California is still mostly a presidential ATM

by juls [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

Running for president this cycle is not a very straight forward proposition, not that ever has been particularly easy.  The condensed primary calendar means that candidates no longer can spend just about all of their campaign time in Iowa and New Hampshire.  However, that does not mean that they will not spend the lion share there.  Candidate performance in those two states will deeply effect the media narrative and public perception leading into the other early primary states like California on February 5th. 

Part of the reason why there is such a big push for massive amounts of money is that candidates will need to spend the traditional amounts in the early caucuses and compete in the other states just days later. WaPo:

The practical effect of the new, truncated political calendar is that it is no longer possible for frontrunning candidate such as Giuliani or Clinton to focus all of his or her time and financial resources on winning the Iowa caucuses because a parade of costly states await in the not-too-distant future. To capitalize on a strong Iowa showing, a candidate must spend large sums of money on costly voter contact operations in the slew of states that will vote in late January and early February.

Campaigns are working as we speak on lining up voter databases in countless states, hiring staff and working out complicated game plans.  They all need to be in place way before January.  The condensed schedule means there is no time to ramp up after the caucuses.  The campaigns need to be firing on all cylinders across the country.

The counter-argument to the idea that the new calendar has created a de facto national primary is that with so many expensive states crowded into late January and early February the only possible way for a candidate to reach potential voters is through the blitz of media coverage that traditionally follows a win or stronger than expected showing in Iowa or New Hampshire.

"There are going to be so many big states in that early period that no one is going to have the money to play in all of those states," said former New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D). "Earned media is the key."

Thus, the strategy to leverage early wins into victories in the Feb 5th states.  That is why we are not seeing candidates spend a whole lot of time in California.  They will come in every few weeks, pick up some cash and maybe do a public event or two.  But we will not see them set up shop here like they do in Iowa and New Hampshire, or Nevada even.  They are counting on earned media for those brief stops.  The LAT today bemoaned the lack of attention California is generating from the contenders today.

This wasn't how the campaign was supposed to unfold in California, according to the chatter earlier this year when the state Legislature moved up the 2008 presidential primaries to Feb. 5, near the front of the electoral calendar. An early primary was supposed to mean that the candidates would take the state and its issues seriously and not just stop by to pick up cash to spend elsewhere.

Yet seven months before the first absentee ballots can be cast, California voters' interactions with the candidates have been few and far between. And although the candidates talk about the political importance of California, some, at least, acknowledge the state isn't a top priority.

The candidates are taking California seriously, but they are not placing it at the top of the list.  California's primary benefit to the presidential candidates at this time is as an ATM.  Sure they are doing a bit of organizing, but it's not like they are readying a TV ad blitz or doing a five day tour of the state.

Part of the problem in courting California lies in the size of the state, and of the field. With so many candidates ? 17 declared between the two major parties alone ? a bad showing in earlier Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire contests could obliterate most campaigns before Feb. 5, when about 20 states will vote. And competing in California is expensive. Obama, the top Democratic fundraiser in the last quarter, said that although California is "a very big ? trend-setting state," he has no plans yet to spend money on TV ads, generally considered the most efficient way to reach voters here.

A bad showing in Iowa, Nevada and NH will obliterate many campaigns.  And, unless candidates can show they will be viable in the weeks leading up to the contest we should expect them to leave the race, or face serious pressure to do so.  There will be candidates dropping out after the earliest states, when they find themselves unable to execute the earned media leverage plan. 

It may be the the most efficient way to reach voters here, but it still costs millions of dollars a week.  Airing ads here just does not make sense for these guys yet and it is unlear when it actually will.

The candidates and campaigns were naturally defensive about their California campaigns when asked by the LAT about it.

Republican or Democrat, the candidates share a two-pronged tactic here: Raise California cash and hope for free media coverage.

"Each time we come over here, we try to do political events as well," Obama said, recalling a February visit that included four private Beverly Hills fundraisers and a rare ? for California ? public rally in the Crenshaw district that drew thousands. "We're trying to do outreach and political organizing even as we are doing fundraising."

Proponents of moving California's primary to Feb. 5 insist that while the candidates might be out of sight much of the time, they have been active behind the scenes lining up endorsements and building networks crucial to winning elections in this wide and diverse state.

The California early primary was oversold.  It was easy to predict that many other states would join us on the Feb. 5th date, thus diluting the impact of our move.  And it is not like the candidates are totally ignoring us.  They have been visiting and talking about Californian issues.

Obama and Richardson both tailored part of their message to California. At his news conference urging national low-carbon fuel standards, Obama noted that his proposal is based on a California plan, for which he credited Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Richardson used a news conference Monday to call for increased light rail and energy-efficient vehicles to ease Los Angeles' chronic traffic congestion, saying more was needed than simply widening freeways.

The Times seems to be grumpy that the most recent visits were not large rallies and instead press conferences that take significantly less resources to set up.  The organizer in me is not particularly thrilled to see that trend, but it is understandable from a national perspective.  There is still a lot of time between now and Feb. 5th to see a whole host of screaming people waving signs.  Don't get me wrong, we must continue to press the candidate's to answer our questions and talk about the issues that Californians care most about.  They may be manufactured for earned media, but they are still talking about the environment, public transportation, health care etc.

Tony Quinn, co-editor of the California Target Book, a nonpartisan elections analysis, said he has come to believe that California will be something of an insurance state for the front-runners.

"Both Clinton and Giuliani face their greatest peril in being ambushed in these small states" such as Iowa and New Hampshire, Quinn said. "So they, and others, have an incentive to try to elevate the role of the larger states."

They will eventually be drawn here for close encounters with voters, he said.

"We will see them," Quinn said. "Just be patient."

Indeed.