Historically, all but three US presidents were elected after winning the New Hampshire primary - and those three came in second place.
Former state representative Jim Splaine, who 36 years ago wrote the law preserving the state’s first primary, said the New Hampshire primary is not about New Hampshire.
“It’s about protecting an important element of American democracy to make sure that there’s a way in place where candidates running for office … can meet voters one to one, face to face, eye to eye, in their living rooms and on the streets, to communicate their messages,’’ Splaine said.
The early schedule will push campaigning into Christmas and New Year’s, a scenario similar to that of 2008. While the national parties had hoped to avoid early January primaries this year, the date became necessary after jockeying among the states.
Originally, the national parties wanted the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada to vote in February, with the rest of the states following in March.
But after Arizona broke the party rules by scheduling its primary for February, Florida moved its contest to Jan. 31. Nevada then tried to schedule its caucus for Jan. 14, which could have forced the New Hampshire primary into December. After several candidates threatened to boycott the caucuses, Nevada bowed to pressure from New Hampshire and national Republican leaders and rescheduled its contest for February.
The move by Nevada opened the door for New Hampshire, which by state law must hold its primary at least a week before any similar contest, to vote Jan. 10 - after the Jan. 3 leadoff Iowa caucuses, and before South Carolina votes on Jan. 21.
Gardner thanked the Republican Party chairmen in Iowa and South Carolina, and pointedly did not mention Nevada. Asked about efforts by several candidates to boycott the Nevada caucuses to force a date change, Gardner responded, “Anything that candidates felt was appropriate on their own to help preserve the tradition of the primary helps us and is appreciated.’’
