s how the man who could be the next lead­er of the free world is be­ing picked.

Thanks to move­ments in­side both the Re­pub­lic­an and Demo­crat­ic na­tion­al com­mit­tees, 2012 may mark the end of this pres­id­en­tial nom­in­at­ing sys­tem. And Iowa and Nevada are the two states most likely to lose their coveted po­s­i­tions at the front of the cal­en­dar.
Pro­cess re­forms in­sti­tuted by both parties after the 2008 elec­tions achieved at least one key goal; though Re­pub­lic­an front-run­ner Mitt Rom­ney may not like it, a nom­in­at­ing pro­cess that ex­tends bey­ond the early states and well in­to the spring is ex­actly what party lead­ers in­ten­ded.

The most re­cent re­forms, led by Re­pub­lic­an Dav­id Nor­cross and Demo­crat James Roosevelt, en­vi­sioned a nom­in­at­ing pro­cess that starts in Feb­ru­ary and ex­tends for a few months. The goals: Give can­did­ates a break from hol­i­day-time cam­paign­ing; en­sure that can­did­ates with mod­est war chests can truly com­pete; and pro­duce a nom­in­ee  battle-tested in every re­gion who isn’t too bruised and blood­ied to com­pete in Novem­ber.

But the best-laid plans of Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans of­ten go awry, and sev­er­al states quickly made clear they wouldn’t abide by what ac­tu­ally amoun­ted to little more than a gen­tle­man’s agree­ment. Suc­cess­ful re­form must in­clude both car­rots and sticks that can in­centiv­ize a state for com­pli­ance or pun­ish it for hold­ing its nom­in­at­ing con­test out­side the rules. The sticks es­tab­lished in 2010 — namely, halv­ing a state’s con­ven­tion del­eg­a­tion and giv­ing them lousy hotel rooms — wer­en’t enough.

The primary pro­cess’s con­vo­luted rules have tripped some can­did­ates and re­war­ded oth­ers with hid­den ad­vant­ages. In 2008, the cam­paign of then-Sen. Barack Obama un­der­stood the del­eg­ate math bet­ter than then-Sen. Hil­lary Rod­ham Clin­ton’s cam­paign did, giv­ing Obama a string of caucus-state vic­tor­ies in Feb­ru­ary that built a del­eg­ate lead Clin­ton could nev­er over­come. This cycle, Rom­ney’s cam­paign has proven ad­ept at un­der­stand­ing the meth­ods by which a can­did­ate ac­tu­ally gets on the bal­lot, while Newt Gin­grich and Rick San­tor­um have each missed bal­lot dead­lines.

For dec­ades, as Iowa, New Hamp­shire, and South Car­o­lina dom­in­ated the early-primary pro­cess, oth­er states con­spired to snatch their in­flu­en­tial po­s­i­tion. It was Flor­ida’s ef­fort to jump to the front of the cal­en­dar that led Iowa to hold its caucuses on Jan. 3 this year, in­stead of Feb. 6 as ori­gin­ally planned (Flor­ida, which sets its primary by stat­ute, was the first to defy Re­pub­lic­an Na­tion­al Com­mit­tee rules). Michigan and Ari­zona, whose Feb. 28 primar­ies are ahead of the date al­lowed by na­tion­al parties, are also in vi­ol­a­tion. Caucus states, which do not bind del­eg­ates based on caucus res­ults but award them later through con­ven­tions, are not tech­nic­ally break­ing party rules.

The next round of re­form is likely to pun­ish both Iowa and Nevada. Already Iowa plays only a tiny role in the ac­tu­al del­eg­ate race. The straw poll con­duc­ted on Jan. 3 is ef­fect­ively mean­ing­less; by the time the state party al­loc­ates its del­eg­ates in June, the Re­pub­lic­an nom­in­ee will be ob­vi­ous. Iowa de­rives its power from the me­dia at­ten­tion it at­tracts — at­ten­tion it may not get again. Nevada Re­pub­lic­ans held a con­ven­tion four years ago that was marred by a fight between party lead­ers and fans of Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, many of whom said they were un­fairly barred from par­ti­cip­at­ing.

“I’m very hope­ful that in four years, people say, “˜I’m not spend­ing a lot of money and get­ting frost­bite if you can’t even count your votes,’ “ Nor­cross said.

“In Nevada, the fact that they screwed it up twice [in 2008 and 2012] really is in­ex­cus­able,” he ad­ded.

That may give primary states a bet­ter ar­gu­ment against caucus states for a place at the front of the line, es­pe­cially with New Hamp­shire, South Car­o­lina, and Flor­ida stand­ing in marked con­trast to caucus states.

“Primar­ies are usu­ally run by states,” Roosevelt said. “States know how to con­duct elec­tions. Parties, if they haven’t done that be­fore, have to learn.”
Be­cause Iowa and Nevada don’t ac­tu­ally al­loc­ate del­eg­ates un­til much later, they thrive only on me­dia at­ten­tion. Take away that and they lose their primary-elec­tion clout — something that more than a few seni­or mem­bers in both parties hope hap­pens.

“The best thing any­one can hope for out of Iowa is that the me­dia and the can­did­ates pay as much at­ten­tion to them as they de­serve, which is not much,” Nor­cross said.

Un­der­stand­ing the rules mat­ters; but even the greatest demo­cracy in the his­tory of the world still re­lies on meth­ods fraught with volat­il­ity and hu­man er­ror. Re­form is com­ing soon — the ques­tion is wheth­er the two parties can craft an agree­ment that gives them great­er con­trol over the way they pick the next lead­er of the free world.

 

What We're Following See More »
DEFERENCE TO PRESIDENT
More Republicans Trust Trump than GOP Members
27 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE
PAC WILL TARGET INCUMBENTS
Sanders Acolytes Taking the Movement Local
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

"While Democrats nationwide have put the focus on President Trump, the Sanders wing of the party has engaged in an intramural fight to remake the party in a more populist, liberal mold." From Washington state to California to Florida, Sanders loyalists are making good on their promise to remake the party from the ground up. And just last week, a "group of former Sanders campaign aides launched a super PAC with the explicit goal of mounting primary challenges to Democratic incumbents."

Source:
THANKS TO MILITARY ROLE
McMaster Requires Congressional Approval
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Congress will need to vote on Donald Trump's pick of Lt. General H.R. McMaster to be his next national security adviser, but not for the reason you think. The position of NSA doesn't require Senate approval, but since McMaster currently holds a three-star military position, Congress will need to vote to allow him to keep his position instead of forcing him to drop one star and become a Major General, which could potentially affect his pension.

Source:
THE QUESTION
How Many Signatures Has the Petition for Trump’s Tax Returns Received?
7 hours ago
THE ANSWER

More than 1 million, setting a record. More than 100,000 signatures triggers an official White House response.

Source:
SENT LETTERS TO A DOZEN ORGANIZATIONS
Senate Intel Looks to Preserve Records of Russian Interference
7 hours ago
THE LATEST

"The Senate Intelligence Committee is seeking to ensure that records related to Russia’s alleged intervention in the 2016 U.S. elections are preserved as it begins investigating that country’s ties to the Trump team. The panel sent more than a dozen letters to 'organizations, agencies and officials' on Friday, asking them to preserve materials related to the congressional investigation, according to a Senate aide, who was not authorized to comment publicly. The Senate Intelligence Committee is spearheading the most comprehensive probe on Capitol Hill of Russia’s alleged activities in the elections."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login