why does the new hampshire primary matter

WEBVTT PECTED AND GNASHING MOVES ON TO NEVADA AND SOUTH CAROLINA. TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT ON PAPER THESE PRIMARIES ARE ABOUT TAKING UP DELEGATES, BUT LET ME SHOW YOU WHY THAT IS REALLY NOT THE CASE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF DELEGATES NEEDED FOR THE TO THE CREDIT NOMINATION, IT S 2382. NEW HAMPSHIRE WILL CONTRIBUTE 32. ON THEIR PUBLIC INSIDE, 1237 TO A NOMINATION, AND 23 CAME FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE. THEY ARE DIVIDED UP ON A PROPORTIONAL BASIS. YOU CAN SEE IT IS NOT ABOUT THE NUMBERS, IT S ABOUT BEING FIRST AND SETTING THE TONE AND TESTING THESE CAMPAIGNS, SEEING WHO CAN GET THE VOTERS OUT AND FOR DONALD TRUMP, THIS WAS A BIG TEST TONIGHT. IT WAS NOT ONLY A MATTER OF WHO SHOWS UP TO RALLIES, WHO SHOWS UP TO SEE A REG OUT -- REALLY TV STAR, BUT ELECTION GOES TO THE VOTING BOOTH AND VOTES FOR THEM.
After his 1980 Iowa victory, Bush looked "forward to 'big mo' being on our side. " At the root of that momentum are two V's: visibility and viability, both of which attract cash to a campaign.


Historically, Iowa and New Hampshire account for about half the news media coverage of the entire primary season, with the winners absorbing the lion's share of the attention. Moreover, coverage of the winners tends to be almost entirely positive, which fuels rising poll numbers. It's extremely difficult for those who fail to win either of the first races to catch up. Kerry's name identification and favorability both skyrocketed by 30 points after his Iowa and New Hampshire triumphs. In 2008, Mike Huckabee added more than 20 points in name ID after his Iowa victory, though he ultimately lost the nomination to McCain, the New Hampshire victor. Voter assessments of candidates' viability matter as well. Most people want to support a candidate they believe has some chance of winning. Early victories provide incontrovertible evidence that a candidate can win.


Losses raise questions about viability в questions the media reinforce by asking losers daily how long they plan to remain in the race. And donors flood winners with cash, while losers' bank accounts dwindle. Where does this leave the Republicans of 2012? The Hawkeye State dashed the hopes of a raft of former front-runners: Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann. Having once been a front-runner, Ron Paul too needed a victory in Iowa to become a viable candidate, and his third-place showing won't bestow much benefit in the races to come. Romney's Iowa showing will almost certainly propel him to victory in New Hampshire, where his service as governor of Massachusetts в whose media markets cover most of the Granite State в already gives him a substantial edge. It's the kind of innate advantage that gave the state to Kerry after his Iowa victory. And if Romney wins both early contests, he will probably capture the nomination as well.


Other candidates may win some states down the road (as, say, John Edwards did against Kerry in 2004), but that will do little to alter the final outcome. Santorum's surprise showing could throw a wrench into those calculations and reshape the race if he skips New Hampshire and brings in the cash and fields the organization necessary to win enough of the primaries that follow. But the hurdles will be high for what has been, at least until now, a bare-bones effort. But pay no attention to all the talk about "three tickets out of Iowa" в it's hard to imagine anyone other than Romney or Santorum capturing the nomination. When all is said and done, the eventual Republican nominee will most likely have come in first either in Iowa, New Hampshire or both. Mark Mellman is president of a consulting firm that provides research-based strategy to Democratic candidates, public interest groups and corporations.

  • Views: 6

why does missouri have a primary and a caucus
why does iowa hold the first caucus
why does iowa have the first caucus
why does iowa have a caucus instead of a primary
why does iowa get the first caucus
why do young people like ron paul
why do we have primaries and caucuses