Implications of Michigan’s calendar actions

Chuck Todd has the main story:

According to sources inside both parties, the two state parties in Michigan have agreed to move the state’s primary — legislatively — to Jan. 15. This is a compromise date out of respect for Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, who really wanted to move the primary to Jan. 8. Others wanted the primary on Jan. 22 as a way to, essentially, play ball with the other early states. There was a nice window being created for a Jan. 22, 2008 event. But by moving to Jan. 15, this will put pressure on the other early states to either entertain a December event or lobby the two national parties to not sanction Michigan at all.

There are several implications to this. First, the GOP convention seems to be off the table. Given the early work, there was a real possibility that the convention was going to lock out signficant delegates for anyone either than John McCain or Mitt Romney. Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson can play in this environment.

Second, I think that this helps Sam Brownback. There is a significant conservative Catholic contingent in the state party and institutions with Ave Maria Law, etc. If the (open) primary draws mostly Republicans, under the theory that Obama gets the independents (although I suspect that this may not apply to Michigan), then Brownback’s in-state organization will be significant.

Third, if Romney really wins New Hampshire and Iowa, he may be able to play to home state advantage, although a recent poll had him in 5th in Michigan.  At the same time, McCain is still very popular in Michigan and has run — and won — a lean race here before.

Fourth, and this is in many ways the most important, this blows up the whole fraud of the calendars being negotiated by the national parties. As Todd points out:

Bottom line: Michigan holding its primary on Jan. 15 means New Hampshire’s window to hold a primary has been moved up further to Jan. 8. And then there’s Iowa, who now could face a decision to let New Hampshire leap frog it or somehow go 2-3 days before New Hampshire (say, on Sat. Jan. 5) or in December – something the governor of Iowa said he didn’t want to do.

Interestingly, the three major swing regions in America are now represented in the current schedule: upper-midwest (Iowa, probably Dec. 2007 now), rust belt (Michigan, Jan. 15), southwest (Nevada, Jan 19th). Florida, the swing super-state is on the 29th. While this clearly wasn’t intended, there is a certain post-hoc logic to the calendar as emerged.

The upshot is probably that the national parties are going to roll over and take whatever comes their way. Look for special waivers at the next DNC meeting. And the question will simply be so old that it won’t be addressed at the RNC. (noting that there’s a slightly weird procedure for bringing up credentials challenges on this question at the RNC) Unless, of course, the convention is contested, which is a whole different ball of wax.

Tags: ,

Why foreclosures matter: The numbers are huge

State 1/x Households
in  Foreclosure
# of Households
foreclosing
Bush 04
margin
EVs Primary
Date
Nevada 40 25,208 21k 5 1/19
Colorado 60 34,287 100k 9 2/5
California 69 189,560 -1.2m 55 2/5
Michigan 80 55,896 -160k 17 1/26??
Florida 81 102,213 380k 27 1/29
Ohio 82 60,728 120k 20 3/??

I know that I keep harping on the housing market as an important issue in the 2008 election. Let’s look at some numbers from RealtyTrac’s first-half of 2007 report, just released on Monday, in the worst 6 states. (ranked by % of households in foreclosure) So that you can get a sense of the possible electoral impact of these numbers, I have also included the margin by which Bush won (or lost) these states, the number of electoral votes that these states have, and the primary date. Some things jump out:

  • In the first half of 2007, more houses moved into foreclosure than the number of votes that Bush won by. (Note also, that "households" probably is something like 1.3 adults)
  • In Ohio, the number of houses that moved into foreclosure is approximately the same size as Bush’s swing.

RealtyTrac believes that this pace of foreclosures could stay stable or increase over the remainder of the year:

“Despite a slight drop in June, foreclosure activity shows no sign of slowing down,” noted James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac. “Based on the rate of foreclosure activity in the first half of 2007, we could easily surpass 2 million foreclosure filings by the end of the year, which would represent a year-over-year increase of over 65 percent.”

So, if you assume another 6 months as bad as these 6 months (and that the rates stay relatively stable in these states), Florida, Colorado, and Michigan would have a number of foreclosing households greater than the swing of the 2004 election results in those states.

Now, I am not saying that these are all Republican voters. Indeed, many of them will not be. But, by and large, people who think that their incomes will go up tend to vote Republican. In any case, with these large numbers, it is clear that this has the potential to become an election issue. Furthermore, with Nevada, Michigan, and Florida having very early contests, there is a real chance that Presidential candidates will have to take positions on these issues.

Candidates will need a message on this. Maybe they will need policies. In any case, electorally significant numbers of people will be effected by this issue.

If I were really clever and had a message, I might even target these people. After all, you can buy their addresses. In Nevada, we are probably talking about enough numbers to win a caucus.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Calendar still in flux: OH and MI

Just when you thought that the calendar was going to be stable, Ohio and Michigan start to screw it up.

In Ohio, legislation has been introduced by a Democratic State Senator to move the date to Jan. 29th, the same day as Florida. Stealing Florida’s special location would probably have a significant impact on the race. This is another state that Rudy Giuliani is ahead in.

In Michigan, according to sources on the ground, there are several ideas in play. At this point, the parties can pick their own date, so the GOP can change the date by a vote of a convention, executive committee, or central committee meeting. There are two options. First, the GOP can pick the 29th also. Alternatively, they could try something like the 25th. If they do the primary on a different day than the Democrats, one wonders what impact that would have on the electorate. If the GOP votes first, then the rules (effectively open primary) could have a significant impact on the results.

It is certainly looking like the big states are taking over.

Tags: , ,

What is going to happen to the primary calendar?

As has been repeatedly noted, the primary calendar is strongly in flux. However, one of the most interesting questions is: what happens if New Hampshire moves up sharply, as I expect it will. Consider some facts:

  1. New Hampshire is committed (and empowered) to move up before, at least, Nevada, meaning that the latest it is held is probably Jan. 15th.
  2. Florida is committed by law to be one week after New Hampshire.
  3. The South Carolina GOP has committed to moving up to be the "First in the South" primary, which probably means before Florida, but after New Hampshire.
  4. The Michigan Dems have stated that if New Hampshire moves up too much, they will do something radical. And if they do, the Michigan GOP has committed to re-evaluating its date.

Perhaps the most important limiting factor here is that New Hampshire can call and hold elections very quickly. Once the ballots are printed, Bill Gardner can call an election almost whenever he wants. Therefore, New Hampshire will be technically capable of holding an election as early as early December. Would Florida be able to print ballots and hold on election on 4 weeks notice? Would the South Carolina GOP be able to do it on 3.5 weeks notice? What if the timing meant that candidates were campaigning over Christmas? (say NH holds it in mid-December, putting the FL and SC elections between Christmas and New Years) Would NV move up to hold caucuses the same day as SC? (they’ve never done caucuses like this before. Are they capable of doing that either legally or logistically?)

Those are merely logistical considerations. What happens when NV becomes irrelevant because it is competing for candidates time with SC and FL, both of which will have more delegates. Candidates will fly from NH to SC and FL.

Finally, what happens if people believe that we are approaching a brokered convention and every delegate will count?

I think that it is fair to say that the current calendar really is more a set of negotiating positions.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

What are the ballot questions: Looking at the Michigan polls.

Epic-MRA has a new Michigan poll. Now, the horserace numbers are interesting, but I want to focus on some other things. But first the numbers. They gave us both fav/unfavs among Republicans:

  Don’t Know

very

Gen

Total

Gen

very

Total

undec

George W. Bush

  0%

30%

43%

73%

15%

  7%

22%

  5%

Jennifer Granholm

  0%

  5%

14%

19%

30%

46%

76%

  5%

John McCain

  2%

15%

50%

65%

16%

  3%

19%

14%

Rudy Giuliani

  3%

19%

53%

72%

  9%

  4%

13%

12%

Mitt Romney

12%

22%

29%

51%

  7%

  5%

12%

25%

Newt Gingrich

  5%

14%

33%

47%

23%

14%

37%

11%

And ballot test/horse race numbers:

30%

John McCain

26%

Rudy Giuliani

21%

Mitt Romney

16%

Newt Gingrich

  2%

Fred Thompson [volunteered]

  1%

Sam Brownback

  4%

Undecided

First look at Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. 22% of the people in the poll are highly favorable to Mitt, and he gets 21% in the horserace. Hypothesis: the people who support Mitt support him because they like him, not because he is the "best of the rest". A similar hypothesis applies to Newt, who gets 14% highly favorable, with 16% supporting him. There is a corollary, however. People who are not highly favorable do not support them for President in the horse race.

Contrast this with Rudy Giuliani and John McCain. Rudy Giuliani is more popular than John McCain, but McCain beats him in the horse race numbers. These two have  In other words, there are things inhibiting people who like Rudy and, to a lesser extent, McCain from supporting them. What is going on here? What questions should pollsters start asking to figure out why people who are positive on McCain and Rudy are not supporting them?

I think that this suggests that Romney and Newt, who Dick Morris calls "corpses", have to keep convincing people they are great, while McCain and Giuliani have to convince people that they are "good enough" and that the others are not that good. McCain and Rudy have the easier job.

Tags: ,

Romney’s letter comparing his record to Brownback’s

Wait. Last week Romney said he was "always for life". At the same time, his staff was saying that he was pro-choice until he was elected (what will be be after he is elected this time?) Check out the letter after the jump.

I’m confused about where he stands. So is his staff. So is Romney.
Read More »

Tags: , , ,

More grassroots anti-Romney protests (update)

At the MRP conventjon, which I blogged about here, there was an anti-Mitt Romney protest put on by members, apparently, of the Michigan State and University of Michigan Young Americans for Freedom:

In this video, there are protesters with signs like "RINOs for Romney" or "If you don’t like Romney’s positions, wait 10 minutes. He’ll flip-flop".

This is the second video of anti-Romney grassroots activity. (the first was this one from the March for Life).

What is going on here? Is this a sign that the grassroots will reject Romney? Or is it just clever political theater?

Update: This was picked up in a local broadcast about the convention.

Tags: , ,

McCain wins MI GOP proxy fight (update)

Two sources at the Michigan Republican Party Convention report that John McCain’s campaign defeated Mitt Romney’s campaign in a clear proxy fight at the convention in the battle for Youth Chair.

While neither campaign endorsed in the race, staffers from both campaigns were managing the floor fights for their respective candidates. Matt Hall, supported by McCain, beat Trevor Pittsley supported by Romney, by 8 votes out of approximately 2,000. For pictures and lists of supporters, see their facebook groups (Hall, Pittsley)

By all accounts, Saul Anuzi and the MRP staff were pushing hard for Pittsley.

Details forthcoming.

Update: Youth Chair has a vote on MRP’s Executive Committee. An MRP staffer tells me that they weren’t working that hard and that there was merely "lots of overlap" between Tippsley’s volunteers and the Romney volunteers.

Update II: MI Secretary of State, Terri Lynn Land, introduced and endorsed Hall. Hall won the first ballot by 20 votes, but Tippsley then challenged a bunch of delegations to knock it down to 8. This was the only contested race for MRP officers, although earlier, Saul’s spot had been contested. That had been a proxy fight between Dave DiShaw, now McCain’s MI grassroots chairman, and Saul. However, after MI AG Mike Cox, McCain’s MI Co-Chair, endorsed Saul, and Saul endorsed an open primary, DiShaw dropped out, leaving Saul uncontested for chair. Hotline has the details here and here.

Update III: Katie Packer, Romney’s Michigan consultant (?), reportedly consoled Pitssley that "sometimes you lose to the devil". That sounds like a proxy fight to me. Also, Young Americans for Freedom protested Romney with signs saying "Rinos for Romney".

Update IV: Apparently Packer’s vitriol is because she has a losing record against McCain’s MI team, Chuck and John Yob. A further source has told me that Packer refers to Chuck Yob as "the devil". An interesting thing to note is that Yob’s grassroots conservative coalition held together in this proxy fight. Does this suggest that Romney is not succeeding on the right and McCain is? Will Romney be able to keep moderates with Giuliani in the race? Interesting implications.

Tags: , , ,

More endorsements

More endorsements:

  1. From The Fix. RGA Vice-Chair and MN Governor Tim Pawlenty for McCain. Lobbyist and former Congressman (also MN) Vin Webber to Romney.
  2. From Michigan Cooler. MI National Committeeman, Chuck Yob, and National Committeewoman, Holly Hughes, are for McCain. This is only sort of news.
  3. From The Shot. Brownback picks up two South Carolina social conservatives.

Tags: , , , , ,

Romney losing support in Michigan

Mitt Romney is getting beaten up again in the Evangelical media. Again, it is Pat Robertson’s CBN:

There are at least four Republican Representatives from the Michigan State House that are seriously rethinking their support of Romney for President. These are members of Romney’s steering committee in Michigan who are now having reservations about recent revelations about Romney’s past comments in regards to marriage, abortion and the Boy Scouts.

Ouch. This is not the first time that Romney has lost supporters. He recently lost his California fundraising consultant, who had worked with him at the Republican Governors’ Association. The story goes on. They see a flip-flop-flip-flop-flip on abortion:

The representatives who may leave Romney are really questioning the legitimacy of his conservative credentials. Romney has always said he has evolved on these issues over the years, but these folks in Michigan think it’s okay to evolve, but some of this seems to be major flip flop material, especially on the life issue where they point out how he’s gone from pro-choice in 1994, to pro-life in 2000, to pro-choice in 2002 and now back to pro-life. Romney’s office will dispute this, but what they can’t dispute is a potential unraveling among their steering committee in Michigan. Michigan is crucial to Romney.

Will the NRO fan club begin to shake?

Tags: , ,