DATE
STATE/TERRITORY
CALCULATED DELEGATES
TYPE
March 22, 2016
American Samoa Arizona Utah
9 58 40
Open Caucus Closed Primary Modified Primary
April 5, 2016
Wisconsin
42
Open Primary
April 19, 2016
New York
95
Closed Primary
April 26, 2016
Connecticut Delaware Maryland Pennsylvania Rhode Island
28 16 38 71 19
Closed Primary Closed Primary Closed Primary Closed Primary Modified Primary
May 3, 2016
Indiana
57
Open Primary
May 10, 2016
Nebraska West Virginia
36 34
Semi-Closed Primary Modified Primary
May 17, 2016
Oregon
28
Closed Primary
May 24, 2016
Washington
44
Closed Primary
June 7, 2016
California Montana New Jersey New Mexico South Dakota
172 27 51 24 29
*this is the Republican Primary Schedule. There are a few slight differences in the Democratic Primary Schedule
AS IOWA GOES, SO GOES THE NATION Looking at the schedule, you will immediately note that it is a stacked schedule. The first primary is in Iowa, followed by New Hampshire the next week, and so on with most states, who hold their primaries on different days. (With a few exceptions such as Super Tuesday, which this year will have 14 states participating in the primaries on the same day.) What effect does that have on elections? In the polls that we have been running for the past few weeks, the focus has continuously been on Iowa and New Hampshire. The candidates are currently doing most of their heavy campaigning in those states; that is where they are visiting and spending their money. The candidates do this because it is common knowledge that as Iowa goes, so goes the nation. History has shown that candidates that do
62
/ T HE MO NS E Y V IE W
well and have a strong showing in Iowa are more likely to continue on to win their party’s nomination. Keep in mind that a majority is not needed. All a candidate needs is to show significant number of supporters. They needs to show that they are a force to be reckoned with and should be taken seriously. Many voters feel more confident voting for a candidate that has done well in an actual election. Politicians, as well as movers and shakers, who have been reluctant to throw their support behind one candidate or another will also do so after the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries. This is called the Bandwagon Effect. People feel more comfortable doing something others have already done. You will also see the lower
tier candidates dropping out of the race and endorsing candidates who are still running. This narrows down the choices for voters from later states, thus giving remaining candidates a better chance to win. The way the system is set gives an unfair advantage to the early state who, election cycle after election cycle, have candidates visiting them and shaping their policies around what they believe will help them win early state elections. There have been several attempts to change the current setup, which so far have been unsuccessful. In recent years, many states have moved their elections earlier, but Iowa and New Hampshire remain the defining states in the primary elections.
History has shown that candidates that do well and have a strong showing in Iowa are more likely to continue on to win their party’s nomination.