Tomorrow Wyoming will be Ignored...

Damocles said:
As all of the candidates rush on to NH, tomorrow another state chooses who they think should run for their party. Yet we hear nothing about them.
Click to expand...

Wyoming is tiny. It also chooses by convention, rather than by caucus or primary. It's ALSO well off the beaten path.

Because it's a convention, there just isn't really much reason to advertise or campaign there. The delegates at the convention are dedicated party members and have probably already made up their mind. Going 2000 miles to campaign there whenever a primary is about to happen a few hundred miles away from Iowa would be retarded.
 
And Now On to ... Wyoming? (From Time Magazine)

Now that Iowa is done with its caucuses, get ready for the first primary of the season. No, not New Hampshire. Wyoming.

On Saturday, Jan. 5, Republicans in Dick Cheney's home state will hold their own renegade primary. It is a huge risk for the state G.O.P. They moved up the primary date without the blessing of Republican National Committee and will lose half their convention delegates for violating the rules. But there may be a big payoff: Wyoming could further confirm front-runner status for Mike Huckabee and give him momentum into the Jan. 8 primary in New Hampshire - or provide Mitt Romney with his first, if minor, stop of what might be a Huckabee steamroller.


Wyoming's Republican leaders, emboldened by a tradition of stubborn independence and weary of obscurity, are pressing ahead in spite of the national party's objections. After the state central committee voted in August to go early, Tom Sansonetti, organizer of the county-level conventions, said it was worth it: "There was a solid consensus by everybody that the price of playing in the nomination process was worth the loss of the delegates." Abiding by Republican National Committee rules and holding the county conventions later, Sansonetti said, would "doom the Wyoming Republican Party to being a non-player, with no visits, no phone calls, no direct mail, by the national candidates."


So far, however, the move has had rather tepid results. Just three candidates showed up for Wyoming's G.O.P. presidential forums in September: Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback (who has since dropped out), California Rep. Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson. Later visits to the state have been made by Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain have been no-shows.

Romney's organization has been the most visible, busily mobilizing campaign supporters among Wyoming's Mormons, who make up about 10% of the state's population. Precinct delegates headed for the Jan. 5 nominating conventions have also received mailings from Paul and Thompson.


The problem, however, is that Wyoming may declare for no clear favorite of its own on Jan. 5. Jan Larimer, Wyoming's national-level state committeewoman, who will lose her own 2008 convention seat under the RNC penalty, says, "It would be nice if we had a winner. I have no sense of any favorite so far. I think we're going to have a very mixed bag. I think we're going to have quite a few undecided, those not bound to support any one candidate." The 12 delegates who will be chosen on Saturday each have to represent a candidate. However, because the campaigns have been so inactive in Wyoming, it is possible that some delegates will be designated without being committed to a candidate at all. And if a majority of these are picked, Wyoming will end up being... undecided.


She says Wyoming's maverick experiment is fraught with uncertainty, unlike Iowa and New Hampshire. "They have their system honed," she says. "It's taken them decades to get that way. For our folks in Wyoming, this is the first time in choosing our delegates early and it has been a real learning curve for us. We have a lot of folks not paying attention. They need to understand that they're in the forefront of this and people are going to be watching."


It's also not clear what issues, if any, will stir Wyoming's G.O.P. primary votes. At the G.O.P. presidential forum in Casper, candidate proclamations of gun-owner rights drew standing ovations, and loud applause rewarded statements urging continued development and use of fossil fuels - a big issue for a state booming with coal mining, oil and natural-gas drilling. Larimer says immigration is a major issue in the state, surpassing the Iraq war. "People want to close the borders," she says. But retired Wyoming U.S. Senator Alan K. Simpson believes that, though "immigration has been a federal failure of will, [it is] not an issue for a President but for Congress. Show me a one-issue guy and I will stay away from him."

Simpson also noted that Wyoming voters have an independent streak. "I don't know why we get stereotyped as a solid Republican state," he said, listing all the Democratic governors in recent years. Still, the state's congressional delegation has been exclusively Republican for the past 30 years (Dick Cheney was elected to the House in 1978) and a Democratic presidential candidate hasn't carried the state since 1964.



Will Wyoming Republicans regret their experiment? "I think the jury is still out," says Larimer, who contends that the risk will prove worthwhile only "if we pick a winner on Jan. 5. If it comes out undecided," she adds, "that would not be a good thing for our process."


Wyoming's Democrats, by the way, are not making waves; they have scheduled their primary for March 8.
 
Socrtease said:
Now that Iowa is done with its caucuses, get ready for the first primary of the season. No, not New Hampshire. Wyoming.

On Saturday, Jan. 5, Republicans in Dick Cheney's home state will hold their own renegade primary. It is a huge risk for the state G.O.P. They moved up the primary date without the blessing of Republican National Committee and will lose half their convention delegates for violating the rules. But there may be a big payoff: Wyoming could further confirm front-runner status for Mike Huckabee and give him momentum into the Jan. 8 primary in New Hampshire - or provide Mitt Romney with his first, if minor, stop of what might be a Huckabee steamroller.


Wyoming's Republican leaders, emboldened by a tradition of stubborn independence and weary of obscurity, are pressing ahead in spite of the national party's objections. After the state central committee voted in August to go early, Tom Sansonetti, organizer of the county-level conventions, said it was worth it: "There was a solid consensus by everybody that the price of playing in the nomination process was worth the loss of the delegates." Abiding by Republican National Committee rules and holding the county conventions later, Sansonetti said, would "doom the Wyoming Republican Party to being a non-player, with no visits, no phone calls, no direct mail, by the national candidates."


So far, however, the move has had rather tepid results. Just three candidates showed up for Wyoming's G.O.P. presidential forums in September: Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback (who has since dropped out), California Rep. Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson. Later visits to the state have been made by Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain have been no-shows.

Romney's organization has been the most visible, busily mobilizing campaign supporters among Wyoming's Mormons, who make up about 10% of the state's population. Precinct delegates headed for the Jan. 5 nominating conventions have also received mailings from Paul and Thompson.


The problem, however, is that Wyoming may declare for no clear favorite of its own on Jan. 5. Jan Larimer, Wyoming's national-level state committeewoman, who will lose her own 2008 convention seat under the RNC penalty, says, "It would be nice if we had a winner. I have no sense of any favorite so far. I think we're going to have a very mixed bag. I think we're going to have quite a few undecided, those not bound to support any one candidate." The 12 delegates who will be chosen on Saturday each have to represent a candidate. However, because the campaigns have been so inactive in Wyoming, it is possible that some delegates will be designated without being committed to a candidate at all. And if a majority of these are picked, Wyoming will end up being... undecided.


She says Wyoming's maverick experiment is fraught with uncertainty, unlike Iowa and New Hampshire. "They have their system honed," she says. "It's taken them decades to get that way. For our folks in Wyoming, this is the first time in choosing our delegates early and it has been a real learning curve for us. We have a lot of folks not paying attention. They need to understand that they're in the forefront of this and people are going to be watching."


It's also not clear what issues, if any, will stir Wyoming's G.O.P. primary votes. At the G.O.P. presidential forum in Casper, candidate proclamations of gun-owner rights drew standing ovations, and loud applause rewarded statements urging continued development and use of fossil fuels - a big issue for a state booming with coal mining, oil and natural-gas drilling. Larimer says immigration is a major issue in the state, surpassing the Iraq war. "People want to close the borders," she says. But retired Wyoming U.S. Senator Alan K. Simpson believes that, though "immigration has been a federal failure of will, [it is] not an issue for a President but for Congress. Show me a one-issue guy and I will stay away from him."

Simpson also noted that Wyoming voters have an independent streak. "I don't know why we get stereotyped as a solid Republican state," he said, listing all the Democratic governors in recent years. Still, the state's congressional delegation has been exclusively Republican for the past 30 years (Dick Cheney was elected to the House in 1978) and a Democratic presidential candidate hasn't carried the state since 1964.



Will Wyoming Republicans regret their experiment? "I think the jury is still out," says Larimer, who contends that the risk will prove worthwhile only "if we pick a winner on Jan. 5. If it comes out undecided," she adds, "that would not be a good thing for our process."


Wyoming's Democrats, by the way, are not making waves; they have scheduled their primary for March 8.
Click to expand...

Or Ron Paul wins.

Which he's going to do.
 
Watermark said:
Wyoming is tiny. It also chooses by convention, rather than by caucus or primary. It's ALSO well off the beaten path.

Because it's a convention, there just isn't really much reason to advertise or campaign there. The delegates at the convention are dedicated party members and have probably already made up their mind. Going 2000 miles to campaign there whenever a primary is about to happen a few hundred miles away from Iowa would be retarded.
Click to expand...
However, the newsies don't report even a 5 second blip? It is inexcusable to ignore one of only 50 states so thoroughly that most people, even those invested in politics, totally had no idea that it was even happening.... Even if it is only 30 seconds on a show, people should have at least had an idea it was going to happen.
 
Damocles said:
However, the newsies don't report even a 5 second blip? It is inexcusable to ignore one of only 50 states so thoroughly that most people, even those invested in politics, totally had no idea that it was even happening.... Even if it is only 30 seconds on a show, people should have at least had an idea it was going to happen.
Click to expand...

It's not being reported because Wyoming just now moved their primaries up. They're still getting a hell of a lot more attention than last time around.
 
Watermark said:
It's not being reported because Wyoming just now moved their primaries up. They're still getting a hell of a lot more attention than last time around.
Click to expand...
They didn't "just decide" they decided a while back to do this, the National Party hated it and they were cut back in delegate count because of it. People have known about this for a bit. Some of the candidates actually even minutely campaigned.

It isn't being reported to a level that people barely even know about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top