LAT: Early voters grow in importance
More than ever, Iowa or New Hampshire is a crucial win, especially for presidential hopefuls on a lower financial tier. That's everyone but Clinton and Obama.
By Mark Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
October 20, 2007
For months, politicians in big states like California, Florida and Michigan have griped about their lack of influence in the 2008 presidential race, pushing up their primaries to try to diminish the sway of Iowa and New Hampshire.
Now, thanks to those efforts, Iowa and New Hampshire appear more important than ever.
The reasons are illustrated in the latest campaign fundraising reports, issued this week. The figures show a presidential contest that has effectively split into two financial tiers. One consists of Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, who are swimming in campaign cash. The other consists of everybody else in the race.
Despite the competitive nature of the contest, fundraising has proved more difficult than many presidential candidates anticipated, particularly on the Republican side. Candidates face pressure to score an early victory in Iowa or New Hampshire -- the two states adamant about voting first -- and then hope to quickly replenish their campaign treasuries to compete in the rapid succession of contests that follow.
Failing that, the also-rans, Democratic and Republican, will probably have to pack up their campaigns and quit before the vast majority of voters even have a chance to weigh in. "Iowa and New Hampshire are everything," said Scott Reed, an unaffiliated GOP strategist, echoing the words of other political analysts. "They'll be like a slingshot for whoever wins and does well."....
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-money20oct20,0,6028518.story?coll=la-home-nation