Everything I’ve found in trying to research this basically punts, saying it’s by “longstanding tradition”. But how did they originally get these pole positions?
BTW, I vacillated over whether to post this here or in the “Elections” forum; but the latter seems to be all about the current election so I decided this was a question of fact.
They got them by deciding that they wanted them. Each state government (or its party organizations, depending on how things are set up) is responsible for conducting its primaries (or caucuses) in whatever manner it chooses and at whatever time.
Iowa moved their caucuses up to the head of the calendar in 1972 I believe.
Wikipedia has a good section on the timing of the New Hampshire primary. It’s actually been getting earlier and earlier over the years, leading to longer election cycles and more voters who just want everyone to STFU & GBTW already.
New Hampshire has had the earliest primary for a long time. Over time, people have noted how much attention primaries atract early on, meaning candidates will make promises relevant to that state to attract voters. Meanwhile, by later in the season one candidate is far ahead and the primary just a formality,with no attention paid to the state and its issues; or else you’r part of a “super-Tuesday” crowd and get ignored in favor of bigger states.
When other states have tried to move up their primaries, NH has responded by advancing its own to stay ahead. IIRC earlier in this cycle they were threatening a December primary if other states went ahead with their calendar changes.
Iowa was fairly irrelevant IIRC until relatively unknown Jimmy Carter made it his strategy to break ahead of the pack in 1976. He campaigned heavily in Iowa, and carried that momentum into NH. Since then Iowa has had a significance far beyond its size or the fact that it’s a caucus, not a full primary. Carter strategized that it required a lot less work to sweep aIowa that a full primary.
So the short answer is, “because it was before it was really important, and because those states are determined to keep it that way.”
Also note that in earlier days, primaries were relatively irrelevant or did not happen in some states; delegates to the conventions were picked by the party and part of the nomination process was schmoozing the party bosses that helped “decide” how their delegates would vote. So it was possible,perhaps, for a rich man from Boston to help buy a nomination for his kid by socializing with the right party bosses in the right states.
As a reaction to this legendary back room dealing, make the system more democratic, primaries were emphasized as the way to pick a candidate. By the time they were made important, NH had already cemented it’s position as the first.
(Recall the uproar in 2008 when it was suggested by some Hillary supporters that the number unelected Democratic party delegates might be able to swing the nomination her way, despite the obvious majority in elected delegates by Obama. Years ago, most of the delegates were selected outside of primaries. TOday it includes members of congress, party executive at various levels, etc.)
New Hampshire’s primary date is, according to New Hampshire state law, supposed to be a week before any other state’s primary. Of course, other states are not bound by NH Law, which results in ridiculous hypothetical scenarios like this. (In the event, Nevada blinked, and will be holding its caucuses on the 21st instead.)
Like Freddy, I’ll believe it when I see it. New Hampshire and Iowa have enough clout in the national committees of both the Dems and the GOP that they will fight tenaciously to maintain their first-in-the-nation status, and to punish any other states that try to horn in on their action, as well as any candidates who do not pay proper obeisance.
I would love to see the other states defuse the power of Iowa and NH by going the other direction - making their own primaries much much later. Let Iowa and NH have their moment and then…nothing…for months. By the time the other states get ramped up, Iowa and NH would be largely forgotten.
Good idea…but wouldn’t NH and Iowa just moves theirs back until it was close to the others?
You would need some collusion. 1 state that try to do it early to force NH and IA’s hand then the rest do it as you suggest. That sacrificial state could rotate every election.