This could be the first year since 1960 that the Democratic nomination contest goes all the way to the convention. In that year, John Kennedy eked out a first ballot win, but the roll call of the states went all the way to the letter W -- Wyoming -- before Kennedy went over the top. You have to go back to 1952 for a convention that went more than one ballot (Adlai Stevenson won it on the third.)
Most knowledgeable observers think I'm inhaling something. The usual view is that after a few primaries, the race must narrow to the top two contenders because everyone else's money dries up. But consider these unusual factors, which have all converged this year:
Proportional Voting. The Democrats no longer use a winner-take- all-system. Thanks to party reforms, votes are allocated proportionally. So, in a nine-person field, a candidate can "win", say, South Carolina with a plurality of 30 percent of the vote -- but only get about 30 percent of that state's delegates. In the old days, the winner would have taken them all.
A Persistent Field. Several also-rans will doubtless drop out after a few primaries. But the first few primaries could well splinter, and give five or six candidates a reason to stay in through March 2 (Super- Tuesday), by which time 2046, or nearly half, the delegates will have been chosen (and splintered).
Flukey Front-Loading. The Democrats keep trying to front-load the primary process, so that the party unites behind a nominee early and the in-fighting ceases in February rather than July. But this year, front- loading could backfire.
Howard Dean could narrowly win the first two contests, Iowa (45 delegates) on January 19 and New Hampshire (22) on January 27, but not get the necessary momentum to produce an aura of inevitability. Dean could also lose Iowa narrowly to Gephardt. In any case, these first two events are low-delegate states. And the next primary day, February 3, with a total of 269 delegates at stake, will produce very different headlines.
South Carolina's 45 delegates selected that day will likely be shared by Wesley Clark, Al Sharpton and John Edwards. In Missouri, with 74 votes, local boy Dick Gephardt will surely come out on top. Oklahoma, with 40 delegates, will be a good state for Clark. New Mexico (26) is Dean territory, but larger Arizona next door (55) could split several ways.
Barring a dramatic change in the dynamics of the race, by February 3 Dean will be slowed but momentum will not shift decisively to Clark (or anyone else). Any of three candidates, Clark, Gephardt, or Dean, could be narrowly leading in the delegate count. Kerry, Edwards, Sharpton, even Kucinich, will all have some delegates, too.
The longer more than two candidates stay in, the less likely it is that the nominee will emerge early. Kerry has just mortgaged his house. He is picking up some steam in Iowa. Unless Kerry is totally disgraced in New Hampshire, he stays in through March 2, waiting for lightning to strike. Likewise Edwards. Dennis Kucinich, darling of the party's left, has little to lose, and plans to keep campaigning.
With proportional representation, this dynamic peels off a few delegates here and a few there. The front-runner could well come into the convention (stagger in?) with fewer than forty percent of the delegates. The Democrats also have 715 "super-delegates" who are elected officials and party leaders. But these delegates have no consensus favorite, either.
If I'm right, what does this portend? For the Democrats, it's part bad news, part good news. The bad news is that the circular firing squad goes on another six months. The good news is that the race starts generating real excitement.
With this scenario, the fragmented delegate count produces several possible permutations. After the first convention ballot, delegates can switch their votes, and then the bargaining starts. If Dean comes in with, say, 35 percent of the delegates, Clark with 30, and Gephardt with 25, we could get a Dean-Clark ticket; or Clark-Dean; or Clark-Gephardt, and so on. The one with the delegate edge coming in is not necessarily the nominee since it takes fifty percent to be nominated.
The winner? The most likely nominee in my view is Wesley Clark, even if he doesn't have the most delegates on the first ballot, because delegates would turn to the candidate with the best chance of beating Bush. Clark, in turn, would be under heavy pressure to invite Dean onto the ticket as his running mate, because Dean enthusiasts would be inclined to bolt if their man had the most delegates but was denied the nomination. An alternative is Dick Gephardt, who could strengthen the ticket in the battleground states of the Midwest, but a Clark-Gephardt would increase the risk of Deaniacs going away mad.
Please note, two weeks ago in this space I wrote a tongue-in-cheek multiple choice test on public issues for the New Year. Several readers expressed surprise that my own guess on Question One was Answer A -- Dean would win the nomination and then lose to Bush. That was a typographical error, which was corrected in print editions of the papers that carry this column. My own pick was Answer B: a Clark-Gephardt ticket is nominated, and narrowly beats Bush. I now think it's equally likely that the ticket could be Clark-Dean.
Robert Kuttner's is co-editor of The American Prospect. A version of this column originally appeared in The Boston Globe.
