The Great Primary Calendar re-shuffle Megathread

[Mr. Morden]

The Arizona primary is scheduled for Feb. 28, but state law allows Gov. Jan Brewer to unilaterally set it earlier than that if she wants, and she's allowed to go as early as she likes, as long as she announces the date at least 150 days in advance.  Well, we now have this:

http://www.ahwatukee.com/news/valley_and_state/article_306e0c1b-229e-5d92-b81f-1e14c78c2c82.html

Gov. Jan Brewer is leaning to moving Arizona's presidential primary to the last Tuesday in January in hopes of getting a jump on most other states.
.
.
.
"It only makes sense that our state be positioned to have its voice heard loud and clear when it comes to the presidential nomination process,'' [Brewer] continued. "Moving Arizona's presidential preference primary election into January would ensure that our citizens are major players in the 2012 campaign.''

If she moves it to Jan. 31, then my guess is that Florida moves to Jan. 24, and you get a domino effect, where the calendar starts out like this:

Jan. 5 IA
Jan. 10 NH
Jan. 21 NV, SC
Jan. 24 FL
Jan. 31 AZ

Or something like that.  Georgia and Michigan might go for late January as well.  Or maybe if enough of the remaining February states move later, they'll figure that there's a void in February that they can fill, and just hold their primaries in Feb.

Because Brewer has to announce this 150 days in advance, if she wants to go for Jan. 31, she'll have to announce it by early September.   Most of the potential early primary states seem headed for some kind of decision time in August or September, so we may actually have a good idea of what the primary calendar looks like on October 1.

[BushKenya]

The Arizona primary is scheduled for Feb. 28, but state law allows Gov. Jan Brewer to unilaterally set it earlier than that if she wants, and she's allowed to go as early as she likes, as long as she announces the date at least 150 days in advance.  Well, we now have this:

http://www.ahwatukee.com/news/valley_and_state/article_306e0c1b-229e-5d92-b81f-1e14c78c2c82.html

Gov. Jan Brewer is leaning to moving Arizona's presidential primary to the last Tuesday in January in hopes of getting a jump on most other states.
.
.
.
"It only makes sense that our state be positioned to have its voice heard loud and clear when it comes to the presidential nomination process,'' [Brewer] continued. "Moving Arizona's presidential preference primary election into January would ensure that our citizens are major players in the 2012 campaign.''

If she moves it to Jan. 31, then my guess is that Florida moves to Jan. 24, and you get a domino effect, where the calendar starts out like this:

Jan. 5 IA
Jan. 10 NH
Jan. 21 NV, SC
Jan. 24 FL
Jan. 31 AZ

Or something like that.  Georgia and Michigan might go for late January as well.  Or maybe if enough of the remaining February states move later, they'll figure that there's a void in February that they can fill, and just hold their primaries in Feb.

Because Brewer has to announce this 150 days in advance, if she wants to go for Jan. 31, she'll have to announce it by early September.   Most of the potential early primary states seem headed for some kind of decision time in August or September, so we may actually have a good idea of what the primary calendar looks like on October 1.

January 5 Iowa would be awesome!! Everyone knows I am a fan of a long, drawn out primary campaign such as we had in 2008 that lasted 5 1/2 months between the January 3 Iowa Caucuses and the late-June coronation of Barack Obama as the Democratic Nominee.  That was a fun winter and spring for me!!  I hope we can have the same fight and tussle with the Republicans this next year!

[TJ in Wisco]

Move it! Move it! Move it NJ! Let me vote in my primary!

Are you guys in NJ really not allowed to vote in the primary until you turn 18? I think in Ohio we're allowed to vote in the primary as long we will be 18 by the general election.

[Mr. Morden]

The West Virginia GOP has decided to ditch the 2-step process they did last time, where half the delegates are allocated in a convention, and half in a primary.  Instead, they'll allocate all their delegates in the May primary:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/07/may-8-primary-opposition-emerges.html

So I've taken the convention date off of the calendar in the OP.

[Simfan34]

Move it! Move it! Move it NJ! Let me vote in my primary!

Are you guys in NJ really not allowed to vote in the primary until you turn 18? I think in Ohio we're allowed to vote in the primary as long we will be 18 by the general election.

Really?

[BushKenya]

Move it! Move it! Move it NJ! Let me vote in my primary!

Are you guys in NJ really not allowed to vote in the primary until you turn 18? I think in Ohio we're allowed to vote in the primary as long we will be 18 by the general election.

Really?

I think that's the same way in Oklahoma.

[Mr. Morden]

Story in the NYT about the primary calendar:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/us/politics/26primary.html

And here's a useful rundown of the state of play in the remaining January/February states:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/07/primer-on-when-remaining-states-might.html

My main conclusions at the moment are:

-Virtually every state will likely have finalized their primary date by October 1.  We may well know the entire calendar by mid-October.

-Many of the remaining February states will move later, but there will probably be about 5-10 (maybe closer to 5 than 10) states that defy the national parties' wishes, and go earlier than March 6.  (This is not counting IA/NH/NV/SC, who are already allowed to do so.)

-The most likely states to do that are Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, and Minnesota.  (No surprise, if you've been following this thread.)

-The "prime movers" are probably Arizona and Michigan.  They will probably both show their hand by early September, and there's a wide range of dates they might pick.  What they decide to do will influence Florida, and in turn every other early state.

-The Iowa caucuses (and thus the beginning of primary season) will probably be held some time between January 5 and January 16, depending on what happens with the other states.  At least, that's my guess for the most likely range of dates at the moment.

[Mr. Morden]

California has officially moved to June 5:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/07/california-presidential-primary-to-june.html

and I've updated the calendar in the OP.  June 5 will now be the date with the second most delegates at stake, after Super Tuesday (March 6).

[Yelnoc]

Idk if this was posted before, but Governor Brewer is looking towards moving Arizona's primary up to the last Tuesday in January (the 31st).  She has to make the decision at least 150 days before the new date, so she could potentially delay until early September.  If she wants to move the date back, which according to the article is possible, she can stall a little longer.

http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/07/arizona-gov-jan-brewer-likely-to-move.html

[Mr. Morden]

Idk if this was posted before, but Governor Brewer is looking towards moving Arizona's primary up to the last Tuesday in January (the 31st).  She has to make the decision at least 150 days before the new date, so she could potentially delay until early September.  If she wants to move the date back, which according to the article is possible, she can stall a little longer.

http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/07/arizona-gov-jan-brewer-likely-to-move.html

Yes, I posted on this last week:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=128721.msg2964713#msg2964713

[Yelnoc]

Idk if this was posted before, but Governor Brewer is looking towards moving Arizona's primary up to the last Tuesday in January (the 31st).  She has to make the decision at least 150 days before the new date, so she could potentially delay until early September.  If she wants to move the date back, which according to the article is possible, she can stall a little longer.

http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/07/arizona-gov-jan-brewer-likely-to-move.html

Yes, I posted on this last week:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=128721.msg2964713#msg2964713

I feel like that guy from the flash mob AT&T commercial.

[Mr. Morden]

Of the remaining February primary/caucus states....

The state legislatures in DE and NJ have already passed bills to move the primary later, and they'll become official once the states' respective governors sign them (which they presumably will).

MO and WI are more likely than not to move to a later date in the end.

My guess is that the majority of the caucus states will end up going later as well.

FHQ says that there is a rumor that rather than move up to Jan. 31, Brewer might move Arizona to Feb. 14, which would be the state's centennial.

Here is my latest very hypothetical guess as to what the early part of the calendar might end up looking like in the end, assuming that many of those states are cooperative and move later.  I'm supposing that many of the early states specifically grab dates for themselves that they won't have to to share with other states:

Mon, Jan. 16: IA caucus
Tue, Jan. 24: NH primary
Tue, Jan. 31: SC primary
Sat, Feb. 4: NV caucus
Tue, Feb. 7: FL primary, MN caucus, ND caucus
Tue, Feb. 14: AZ primary
Tue, Feb. 21: GA primary
Tue, Feb. 28: MI primary
Tue, March 6: Super Tuesday

[True Federalist]

I will be shocked if the SC GOP primary is not held on a Saturday, no matter when it is held.  That is the traditional day of the week to hold the Republican Presidential Primary.

[Mr. Morden]

I will be shocked if the SC GOP primary is not held on a Saturday, no matter when it is held.  That is the traditional day of the week to hold the Republican Presidential Primary.

You're probably right.  I was just thinking that perhaps if SC was only three days before FL, the SC GOP would be afraid that a few candidates would put less emphasis on SC, figuring that FL would be a few days later anyway, and that might be a bigger deal.  Whereas if it's separated from FL by a full week, that wouldn't be an issue.  So maybe they'll go a full 10 days before FL like last time, though of course that bumps IA and NH up another week.

[Mr. Morden]

A note on the delegate allocation:

As previously mentioned, states that vote in March or earlier have to award their delegates according to some version of PR (though there are loopholes, allowing them to use a hybrid of statewide PR and CD-wide WTA if they wish).  States that vote in April or later are free to allocate their delegates however they like.

While the April-June states can allocate by statewide WTA if they want to, it looks like very few of them intend to do so.  It looks like the only states left that will use statewide WTA will be New Jersey (assuming Christie signs the bill that moves the primary to June), Connecticut, Montana, Utah, and DC.

However, many states (including the biggest delegate prize of all, California) will use WTA by congressional district.  WTA by CD means that the statewide winner can often win the lion's share of the delegates anyway, because if you're winning the state by like 10 points, then you're going to win the bulk of the congressional districts.  In 2008, for example, McCain beat Romney in California by 42.2%-34.6%, and ended up winning about 90% of the state's delegates, because he won nearly every CD.  So for many of the primaries next year, there's going to be an enormous difference between winning a state by 1% and winning by ~8% or more.

[Mr. Morden]

Delaware officially moves to April 24:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/08/delaware-governor-quietly-signs.html

Calendar in the OP has been updated.

[True Federalist]

Why is Christie sitting on the NJ bill?  Alternatively, when is the NJ Assembly going to meet next?  It's been almost long enough that all that is needed is for the lower house to meet for the NJ bill to become law without Christie's signature.  (when they first meet on or after August 13)

[Senator Snowstalker]

Christie's sitting on it? It's dead. No piece of paper could withstand that pressure.

[State Comptroller Atkins]

It could actually end up having a similar feel to it as the 1992 Democratic Primaries.

[Mr. Morden]

The RNC has decided to defer on the question of whether to impose further punishment on "rogue states" like Arizona and Florida for scheduling their primaries earlier than March 6th:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60682.html#ixzz1U6XvlJhV

The current punishment is that the states lose 50% of their delegates.  However, the RNC can impose further punishment by giving the remaining delegates bad hotels and inferior seating in the convention hall.  But they're not going to make a decision on any further punishments until January, by which time the calendar will be set anyway.

The RNC has basically resigned itself to the fact that some states are going to defy the calendar rules and go early.  At this point, they're probably going to work behind the scenes to simply contain the damage, and least keep states like AZ, FL, and MI in February, so that IA, NH, NV, and SC can vote in January, rather than spill over into Christmas.

[Mr. Morden]

"The Death of Super Tuesday":

http://news.yahoo.com/mitt-romney-sarah-palin-012-presidential-race-death-024013923.html

[whaeffner1]

Here's my question to the RNC: Why can't Florida be the first primary in the country?  First, it is an important swing state, being the biggest one out there.  Second, it has a large Hispanic population, which is important because whoever the nominee is will need to have more of their support than McCain did in 2008.  Third, it is a big state, so it will test who has better fundraising power, an important trait for the general election.  And fourth, Iowa and New Hampshire have dominated the process for so long that their voters almost feel entitled.  Let's shake it up a bit.

[Mr. Morden]

Here's my question to the RNC: Why can't Florida be the first primary in the country?  First, it is an important swing state, being the biggest one out there.  Second, it has a large Hispanic population, which is important because whoever the nominee is will need to have more of their support than McCain did in 2008.  Third, it is a big state, so it will test who has better fundraising power, an important trait for the general election.  And fourth, Iowa and New Hampshire have dominated the process for so long that their voters almost feel entitled.  Let's shake it up a bit.

Welcome to the forum.

I won't give a full answer to your question here, but I would just point out that, as we're seeing yet again this time around, the RNC's current penalties are in no way sufficient to prevent states from going earlier if they want to.  So, for example, even if Florida went as early as possible under state law (which I believe would be the first Tuesday of January), then Iowa and NH would simply move up to December, because they're determined to go first.  It wouldn't matter if the RNC then imposed a 50% delegate penalty on IA and NH, because they don't care about delegate penalties.

The only way to stop IA and NH from going first is to either: 1) Force them to move later via federal legislation, 2) Have some other state change their laws or party rules, to allow them to go arbitrarily early, and then have that state match IA and NH in brinkmanship, or 3) Convince the candidates to ignore IA and NH (which might be doable with a 100% delegate penalty.....but possibly not even then).

Of course, the above is probably all moot, since neither of the two national parties seem that interested in removing IA and NH from the front of the line, and very few other states seem that interested in usurping them.

[True Federalist]

Here's my question to the RNC: Why can't Florida be the first primary in the country?  First, it is an important swing state, being the biggest one out there.  Second, it has a large Hispanic population, which is important because whoever the nominee is will need to have more of their support than McCain did in 2008.  Third, it is a big state, so it will test who has better fundraising power, an important trait for the general election.  And fourth, Iowa and New Hampshire have dominated the process for so long that their voters almost feel entitled.  Let's shake it up a bit.

Having small states go first does enable a wider variety of candidates to test the waters.  If they can attract attention there, they can leverage that into fundraising on a broader level.

However, if the RNC (or the DNC) wants to take back control of their nomination schedule they'll have to start organizing them themselves.  So long as the States are footing the bill, they'll be the ones deciding the schedule.

[Mr. Morden]

There'd been some talk for a while about the Michigan GOP abandoning the primary in favor of a caucus.  Well, that talk is no more, as the state party voted decisively in favor of sticking with the primary:

http://detnews.com/article/20110813/POLITICS02/108130391/Michigan-GOP-to-hold-primary-for-delegates-in-presidential-nominee-vote

Under current state law, the primary is scheduled for Feb. 28, which puts it one week before Super Tuesday, but not as early as last time.  The state legislature still might change the date, but the most likely scenario is that they simply stick with Feb. 28.  If Michigan sticks with Feb. 28, then they'll be going before Super Tuesday, but after early states like IA, NH, NV, SC, and probably FL, AZ, MN, and a couple of others as well.