Every four years during the presidential primaries, we hear about how desperate states are to get the kind of national attention that goes along with playing a high-profile role in the presidential selection process. Some new data suggest, however, that the one caveat to this predictable behavior is when that role involves a state’s homegrown political talent. For Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, this means that a majority of his state’s voters do not approve of his busy schedule of invisible primary activities in places like New Hampshire and Iowa. For former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, it means that her fellow Alaskans would prefer former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee in 2012.

 

I remember a similar phenomenon in late 2002, when Howard Dean was the sitting governor of Vermont, and was first exploring a potential bid for the Democratic nomination for president in 2004. I recall hearing a great deal of criticism from within the state about his busy national travel schedule and frequent absences from Montpelier. Granted, some of this kind of local political pushback is likely the work of partisan opponents within a particular state, and a longstanding familiarity with a politician can also change voter perspective over time.

 

But this phenomenon of local disapproval of presidential ambition clearly has something to do with the setting of in-state priorities by chief executives, especially with sitting governors at the end of their final term in office, like Pawlenty and Dean. In Palin’s case, she is already a private citizen, having resigned her office in July 2009. But the continued impact of her 2008 vice presidential run and newfound national celebrity seems to be playing out as the same sort of mixed bag for her fellow Alaskans.

 

Note: Have a safe and enjoyable Labor Day weekend. I’ll see you back here on Tuesday for the final sprint to our state primaries. -Dean

I’ve had some requests in the past 24 hours for my reaction to the release of the draft legislative panel report on the Financial Resources Mortgage scandal, and in particular, questions about whether its criticism of former New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte is a serious problem for her U.S. Senate campaign, just two weeks before the Republican primary. As I said yesterday shortly after the draft became public, this couldn’t have come at a worse time (or a more suspicious one, according to Ayotte supporters) for her candidacy. It will certainly give both her potential Democratic opponent, Rep. Paul Hodes, and the other Republican rivals a renewed opportunity to question her leadership ability. The media will also continue to explore all possible angles on the story right up until ballots are cast, which will keep it highly visible in the public discourse surrounding the race.

 

But the report mainly paints a larger picture of systemic governmental failure in dealing with fraud cases, complete with overlapping and conflicting bureaucratic jurisdictions. Ayotte is singled out and assigned at least some of the blame for this in the FRM case. The question for me is whether voters will see this episode primarily as a failure of Ayotte’s leadership, or instead as a more general institutional design failure of the sort we see in government all too frequently. With no new revelations to detail in the report, the Democratic-led investigative committee is essentially left to level anew prior criticism first heard during Ayotte’s public testimony last spring. The report’s content and timing are therefore ripe for the inevitable charges of politicization. My sense is that none of it will fundamentally alter the arc of the scandal story, or Ayotte’s role in it. Since it didn’t derail her candidacy in June, my guess is that it probably won’t now.

Per my last posting, I’ve been away from the website until today, so I was unable to provide you with advance notice of my appearance this morning as a guest on New Hampshire Public Radio’s The Exchange. On the show, I participated in a preview of the September 14^th primaries to replace retiring U.S. Senator Judd Gregg. If you were unable to catch the show this morning, or the 8 p.m. rebroadcast this evening, I hope you will check out the program’s podcast here.

Archives