Democrats Get Quick Lesson on Early Calendar

The first rounds of Democratic primaries and caucuses have taught one lesson above all: In the party’s compressed nomination calendar, momentum trumps money and organization.

Propelled by victories in Iowa and New Hampshire, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts won five of the seven states that voted Tuesday, even though he did not advertise in any until last week and had not set foot in them for months.

Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, coming off his losses in Iowa and New Hampshire, finished no better than third in any of Tuesday’s contests despite huge spending last year and early this year in most of the states.

Similarly, retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark advertised extensively in several of the states voting Tuesday, but managed to win only one after finishing third in New Hampshire.

To many Democratic strategists and independent analysts, these results make clear that when the contests are packed so closely together, momentum is by far a candidate’s most valuable asset -- a conclusion underlined by Kerry’s sizable victory in Arizona, where he attracted single-digit support in polls a few weeks ago.

“There are not a lot of candidates recently who can say they got the nomination on the basis of momentum, but Kerry clearly [would be] an example of one” if he goes on to head the Democratic ticket, said William Mayer, a political scientist at Northeastern University in Boston.

All the candidates, even Kerry, are struggling to raise more money for advertising in states with approaching primaries, including Tennessee and Virginia next Tuesday.

But Kerry, far more than his rivals, is reaching voters through news media coverage of his wins. For Kerry, the most important ingredient of his success may be success itself.

The wave propelling Kerry is so powerful that it threatens to overwhelm one of the most reliable laws of modern presidential campaigns. Since 1984, the candidate who raised the most money in the year before the voting has won each major party’s presidential nomination. But Dean now appears a long shot despite collecting about $41 million in 2003 -- the most by any Democrat in the year prior to primary season.

For Kerry, the decision to concentrate on Iowa and New Hampshire was driven as much by necessity as design: his difficulty raising money last fall forced him to lower his sights.

But it also reflected a different vision than Clark or Dean about the ability to lock down support early in states that vote after Iowa and New Hampshire.

“The strategy that we pursued ... was built on the belief that Iowa and New Hampshire would dramatically focus the attention of voters in later states,” said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist advising Kerry.

Kerry’s remarkable run from the back of the Democratic pack to the front will likely encourage future presidential candidates to focus even more intently on Iowa and New Hampshire.

“The lesson that everyone is going to take away from this is to concentrate on the early states and don’t make big investments in the subsequent states, because it could all change very rapidly,” said David Axelrod, an advisor to Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

Choices on balancing resources between the first two states and those that follow have influenced every nomination race since the modern primary system began in 1972, but never as starkly as this year. No first-tier contender concentrated his efforts into Iowa and New Hampshire -- and then Iowa alone -- more severely than Kerry. And no candidate has made a larger early investment in states that follow New Hampshire than Dean.

Edwards blended these approaches. Like Kerry, he emphasized Iowa and New Hampshire and paid little attention to most of the states with February contests. But he did devote substantial time and money last year to his native South Carolina. He hoped -- correctly, as it turned out -- that victory there could sustain his campaign even if he failed to win Iowa or New Hampshire.

Dean’s early investments grew both from his success at raising money and his decision to opt out of the public financing system, which freed him from campaign spending limits.

Flush with cash, Dean by last summer had opened offices with paid staff in most of the major states with February contests. And through late January, Dean had poured more than $1.4 million into television ads in Arizona, nearly $1 million in South Carolina and more than $756,000 in New Mexico, according to the Virginia-based TNSMI/Campaign Media Analysis Group.

That spending was intended to protect Dean from initial setbacks. But it is proving no more effective at resisting the rising tide than castles in the sand.

Not only did Dean finish far behind the winners in Tuesday’s votes, but recent polls show him trailing badly in two states where his organization is strongest: Michigan, which conducts caucuses on Saturday, and Wisconsin, which holds a primary Feb. 17.

He’s struggling for a decent showing in Saturday’s caucuses in Washington state, where he attracted such a large crowd for a rally in August that then-campaign manager Joe Trippi boasted Dean could win the vote just with the people on the spot.

“If Dean had been able to continue his momentum, his organization [in the later states] would have served him very well,” said Steve Murphy, the campaign manager for Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri, who left the race after running fourth in Iowa. “But the organization is only valuable if you have momentum.”

Clark, who didn’t enter the race until September, took a similar approach to Dean’s. He raised enough money to open offices with substantial staff in several states, including Arizona, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Tennessee and Virginia. And through late January, his campaign had spent $1.5 million on television ads in Arizona, $820,000 in South Carolina, $630,000 in Oklahoma and $152,000 in New Mexico, according to the ad tracking firm.

Clark husbanded his money better than Dean. While Dean could not afford to buy any advertising last week in the states that voted Tuesday, Clark still spent heavily in most of them.

But Clark didn’t have much more to show for his spending than Dean, with only a narrow win in Oklahoma and second-place finishes in Arizona, New Mexico and North Dakota.

The contrast with Kerry’s approach could hardly be more dramatic.

Kerry also opened offices last year in many of the states with February contests. But he shifted some of that staff to Iowa, and focused his time and advertising money almost entirely on that state and New Hampshire.

Until the day after New Hampshire’s Jan. 27 vote, the Kerry campaign had not bought a single ad in any of the states that voted Tuesday. Until a few days ago, he hadn’t visited Arizona since November; his visit to Michigan on Friday will be his first since October.

Polls completed exactly one week before his victory in Iowa showed Kerry attracting 7% support in Michigan, 3% in Arizona and 1% in South Carolina.

Yet Kerry finished a solid second in South Carolina, beat Clark in Arizona by 16 percentage points and leads Dean, his closest competitor, in the latest Michigan poll by more than 40 points.