The Iowa caucuses—the first major events in the presidential election seasons—are just two months away, Super Tuesday—the day when the greatest number of primaries are held to elect delegates that will nominate the party's candidate —is in less than four months and the general election is less than a year away.
Sure, our radars occasionally blip with stories like Cain’s ridiculous smoking ad and Perry’s “oops,” but this primary season has largely lacked the hype that we have come to expect from presidential elections. In an article earlier this week, Dan Balz of the Washington Post notes five reasons this race has been what he calls “one of the latest-starting, slowest-developing and most changeable nomination battles in modern memory.” His points are listed below, along with what I've personally noticed about why they matter.
1.)
Late Starts: In 2008, candidates eagerly filed far in advance of the elections, with formal announcements in 2006. Mitt Romney, often considered the current GOP front runner, also ran in 2008, making him a useful metric for comparing the two elections. For 2008, he announced at the very beginning of 2007. This election cycle, he waited until spring of 2011. Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry also waited until spring or even summer to declare their candidacies.
My take: The race’s late start seems to have prevented the candidates from settling into more clearly defined policy positions. Granted, much of American politics centers around posturing and packaging, but this race has been especially devoid of talk about the candidates’ platforms.
2.)
The People Who Didn’t Run: Mike Huckabee, Mitch Daniels, Sarah, Palin, Chris Christie—the list goes on and on. This race, numerous Republican publicly turned down the chance to run, with considerable attention going towards these candidates’ deliberations.
My take: I was utterly confused by why decisions not to run were regarded, over and over, as breaking news. The coverage dedicated to those who decided not to run has indicated what the race isn’t about, but it has done little to help us understand what the nature of the race is about.
3.)
Paging All Front-runners: Seven different people have held the top spot in the polls for the Republican race at some point this race. Even Romney, now generally regarded as the front-runner, has had a tenuous grasp of first place compared to other recent front-runners.
My take: The lack of a strong, leading candidate has made it difficult to rally excitement, in both support and opposition. The mainstream GOP sentiment seems to be okay with settling, but there have hardly been the expected rallying cries either for or against the “front runner.”
4.)
Funky activities: From fundraising, to campaign locations, to advertising, this race has broken from tradition. Around this time in 2007, Republican candidates had raised a total of around $230 million—this year, that number is $85 million. Interestingly, that’s around the same amount Romney alone had raised by this time during the last presidential election. Candidates have also been surprisingly uninterested in the early states (with a few exceptions), visiting less frequently and setting up fewer offices than in past elections. The candidates have also spent notably paltry sums on advertising: the Republican candidates have spent $1 million combined this year on advertising, compared the $11.3 million that been spent by this time in 2007.
My take: The lack of activity on the ground has again made for an unexciting race. Although it’s hard to tell which came first: the boring race or the bored electorate, it seems that each one has exacerbated the other.
5.) A national campaign: This race’s main theater been the national stage. Voters have gotten to know the candidates more through televised debates and shows than local events.
My take: this shift in focus will likely make for a more volatile race. When Perry stumbled horribly at the debate Wednesday night, people were quick to label it the moment his campaign died. With the whole nation paying attention to the same things, it is increasingly likely for one move to make or break a campaign.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.