"Republican primaries usually amount to coronations ... Democratic contests are often messier affairs ..." but now "... the two parties appear to be swapping their usual roles."

...................................................................................................................................................................
Stability and Chaos, Hallmarks of Presidential Races, Swap Parties
By Jonathan Martin, February 23, 2014

For generations, the two major political parties have taken strikingly different approaches to picking their presidential candidates: Republican primaries usually amount to coronations, in which they nominate a candidate who has run before or is otherwise deemed next in line, while the Democratic contests are often messier affairs, prone to insurgencies and featuring uncertain favorites.

Or, as former President Bill Clinton likes to put it, “Republicans fall in line and Democrats fall in love.”

But as the early positioning for the 2016 presidential primaries gets underway, the two parties appear to be swapping their usual roles. With former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s widely presumed candidacy overwhelming the Democratic field and dominating the news media’s attention, Democrats are playing the part of the royalists seeking a smooth succession. At the same time, the Republicans are acting like the Democrats of yore, anticipating a free-for-all primary that highlights the competing and at times fractious constituencies in their coalition.

“The Democrats look like they’re going to have a strong front-runner like we usually do and we look like we’re going to have a very large, very competitive field like they do when they win the White House,” said former Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, a onetime Republican National Committee chairman who has worked on presidential campaigns since 1968.

Gov. Mike Beebe of Arkansas, a Democrat who has also participated in many campaigns over the decades, phrased the 2016 circumstances less charitably for Republicans: “They’ve adopted our model of total chaos.”

The reversed roles were on display over the weekend as the nation’s governors gathered in the capital for their annual winter meeting, traditionally a showcase event for ambitious chief executives of both parties to talk up their records and test out their messages for a future presidential campaign. This time was no different, but it was the silence of one potential candidate and the shadow of another that vividly illustrated the contours of the coming race.

The Republican who many in his party believed was the closest thing they had to a presidential front-runner, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, attended the conference but avoided the news media and therefore questions about his administration’s role in closing down the George Washington Bridge as a form of political payback.

Even though he is effectively the spokesman of his party’s governors as chairman of the Republican Governors Association, Mr. Christie declined sit-down interviews and avoided impromptu encounters with reporters that are typical of the event. Into this void stepped a bevy of Republican governors who are also thought to be eyeing the White House; they used the weekend to appear on Sunday political programs and begin making their case for the nomination.

Of course, few will admit to planning a presidential campaign even before the midterm Congressional elections, but conversations with governors and political operatives suggest that as many as seven current Republican governors are considering bids. Then there is the prospect of Senators Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, and former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, all Republicans considering the presidency. All told, 2016 is shaping up to be the most unpredictable Republican primary in decades, perhaps since 1964, when the party was facing an internal struggle much like the one today.

“I think it’s great,” said Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, one of the Republican prospects, referring to what he called his party’s “wide-open race.” “All of us candidates always say we hate primaries, but the fact of the matter is we’re always much better for them.”

The Republican contest in 2016 could bring some clarity to whether the Tea Party wing or the establishment-aligned forces are in control of the party. It will also offer insights on more complex questions about the party’s tendencies on foreign policy, social issues and the economy. One reason there is no obvious Republican presidential heir is that the party has not yet resolved its own identity in the Obama era.

Former Gov. Jim Hodges of South Carolina, a Democrat, compared the Republicans’ plight to his party trying to find its way in the late 1980s and early 1990s after Ronald Reagan’s two terms.

“They’ve lost several elections in a row, so they are faced with a question of whether they go back to their core or become something else,” Mr. Hodges said.

If the Republicans are in the middle of trying to determine who they are, the Democrats are focused on the more calculating question of how they retain presidential power.

“My party is in a little bit of a just-don’t-blow-this-thing mode,” said James Carville, Mr. Clinton’s former chief strategist. “The idea that we’re now consistently winning presidential elections isn’t lost on us.”

After decades of internal feuding when they were mostly shut out of the White House, the Democrats are much more unified now on policy, particularly social issues.

Further, after electing the country’s first black president, Democrats want to make history again.

“I just think it’s going to be the year of the women,” Mr. Hodges said of 2016.

So while Mrs. Clinton may not have been at the JW Marriott for the governors’ meeting, her political presence was unmistakable.

The Democrats who would like to run for president dutifully paid homage to the former first lady, but could not help but show a touch of frustration.

“I do think that the clock ticks and while folks certainly want to give her some time to think and rejuvenate and get ready and all that sort of stuff, I do think you get past this November and people start toeing lines,” said Gov. Jay Nixon, of Missouri, a Democrat, taking care to add that if Mrs. Clinton ran he would help her “carry the Show Me State.”

Another Democrat, Gov. Jack Markell of Delaware, noted that the campaign should be about policy not primogeniture.

“It would be a huge mistake to forget the lessons that we learned in the ’80s and the ’92 election that elections are supposed to be about ideas and about how do you move the country forward,” said Mr. Markell, while calling Mrs. Clinton “an incredible candidate.”

As for Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland, who has been more candid about his presidential aspirations than any other Democrat, he said Mrs. Clinton would not freeze his ambitions.

“I spoke in New Hampshire about three months ago, I’ll be going to California to talk to the state convention there, I’ll be going to Wisconsin, so I don’t feel particularly frozen by anything,” he said.
...................................................................................................................................................................