(Cross-posted at The Field.)
There are published rumors that either or both the Richardson and/or the Biden campaigns have told supporters in key precincts that if their candidates don’t achieve the 15 percent “viability” (in some precincts, that threshold, set by the locals, is as high as 20 or 25 percent) that their supporters should cast a second-choice vote for Obama. (All three campaigns officially deny any such deal-making, but the rumors persist, including with quotes from unnamed campaign operatives).
I think it’s plausible. But there's a bigger potential game on the horizon tonight if the entrance poll shows Clinton in third place: one in which the Clinton campaign pushes those delegates it can to vote for Edwards. But first, on to the early wave of rumors...
Biden and Richardson should rather want Obama to win than Clinton or even Edwards. If Obama bests Clinton in Iowa and then again in New Hampshire, the “experience” candidate is going see her fundraising stall and her momentum sputter, leaving a small but real window open for another “experience” candidate to emerge as the anti-Obama in later primaries. But if Clinton wins Iowa and then New Hampshire, those slim chances greatly narrow for Biden and Richardson both.
No deal is necessary for one or both to quietly make that call to their most trusted precinct captains and political brokers (as we pointed out yesterday, Biden counts with a lot more of the kinds of politically savvy supporters that could pull this off than Richardson has). It’s in their self-interest (just as it’s in Kucinich’s self-interest) to see Obama push Clinton and Edwards out of the way, opening up new vacancies in the roster.
But here’s where a deal could come in handy: Biden and Richardson are in their own sub-primary to best the other for a likely fourth place.
If you’re the Biden campaign, you have the upper hand over Richardson to broker the following kind of deal either with the Obama, Clinton or Edwards campaigns: that in exchange for pushing an agreed-upon number of votes to one of those candidates in those districts where yours doesn’t meet the 15 percent threshold, that campaign then sets some of its most discreet and experienced operators to push your candidate some of his votes in those precincts where a little extra push could get you a delegate or two. The net number of votes for each candidate might not differ, but the delegate apportionment would be bolstered for both. Today, in the age of cell phones, such deals are more possible than ever, and with simultaneous on-site verification of their compliance.
Many people hear of these scenarios and say “that’s impossible.” Or they think, “That’s dirty.” Maybe so, but it’s not illegal.
And it happens. I’ll offer an example.
Once upon a time there was a state Democratic convention in one of the 50 states for candidates for statewide office. Seven candidates competed for one of those offices. To qualify for the primary ballot, one had to receive 15 percent of the convention delegates on either the first or the second convention ballot. On the first ballot, four candidates qualified, one of them, a liberal man, with 15 percent plus only 4 votes. That meant that one liberal woman and three men – two conservative Democrats and the one liberal man - would be on the ballot. But a fifth candidate, a popular liberal woman legislator, fell short of her 15 percent by about 20 votes. Still, she had a second chance to meet her 15 percent threshold.
On the second ballot, in very small clusters where discreet and effective political operatives had supported the sole male liberal, handfuls of those that voted for him on the previous ballot switched and voted for the second liberal woman, nudging her across the 15 percent bridge and placing her on the statewide ballot. The candidate from whom those votes came saw his vote lowered on the second ballot, but he had already qualified for the statewide primary ballot, and had no chance of winning the symbolic convention endorsement anyway. He went on to narrowly win the primary, in part because two liberal women, instead of one, ended up splitting womens’ votes in the primary.
If such a time and place ever existed, it was probably someone that looked a lot like me who coordinated that geographic part of the state for the eventual winner at that convention. The votes that disappeared from him and put the other candidate on the ballot came from my region. Today, decades later, I would still fervently deny that I was involved in any such brokering (although it is not a crime of any kind), and if confronted by evidence that I had been involved, I would change my story to say, “well, yes, but I was a rogue agent, my actions weren’t authorized by the campaign.” That’s how it’s done.
On the other hand, had there been cell phones and wi fi back then, I and others might have been caught in the act and read about ourselves on the Internet and in the morning papers.
That said, here’s what to watch for tonight if the entrance poll shows Clinton in third place and Obama in first: It may be the Clinton campaign that attempts to push Edwards in front of Obama by shepherding some of its supporters – those that are part of local political machines, and therefore more willing to play in this way - into the Edwards camp.
As everyone knows, a win by Edwards would be less damaging to the Clinton aspirations than a win by Obama. That’s difficult – but not impossible – to do, even more difficult to hide, and could cause a controversy coming out of the caucuses tonight.
Such a controversy would change the story from “Obama wins” to “Did Edwards really win? Or did Clinton push him over the top?”
But for Clinton, even that kind of controversy would be a less harmful story than a clear victory by Obama. And politics ain’t beanbag.