Playing Catch-Up May Be Harder This Time

Washington Post: Short Primary Calendar Means Candidates With Momentum Could Keep Rolling

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Michael D. Shear and Peter Baker.

---

When George W. Bush stumbled here in his quest for the presidency in 2000, he had 18 days to recover before the next major primary. But the erstwhile front-runners humbled in Iowa this week emerged with just five days to get back on their feet, slow down their rivals and salvage their campaigns.

For all the discussion about how early this year's presidential primary season started, the more profound change in the political calendar is how compressed it has become. Starting with the Iowa caucuses, 31 states will vote over 33 days for the nominee of one or both parties, compared with just nine states that voted in the equivalent period eight years ago.

The furious pace of contests this year will be so intense that it could make momentum king and increase the challenge exponentially for Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Mitt Romney as they try to shrug off defeats in Iowa and regroup for New Hampshire's primary on Tuesday. That proves a bitter irony for both camps, which had built their strategies around the assumption that they would exploit the compressed schedule to roll over other candidates before anyone had a chance to catch up.

"This is a faster track than ever before," said Scott Reed, a political strategist who ran Republican Robert J. Dole's presidential campaign in 1996 and had the luxury of a couple of weeks to revive it after it faltered early in New Hampshire. "It leaves very little margin for error if you're a front-runner. It's tougher to lose two nights in a row and think you can carry on."

As the campaigns rolled into New Hampshire early Friday morning, they had only hours to absorb the Iowa caucus results, decide whether (or how) to retool their strategies and set last-minute television advertising. The campaign window is so abbreviated that it was already too late to commission new mailings and to count on getting them into voters' hands before they go to the polls.

The campaigns will have to rely on the organizations they long ago built here and in other early-primary states to carry them through despite an early loss -- or even losses -- and enable them to compete when more than 20 states vote Feb. 5. "It's going to go so fast from start to finish," said Terence R. McAuliffe, Clinton's campaign chairman. "Once we get through the early states . . . I think we're going to go with tremendous momentum into the February 5 states."

The Iowa losers are also counting on New Hampshire's contrarian streak; it has frequently chosen a different favorite than its Midwestern cousin. But the usual eight days between the contests has now been cut nearly in half, leaving little time for the victors' media bounce to fade. Once a sense of momentum builds around a campaign, strategists said, it becomes awfully hard to turn things around in a short time frame.

"I've been there," said Joe Trippi, a strategist for Democrat John Edwards who worked for Howard Dean in 2004, speaking in an interview before the Iowa vote. "There isn't anyone on the planet who can knock down that wave."

Bush's experience in 2000 underscores the impact of this year's accelerated schedule. After losing to Sen. John McCain in New Hampshire, Bush headed to South Carolina, where he hit bottom in the polls but slowly began to climb back up as his well-funded campaign launched withering attacks on McCain. "The key fact was we had 18 days," said Warren Tompkins, who ran Bush's South Carolina campaign. "It used to be we had sensibility in the system. Now we got chaos the way the calendar's set up."

This year, the Republicans have just seven days after New Hampshire to prepare for the Michigan primary, followed by South Carolina four days later. Strategists in the Bush and McCain camps say that sort of timetable could easily have changed the outcome eight years ago. "If we had had this schedule in 2000, I think McCain could have swept," said Rick Davis, the campaign manager for the senator from Arizona then and now. "We would have won everything but Iowa."

The dynamics this year are different in the two parties. Among Democrats, Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has the resources and the poll numbers to potentially capitalize on his Iowa victory and overtake Clinton in New Hampshire, where the senator from New York has long led in polls. A pair of back-to-back victories could be enough to propel Obama into South Carolina and the Feb. 5 states, and undermine Clinton's claim to be the most electable Democrat. Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, edged out Clinton for second place in Iowa but has trailed both rivals in New Hampshire.

The Democrats have more time than the Republicans after New Hampshire, as the Democratic National Committee is not counting delegates awarded in Michigan's Jan. 15 primary because the vote was scheduled earlier than party rules allowed. The Democratic candidates will head next to Nevada on Jan. 19 and South Carolina on Jan. 26.

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee is not well positioned to repeat his come-from-behind Iowa victory in New Hampshire, where his evangelical base is not as potent a force and where he has little organization, to say nothing of money. For Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, the time may prove too short to translate his folksy appeal into a credible claim on Granite State Republicans.

"Five days -- that's not a lot of time for things to develop," said Terry Nelson, who managed McCain's campaign this year before leaving in a shakeup. Of Huckabee, he said, "The reason he did well in Iowa is that he had time to meet a lot of people. Iowans had a chance to really see him and get to know him."

But Huckabee's triumph may have blunted Romney's efforts in New Hampshire, leaving the former Massachusetts governor vulnerable to a surging McCain. Twin defeats for Romney could be enough to cripple his campaign, according to Republican strategists, because he invested so heavily in the notion that he could win the two early states.

"The fact that this thing is so condensed, so tight and so fast-moving really puts the pressure on the guys who are supposed to do well to meet those expectations," Reed said. "And when you don't, it comes down on you like a ton of bricks."

Much like the members of the Clinton camp, members of the Romney team disputed the notion that the compressed calendar works against their candidate. Spokesman Kevin Madden said it could work in Romney's favor, because he has had the money to build effective campaign organizations in all of the early-voting states. "Other candidates were depending on slingshot," he said, referring to momentum from an early victory. "We are more advanced in our preparation for those states."

Still, it is unclear which Republican would have the momentum after a split decision in Iowa and New Hampshire. The GOP contest will head next to Michigan, where Romney's father was governor, and then to South Carolina, where Republicans will vote Jan. 19, and where Southerners Huckabee and former senator Fred D. Thompson (Tenn.) are lying in wait.

And then there is Rudolph W. Giuliani, who is playing the compressed calendar entirely differently. While others look for early momentum, the former New York mayor is gambling that he can effectively sit on the sidelines and wait until Florida votes Jan. 29 and many other big states go to the polls Feb. 5. His hope is that his Republican rivals will arrive in Florida bunched up, with no clear front-runner. His risk is that someone will already be rolling toward the nomination.

[barbjc1]

Americans, you had better be very careful if you vote for Barack Obama. By the way, has anyone checked out his citizenship?
Barack Obama is a snake, in a Harvard lawyer''s suit. At least we already know all the dirt about Hillary Clinton, the news media made sure of that while Bill Clinton was President.

[bhappy2-2]

What we need is a candidate that supports AMERICA. We have had plenty of politicians who support ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS. We need to start DEPORTING ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS and HEAVILY FINE those who support ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS. We MUST SECURE OUR BORDERS and rid OUR COUNTRY of these parasitic ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS. If our politicians refuse to do so WE, THE CITIZENS OF AMERICA, need to REPLACE the treasonous politicians with ones who SUPPORT AMERICA. Failure to act now could result in The United States of America becoming North Mexico. They have an army here already, they only need to arm them. Those who claim "they don''''t want to take over" need to look around, see the way they have ALREADY TAKEN OVER our jobs.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! GET RID OF THESE ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS, NOW!

[aldee41]

The next President will be a Democrat.
Chose wisely. Chose Richardson

[element51]

RowdyTexan2...You have to excust Jack due to the fact that he forgot to clean his belly button window and connot see with his head so far up his azz. It isn''t his fault..those meds just aren''t working the way they are supposed to. He hates us because to him that is the American way..to him. To sit down and calmly discuss anything is just not acceptable. Wouldn''t it be wonderful to have to live with him? He could get you on the right path for sure.

[weezee4bill]

Ok, so who do you think Obama;s V.P. will be ??
Oprah Winfrey, Al Sharpton, or Jesse Jackson??

New Hampshire, turn these candidates INSIDE OUT TO KNOW TRUE CONTENTS.

BILL RICHARDSON FOR PRESIDENT.

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by Jack3213 at 06:16 PM : Jan 05, 2008

Oh yeah, let''s just get rid of all the democrats, keep all the stupid republicans here that voted TWICE for the Neocon regime! Hell they don''t want anybody in their country that can show them they''re being duped out of every dime they have! They don''t want anybody in their country that sees a better way!

I say let''s all us democrats move out. Maybe when they have to work until they drop dead because there''s no social security, and maybe when they have to lay in a bed and writhe in agony, because there is health care only for the very elite because they''re the only ones that can PAY for it. When the corporations have finally stolen their last cent from them in late fees and trumped up charges, and they can no longer drive their cars because they can''t buy gasoline anymore.

MAYBE THEY MIGHT APPRECIATE A LITTLE FREE THINKING!

[jack3213]

The poor simpleton democrats think that change- any change- for the sake of change- is even remotely congruous to improvement of a situation. You don''t revolt except against evil which precludes by definition even allowing the evil dems to propose change. See, just like with drugs, booze and toxic waste, there is absolutely NO problem for which the answer is a democrat!! Besides- if you want change for the better- the thing to do is get rid of the god damned marxist pigs pretending to be americans calling themselves democrats. They have not been cleansed out of washington once since 1940. THAT would be a change that would improve all our lives, and all of USA.

[weezee4bill]

Get out of Iraq with Bill Richardson for President.
Undeniable experience, Ready to lead, No on the job training needed. Good for America.
BILL RICHARDSON FOR PRESIDENT.

[realpatriot1]

Prinzowhales,

You''re absolutely right that you can''t fix stupid and once again you prove it with your simplistic posts.

Going into Iraq was wrong. Now that the troops are deployed getting them out involves more than campaign promises to bring them home.

Getting the troops home alive while limiting the bloodshed among the Iraqis requires several elements working together. The Iraq Study Group mapped this out over 2 years ago but the President stubbornly refuses to support the troops with a serious diplomatic effort to involve the cooperation of others in getting us out because he doesn''t want to leave.

You can *** all you want about those who gave him the authority being no different than the Commander who took that authority 4 years past the mission he was given authority for and it won''t say *** about what we do now.

If you and Kucinich and Gravel all put your heads together you''d still have nothing because pulling out is a massive logistical undertaking that will require working diplomatically with the Iraqi government, the Shiite militias in the south, the Kurds to the north, The Turks, and the Kuwaitis.

It took 4 years to get into this mess and it will take anyone but Bush to get us out but we''re going to protect our troops in the process.

[prinzowhales]

The overwhelming majority of Americans oppose the war in Iraq.

The overwhelming majority of Americans are supporting candidates who support the war in Iraq.

Ron White sez, "You can''t fix stupid."

[likeitis5050]

This will replace the writers strike!!! Who cares how long it takes for the writers, and actors scared to tick them off, to get their cut of the billion dollar industry that is wasting away because of greed? Who needs Desperate Housewives when you can watch Hillary melt like the witch in the Wizard of Oz? Who needs Grey''s Anatomy when you can watch the bottom feeders slice away at the bellies of the surface swimmers inching closer to being our future president? Gotta love this. Timing couldn''t be better. Maybe we''ll actually have people involved in the political process because their idiot tubes supplying them with the c.rap they refer to as prime time entertainment is out of business....having cut its own throat by insisting on getting more of what the other 75% of the nation, who thought they could never live without their favorite c.rappy tv show, will never see. The tv industry is dieing....let the games begin....and even more worthy of mentioning is the vast majority of writers and actors insisting on holding out for the big bucks are Democrats...the real backbone to the expansion of all these wonderful ''free for all'' government progams being formulated by the next Democrat in office....hahahahaaaa!!!!

[sjc_1]

I do not know if it is everyone''s desire to have a new president or they just want to get it over with, but this pulled in compacted schedule may not be the best way to go.