Was the primary calendar and the general nomination system stacked in Obama's favor? If there was some DNC tilt for him in the way the race was structured, and I don't think there was, Hillary Clinton had managed to take command of the institutional advantages in 2007.  On New Year's Day 2008 she had the institutional edge in the four early states and in key national indicators.  The calendar worked in favor of the frontrunner, and on 1/1/08 Clinton was the frontrunner.

During 2007 Hillary Clinton led in money raised.  The Polls also favored Clinton.  Throughout 2007 she held a lead of at least 20 percentage points over her nearest rival, and the rival more often than not was Al Gore, who had repeatedly said he would not run, rather than Barack Obama.

Clinton also held the lead in endorsements by Democratic officials, especially in the early primary states.  In Iowa, Clinton claimed more endorsements from state Democrats than did Obama and she wracked up the endorsement of the state's leading newspaper, the Des Moines Register.  In Nevada, Clinton's backers included Rory Reid, Harry Reid's son who served as the Clinton campaign's Nevada state chairman. H. Reid never endorsed, but this was a "leading indicator" of where he leaned. The same was true for John Lynch, Governor of New Hampshire.  Susan Lynch, a pediatrician and the wife of the governor, served as Clinton's national campaign co-chair.    Even in South Carolina, a state where Obama doubled Clinton's vote total, the former First Lady claimed public support from more elected Democrats than did her challengers.  

In 2007, the year before the voting started, Hillary Clinton raised more money, garnered more endorsements. And led in every poll of popular support over her challengers for the nomination. She had by all measures won the first round of the race for the nomination, and she was the decided favorite for the Democratic nomination.  

I'm curious to read the other side of the equation.  Have at it.

There's more...

Mark Armbinder has the scoop on Michigan top politicians (Democrats and GOP) reaching a deal this morning, which is waiting to be ratified by the Michigan legislature, to move the primary to January 15.  

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arch ives/2007/08/a_january_15_michigan_prima ry.php

Michigan could hold a statewide primary on Jan 15, if a deal reached this morning by top Republicans and Democrats in the state passes muster with state legislators.

Michigan political sources say that Gov. Jennifer Granholm, Sen. Carl Levin are very close to a deal with House Speaker Andy Dillon (D) and Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R). It's not clear whether the state parties are on board, yet, but if the legislature decides to pass a bill changing the primary date, and then Gov. Granholm signs it, there's not much dissidents can do.

I doubt that the Michigan legislature is opposed to this deal.  Generally, legislators would be prone to follow their leaders on this.  It also is logical for state legislators to want their state to make a difference rather than be completely out of the decision-making process at their previous set date of February 26.

What would a Jan. 15 primary mean for the rest of the primary calendar?

One possibility is that the DNC and virtually every other interest in the party gangs up on Michigan and pressures candidates not to compete there. The Republican National Committee has some leverage, but not nearly enough.

Also: If the political world takes Michigan seriously, Iowa might be forced to look at a December date again (despite Gov. Chet Culver's protestations to the contrary) because New Hampshire's Secretary of State would be pressed to set the state's primary in early January.

Of note here is the DNC meeting with the Florida Democratic party to discuss and decide on a proposal to give Florida a one-state exemption to keep all its 201 delegates, despite having moved to Jan. 29.

If Michigan forces Iowa to move into Dec. 2007, the caucus is seen as losing a lot of impact, basically becoming a glorified straw poll.  

Also, if Michigan indeed becomes the 3rd early state on Jan 15, it gains tremendous impact which would hurt South Carolina's importance.  

There's more...

Michigan is not mobbing to January 29th, as I have often assumed. Last week I received the following bit of information from an anonymous source:

My local Democratic club, and my county party, have been told to secure caucus sites for December 8th and 15th, and January 5th and 12th, along with our scheduled February 9th. The list of sites are to be submitted by June 1st, so it would seem these are the only possible 5 dates.

Personally, despite repeated threats and a clear desire to be one of the earliest states, I doubt that Michigan will have the guts to move to either December of early January. Even if they did move early, it is hard for me to imagine that any of the major candidates would take such a move seriously and compete there. Then again, I thought Michigan was going to move to January 29th, so maybe no one should listen to me when it comes to figuring out the Michigan caucus.

Also, Texas has pulled out of Super Duper Tuesday, Pennsylvania isn't signing up, Montana has bowed out, and Kansas does not appear eager to join up either. However, with little opposition, February 5th legislation has moved forward in Illinois, Georgia, Connecticut. Mark those three down. Right now, about the only February 5th question mark is North Carolina, which has introduced legislation to move to February 5th, but has not acted on that legislation in over three months.

So, here is my best guess at the developing Democratic primary calendar:

• January 7th: Iowa (rationale)
  
• January 15th: New Hampshire (because Iowa and South Carolina will move)
  
• January 19th: Nevada
  
• January 22nd: South Carolina (rationale)
  
• January 29th: Florida
  
• February 5th: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah

While still clearly delegate rich, the lack of Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania and, on the Democratic side, Michigan, has made February 5th a little less "Super Duper." Still, the 19 states currently listed on February 5th represent more than 45% of the country's population. Interestingly, February 5th now has a decidedly western, or at least California, flavor to it. This is especially the case if one removes Illinois, New York and North Carolina from the equation, considering those are the home states of Obama, Clinton and Edwards respectively. Representing about 40% of the remaining February 5th delegates, California might end up being the big winner and big decider after all. Then again, it is hard to imagine California making some sort of California specific decision that is free of early state influence and momentum. All of these states February 5th states will probably just end up voting the way the post-Iowa and New Hampshire media narratives tell them to vote.

I am stuck in the Atlanta airport, which is going to make me late for a conference I am attending this weekend. However, there is the added side benefit of having a little extra time to blog. Here are some stats that caught my eye this afternoon:

• My high-end national polling average stands at 34.0%--Clinton, 29.7%--Obama, 18.3%--Edwards, and 18.0% Other / Unsure. That is a record low in the high-end estimate for both Clinton and Others / Unsure, while it is a record high for both Obama and Edwards. The low-end average currently stands at Clinton--32.8%, Obama--25.6%, Edwards--16.6%, and Others / Unsure 25.0%.
  
  
• Chris Mathews loves him some Romney. Check out how much more time Romney had to speak last night compared to other Republican candidates:

  Candidate: Questions asked / Speaking time

  1. Mitt Romney: 19 / 10 min 47 sec
  2. Rudy Giuliani: 17 / 8 min 19 sec
  3. Sam Brownback: 15 / 7 min 26 sec
  4. Mike Huckabee: 15 / 7 min 23 sec
  5. Jim Gilmore: 12 / 6 min 58 sec
  6. Tom Tancredo: 15q / 6 min 48 sec
  7. Tommy Thompson: 13q / 6 min 26 sec
  8. Ron Paul: 13q / 6 min 20 sec
  9. John McCain: 16q / 6 min 7 sec
  10. Duncan Hunter: 12q / 5 min 53 sec

• In wake of Florida's obnoxious power grab, Iowa now seems certain to move to January 7th, or even earlier.

  The Florida Legislature's decision Thursday to move the state's presidential primary to Jan. 29 makes it more likely that Iowa's leadoff caucuses will be forced earlier - within a week of New Year's Day, Iowa and New Hampshire Democratic Party insiders said.
  
  Iowa's caucuses are tentatively set for Jan. 14, with New Hampshire's primary set to follow eight days later.
  
  "I would not be surprised if we have to move ourselves to Jan. 7," said former Iowa Democratic Party chairman Rob Tully.

  It is starting to seem like the primary calendar will go : Iowa on 1/7, New Hampshire on 1/15, Nevada on 1/19, South Carolina on 1/22, Florida and Michigan on 1/29, and Super Duper Tuesday on February 5th This isn't too bad, as it stretches out the process somewhat, but I still think my proposed calendar with Iowa and New Hampshire on December 10th and 18th respectively would be the best solution. As usual, most problems wouldbe solved if people just listened to me. No matter what happens, I hope that Iowa and Hampshire will stop their privileged, anti-democratic whining and just set their dates once and for all. I just don't know how much longer I can stand to listen to Iowa and New Hampshire officials complain, threaten, and explain why residents of those two states are the master race before I begin projectile vomiting.
  
  
• New Diageo / Hotline general election matchups:

  Clinton 45% McCain 45%
  Giuliani 47% Clinton 43%
  Clinton 50% Romney 35%
  
  Obama 48% McCain 37%
  Obama 48% Giuliani 39%
  Obama 54% Romney 25%
  
  Edwards 48% McCain 37%
  Edwards 47% Giuliani 41%
  Edwards 52% Romney 26%

  Clearly, Diageo and Quinnipiac are not polling the same nation.

This is an open thread. Tell the world what is on your mind.