Aug. 23, 2006
BAYHAM ON POLITICS: Democrats to New Hampshire: Go to Second
By Mike Bayham
South Louisiana (Special to HNN) -- The Democratic National Committee this
past weekend shook up the 2008 presidential primary calendar making New
Hampshire, which established itself as the first primary of consequence over
a half century ago, second fiddle to South Carolina.
In telling the Granite State to go to second, the DNC might as well have
told New Hampshire, whose residents are fiercely proud of their unique
status as the sole locale for retail presidential politics, to go to Hell.
Actually New Hampshire will be fourth on the overall schedule, with its
primary being conducted after the Iowa and Nevada caucuses and the South
Carolina primary.
The change was intended as a sop to minority groups that traditionally
identify themselves as Democrats, with Nevada having a large Latino
population and South Carolina being almost 30 percent black.
The shift in the 2008 delegate selection schedule is the latest bold move by
DNC Chairman Howard Dean, whose tenure as party leader is assured of being
eventful if not successful pending on this year’s midterm elections.
Dean, who was called on the carpet for hypocrisy in a recent Manchester
Union-Leader editorial due to his previous support for New Hampshire’s
kickoff spot, could be accused harboring a grudge against the state whose
voters ended his 2004 presidential campaign’s hope for a rebound in the
aftermath of his Iowa post-caucus “I Have a Scream” rant.
The national media, playing the role of fickle Fortuna spinning her wheel,
will be the final arbiter of whether a win by Joe Biden in Nevada is page
two blurb-worthy or fit for the cover of Time.
Two factors will determine whether the media dotes on Nevada and South
Carolina with the same attention they generally shower upon Iowa and New
Hampshire: 1) if Hillary Clinton competes in them as the television cameras
will be there to cover her every sneeze and 2) if the Republican leadership
in Nevada and South Carolina move their contests forward as well.
If the GOP brass in those states balk, then the networks will probably give
the Democratic contests there scant attention, as they did to Louisiana and
Alaska’s early contests in 1996 when they leapfrogged New Hampshire and
Iowa.
Even though New Hampshire was worth only 21 Democratic delegates in 2004,
the state’s longstanding reputation of being first and the intense media
frenzy that descends upon a state that is small enough to crisscross in a
few hours, pending on the weather, makes it an ideal setting for people to
actually meet and converse with would-be presidents in a setting that does
not involve a red velvet rope.
What is unknown is how the candidates will react to the DNC rules. Will
the big names stand by New Hampshire and stay out of the newly anointed
second and third states on the calendar as a means of ingratiating
themselves with voters in the historically important primary state?
This is not without precedent as most high-profile Republican candidates
skipped Delaware’s early primary in 1996, though the boycott proved to be a
boon to Steve Forbes’s then flailing presidential bid by parlaying his
victory in the tri-county state, where he ran virtually unopposed, into a
surprising win in Arizona.
Also, stronger candidates that take a pass in deference to New Hampshire
could have their standing clipped by the emergence of candidates who scored
in the Nevada caucus and South Carolina primary if the news organizations
decide to give the rookie contests coverage.
US Senator Joe Lieberman and retired General Wes Clark, who went into the
2004 contests with healthy poll numbers, paid a bitter price for skipping
the Iowa caucuses.
On the other hand, maverick Republican John McCain took a powder on Iowa in
2000 and managed to handily beat George W. Bush in the New Hampshire primary
a week later.
Eight years prior, Iowa US Senator Tom Harkin entered New Hampshire with a
delegate count lead courtesy of unanimously winning his own state’s
uncontested caucuses, though Harkin’s “frontrunner” status was ignored while
Bill Clinton’s surprise second place finish in New Hampshire dominated the
news.
Perhaps the greatest significance of the calendar change won’t be felt until
November 2008 courtesy of New Hampshire voters disgruntled by the national
Democratic Party’s undermining of their cherished primary.
The state has swung both ways by less than 2% in the last two presidential
elections and it should not be forgotten that New Hampshire’s four “big
ones” were the difference between President George W. Bush and President Al
Gore.
Mike Bayham is a political consultant in south Louisiana and can be reached
at MikeBayham@yahoo.com.