Mark Mellman: Parsing the primary processes

If Democrats and Republicans were holding their national primaries 12 days from now, on Feb. 1, we could predict each party’s nominee with relative confidence.

Hillary Clinton enjoys a 16-point lead over Bernie Sanders nationally. Sanders’s support has grown significantly, doubling since August, but Clinton has held more than 50 percent of the vote for three months.

{mosads}On the other side, Donald Trump more than doubles the support of the second-ranking Republican.

However, we are not holding a national primary. 

The system proceeds state by state, over the course of several months, setting up a process where what happens in earlier states affects outcomes in subsequent states.

Real understanding of nomination dynamics also requires an appreciation of how the voting process interacts with each party’s delegate selection rules, because it is convention delegates who ultimately select the nominees.

One can lose their way to the nomination, so let’s start with the voting in the early states, which move votes elsewhere. 

Iowa and New Hampshire move votes in part because they account for about half the news media coverage of the entire primary season, with the winners absorbing the lion’s share of the attention. 

Coverage of the winners tends to be almost entirely positive, which fuels rising poll numbers. Meanwhile, losers find it difficult to stay on message as microphones are thrust in their faces and they’re asked to explain their loss and announce when they will be exiting the race.

The close contests forecast for Iowa and New Hampshire are injecting uncertainty into these races, making them difficult to predict. 

The two-person race on the Democratic side is more straightforward, if still not completely predictable. Clinton enjoys a narrow lead in Iowa, with Sanders holding a narrow advantage in New Hampshire. 

A Clinton victory in Iowa could still enable a Sanders win in New Hampshire, after which the demographic terrain becomes much less hospitable for the Vermont senator.

A Clinton win in both early states would seal the nomination for her, even if the ostensible battle continues.

On the Republican side, Ted Cruz maintains a clear advantage in Iowa, with Trump leading New Hampshire by a substantial margin. 

A Cruz win in Iowa would create an opportunity for him to win New Hampshire. 

A Trump victory in either of the first two states would also likely lead to a Trump win in South Carolina. 

Then the combination of the electoral environment and the arcane GOP delegate selection rules could complicate the Donald’s life.

By that point, Republicans, who see Trump and (to a lesser, but still meaningful, extent) Cruz as existential threats, will likely have created a situation where there is just one “establishment” candidate remaining. 

In a one-on-one match with Trump or Cruz, or in a three-way contest, the establishment candidate has a real chance of racking up wins. Moreover, those victories would come in large, winner-take-all states, quickly pumping up their delegate total beyond those of Trump (and/or Cruz).

While this is, of course, a conceivable scenario, and one explored elegantly and in depth by Dave Wasserman at 538.com, it comes with a large caveat.

Could the establishment candidate — say, Marco Rubio — lose a dozen states (or even four) and then get back in the GOP hunt based on potential victories in states like Massachusetts and Minnesota? 

In 1992, Bill Clinton lost five contests before winning the Georgia primary. Of course, Iowa was rendered moot that year because home-state hero Tom Harkin was a candidate, and Clinton had established himself as a force to be reckoned with by placing second in New Hampshire to Massachusetts’s Paul Tsongas. 

Since we began using primaries extensively, no other successful nominee has waited past New Hampshire for a win. 

Could this time be different? 

It’s possible, but don’t bet too much on it.

Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has worked for Democratic candidates and causes since 1982. Current clients include the minority leader of the Senate and the Democratic whip in the House.