In its current construction, the 2008 Democratic presidential calendar is as follow:
- January 14th (Monday): Iowa
- January 19th (Saturday): Nevada
- January 22nd (Tuesday): New hampshire
- January 29th (Tuesday): South Carolina
- February 5ht: Super Early tuesday
The Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries have little inherent power to help or hurt candidates in and of themsevles. Delegate-wise, these contests are minimal. What gives them their power is the huge amount of media attention leading up to the contests, and the far more massive news coverage that occurrs onces the contests are over. With no other contests taking place either before IA / NH or at the same time as IA / NH, candidates are branded winners and losers, insurgents and stumblers, frontrunners and also-rans based almost solely on how they perform in these two states. These two early contests derive their power from the impact they have upon the larger media marraative. Candidates spend so much time and money competing in these states in order to drive a favorable media marrative heading into later contests.
With no real time for the media to develop a narrative around the Nevada caucuses, I have a difficult time seeing how they will have a major impact on the media narrative, and thus the nomination process. Because they take place on a Saturday, only three days before the New Hampshire primary, at best they will be the focus of news of one weekend. Due to the lack of media attention, and due to the proximity to to the New Hampshire primary, many candidates, especially top tier candidates, might choose to ignore the Nevada caucuses. With fewer big name candidates making a serious play in Nevada, the contest will be the focus of even less media coverage. In a vicious circle, even fewer candidates might end up making a serious play as a result. It strikes me as highly unlikely that Nevada will ever turn into an all out battleground, even for a single day, where every top tier candidate makes a stand.
So, what will happen in Nevada? One possibility is that it might end up becoming the pet project of a single candidate, ala Steve Forbes and his "Delaware strategy" in 1996. However, in order for that to happen, someone will have to ignore either Iowa or New Hampshire, so I doubt whoever does that will come from the top-tier. A second possibility is for the state to become dominated by independent groups not officially affiliated with any party. After all, this is a caucus state, and the extremely low, activist heavy turnout leaves a big opening for groups that can mobilize people on the ground (unions, local Dem parties, even maybe the netroots). That could be really interesting. A third possibility is that one or more candidates will try to compete here primarily through the airwaves, though not in person, meaning that the person with the most money and best ads will win.
Most likely, Nevada will end up being a combination of these three possibilities. It might be smart for second tier candidates to target a "better than expected" finish in Iowa coupled with a win in Nevada (this might especially be effective for Vilsack and Richardson). With
the only poll on Nevada showing Clinton up 25 points, among the top tier she probably has the most to potentially gain from Nevada. Polls already show her struggling in Iowa and New Hampshire, and a win in Nevada would help stave off the bad press poor showings in those states could cause. In fact, as the national poll frontrunner with little to gain from Iowa and New Hampshire, it might even be smart for Clinton to just target Nevada, South Carolina, and then February 5th. If she pulled out of Iowa and New Hampshire, it would seriously reduce the momentum any other candidate would gain from those states, while giving her a less obstructed path in the states where she does compete.
Ahh, interesting stuff. In the end, however, I doubt Nevada will have a major impact on the process. South Carolina, which is the only contest between New Hampshire and Super Early Tuesday, is probably a very different story. Whatever the case, there is one thing I know for sure: speculating on the different twists and turns the process could take, as well as the different strategies various campaign could employ, is a nearly unending source of pleasure for a political junkie such as myself. In the comments, I would love to hear your speculations on how it will all unfold, as well as any unusual strategies you think might work for one or more campaigns.
