Approaching the New Hampshire primary or as Bernie Sanders would say, the New Ham-Sha primary, the pundits tell us that it is critical to make a strong showing to be able to raise money to go on running for president.
Wrong. Why wrong? Because it is already Feb. 10 and there are not but two realist outcomes left in the race for the Democratic nomination.
Either someone will emerge to be the overwhelmingly likely nominee by April 2 — only seven weeks from now — or no one will, pointing the contest toward negotiation and perhaps some candidate withdrawals in mid-to-late June as the decision could head toward the first multi-ballot convention in either major party since 1952.
Ah but all the pundits keep harping on the likelihood that candidates will be forced to withdraw because their money will run dry long before then.
Have they been right yet? Nope. And aren’t you beginning to hear the first noises from them about this being a long, drawn-out battle?
First, money is a lesser factor in a contest in which one man is spending three times what all other candidates are combined. As of the Iowas caucuses — whose failure is one of one state Democratic committee, not of an entire party — Michael Bloomberg had spent $300 million in two months since entering the race.
The day after Iowa, Bloomberg announced he would double down and spend $300 million more to gain the nomination and would double his staff of 1,000 campaign workers nationwide to 2,000 workers.
Against the onslaught of his money, the amount any other candidate can raise and spend is relative — as in relatively meaningless. That is especially so knowing that at his present pace, by the time the convention rolls around it is likely Bloomberg will be in for $1 billion. His convention operation will cost millions more than anyone else’s simply because it can.
Second, and equally relevant as to why money is less the measure it has been up to now is the calendar.
As noted, it is Feb. 10. New Hampshire votes Feb. 11 (tomorrow as this is being written). Late polls point to at least five candidates obtaining 10% of the vote statewide. At least three and possibly four are within reach of the 15% needed to get a share of the state’s pledged delegates, of which for all the commotion there are but 24 — 8 each in the state’s two congressional districts, 3 PLEO delegates (if my readers by now do not know what PLEO means I am not explaining it again) and 5 statewide at-large delegates.
As Bugs Bunny would say, “Duh, that’s all folks”.
Yes, that’s all folks because for all the rapture on MSNBC and CNN, 24 delegates is a spit in the delegate ocean. Oh, Iowa? That was 42 delegates where 5 candidates came away with at least a few and the highest number was 14 for Pete Buttigieg.
Get the point? February is deciding pretty much nothing.
And that will signal what? Nothing actually, absolutely nothing except that the race goes on. Why? Because Democrats so far fail to perceive a president among their choices, allowing that yes, so far, Bloomberg is not one of the choices they have had and he won’t be until March 3.
After New Hampshire, the contest moves on to Nevada (where more orderly caucuses will occur Saturday, Feb. 22 ) and then to the South Carolina primary on Saturday, Feb. 29 (it’s a leap year).
South Carolina has rightfully been advertised as the first test of how black Democrats will vote except that proposition too is subject to dissection. Yes, African Americans comprise well more than half the Democratic electorate in the Palmetto State.
But their outlook, political experience, and expectations in small-city, rural South Carolina are very different from African Americans in, for example, the largest black city in the United States – Brooklyn, N.Y., where more than half the 2.7 million population are black people.
All that being said and said and said by the media and when it concludes with the South Carolina vote, February results in the election of just 154 pledged delegates among the 3,981 pledged delegates who will be elected to cast votes on the 1st convention ballot. On that first ballot, 1,991 delegates will comprise the majority necessary to win the nomination. So, after Iowa, Mayor Pete for example still needs 1,977 delegates to be nominated.
Three days later, on March 3 is Super Tuesday: 14 states including California (415 pledged delegates) and Texas (268 pledged delegates), American Samoa and Delegates Abroad will vote.
On Super Tuesday, a further 1,551 delegates will be chosen and the total elected to that moment will be 40%. By March 17 the total rises to 60% and by April 2 to 70%.
If Super Tuesday produces at least four — and with Bloomberg and his fortune in the mix from that day forward — quite possibly five still viable candidates, then money to finish the heart of the primary season to April 2 will be less consequential because only 30% of pledged delegates will still be available and because Bloomberg’s money will continue its deluge.
This is not to dismiss money as a factor but if by April 2 at least four of the candidates who rely on fundraising rather than a $55 billion fortune have accumulated sufficient delegates to continue, they will be able to ride increased public awareness in the media, on-line, and among actual remaining primary voters of the fact that a historic convention battle could loom.
If no candidate reaches or gets really close to the magic first ballot number of 1,991 delegates, candidates who can amass even a couple of hundred delegates would be foolish to drop out. Lightning doesn’t come in a bottle but at a contested convention a few hundred delegates can be tinder for a wildfire to sweep the convention floor.
It may be an oxymoronic posit, but one doubt has become clear as crystal. If Bernie Sanders is not the candidate, and this writer bets heavily he won’t be, will he and his angry legion — who like their candidate reflect limited knowledge and narrow perception — abandon the Democratic Party and its nominee?
This threat more than anything else — and it looms and will loom larger as the competition becomes sharper — could thwart the election of a Democrat to the White House in November.
Peeling the Onion 