Calendar implications; Iowa less important?
| Jan. 5: | Iowa caucuses | both parties |
| Jan. 8 | New Hampshire primary | both parties |
| Jan. 12 | Nevada caucuses | both parties |
| Jan. 15 | Michigan | GOP primary; Dem beauty contest |
| Jan. 19 | South Carolina primary | both parties |
| Jan. 29 | Florida | GOP primary; Dem beauty contest |
Marc Ambinder reports the schedule.
The most interesting thing that I saw was 3 days between Iowa and New Hampshire. Is that going to dampen the effect of (presumably) Romney’s Iowa win. Candidates are just going to move straight to New Hampshire, and there will be little chance for people to see much impact. With three days to go, people in New Hampshire are going to be making their minds before Iowa.
The same thing applies to Nevada, but I am not sure that anyone is really going to care about Nevada anyways.
Comments
Comment from Rachel
Time September 28, 2007 at 6:40 PM
The Mittwits hope we will think its over after Iowa, and that we want to vote for a winner. LOL
Pingback from death by internal memo: how the Romneys assuage themselves for their massive and accumulating losses « who is willard milton romney?
Time September 28, 2007 at 7:24 PM
[...] Here is a further problem for the Romneys. Iowa may be irrelevant what with the compressed primary schedule—2008 is not 2004, or so suggests the all-seeing eye in an eyeon2008.com post titled Calendar implications; Iowa less important? A Republican strategist not attached to a presidential campaign said the Romney campaign was trying to lower expectations about Iowa and New Hampshire. [...]
Comment from Rachel
Time September 28, 2007 at 10:14 PM
Now Romney is downplaying his chances of winning both New Hampshire and Iowa.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2844734020070928
Comment from eye
Time September 29, 2007 at 4:52 PM
Of course he is. He has a huge expectations problem.
Comment from sampo
Time September 27, 2007 at 5:46 PM
The GOP should take a lesson from the Dems and strip votes from Michigan and Nevada.