The politics of '08 primary spots

The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee met over the weekend and engaged in an intense debate over where the two new primary spots, which will take place around the time of the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire primary, will be held.  The committee came up with Nevada and South Carolina.

But just as I wrote, the debate was intense.  Democratic strategists Herold Ickes strongly disagreed with the choice of South Carolina because he felt that it would give John Edwards an unfair advantage:

Harold Ickes made no bones about why he would not vote to choose SouthCarolina as the additional primary state. His reason was summed up inone name: John Edwards. Prior to the vote, Ickes, a DNC Rules memberfrom the District of Columbia, tried to persuade his colleagues that ifSouth Carolina was selected it wouldn't be taken seriously by otherDemocrats because Edwards, a former Democratic senator from neighboringNorth Carolina, would be considered the hometown favorite. This drewloud protests from Don Fowler and Carol Khare Fowler, DNC Rules membersfrom South Carolina.

I must say that I sort of agree with Ickes.  There's certainly been a lot going right with John Edwards lately, and he would make a great presidential candidate.  But it is almost certain that South Carolina would vote for John Edwards because he grew up there.  Of course, on the other hand, objecting to primary destinations just because a specific candidate is from there might be a bad precedent to set.  Tom Vilsack, for example, is from Iowa.  I don't hear anyone saying that the Iowa Caucus should not go first.

Bottom line though: this is sure a boost to John Edwards.  The latest Des Moines Register poll taken of Iowa Democrats puts him ahead of all other possible '08 contenders, even including Hillary Clinton and Tom Vilsack.  And now with South Carolina in there as well, Edwards has a good shot at taking at least two of the first four primaries.  Obviously we are very early in the game, and opinions can change up until the very last day as we saw with Howard Dean in 2004.  But as of now, Edwards has the early advantage.

As for Nevada, that is the best state that the Democrats could have possibly selected.  The Las Vegas area, especially the town of Henderson, is one of the fastest growing areas in the country.  Many of these voters consist of new families that own their first home.  In 2004, Bush carried 97 of the country's 100-fastest growing counties.  We need to give these new population centers a large say in who the Democratic nominee is.  Although Arizona, New Mexico and Utah are also surging as far as growth, Nevada was probably the best idea.  I am glad they chose that state.

Even though Nevada and South Carolina will be moving up a bit in the primary calendar, Democrats are still campaigning like mad in New Hampshire.  Mark Warner and Evan Bayh are supporting local candidates in that region in order to possibly get their endorsements in 2008.

As of now, this is what we know about the list of Democrats that could run:

• Candidates that have officially declared their intentions to run: Chris Dodd and Joe Biden.
• Candidates that have said they might run: Mark Warner, Evan Bayh, John Edwards, Tom Vilsack, and Tom Daschle.
• Candidates that have not said anything but are acting like it: Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Russ Feingold.
• Candidates that will likely not run, but still could: Barack Obama, Wesley Clark, Al Gore and Bill Richardson.

So, as you can see, we are expecting a pretty big field.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Other blogs writing about this issue: Socratic Gadfly, Georgia Politics Unfiltered, News you Can Abuse, The World Newser, Political News, The Object of Power, Copeland Institute for Lower Learning, Vichy Democrats, Truthout, Hotline, Political Wire, Huffington Post.

Comments

[Edward Copeland]

What will be interesting to see is what New Hampshire does in response, since they have a state law that mandates that no contest be held either 7 days before or 7 days after their primary, so they may unilaterally move their primary -- perhaps even before the Iowa caucuses. Then of course, Iowa might react and by the time we're done, we'll start the voting in the middle of 2007.