Jon Ralston on the little attention Nevada’s caucus gets

Wednesday, Aug. 1, 2007 | 7:18 a.m.

There they were on "Meet the Press" last weekend, the roundtable of pundits discussing the early states in the presidential race, wondering about Iowa and then New Hampshire, Iowa and then New Hampshire, Iowa and then New Hampshire.

Tim Russert presented poll results from the two states. Andrea Mitchell talked about how Barack Obama was emphasizing a campaign theme, "especially in Iowa and New Hampshire " Ron Brownstein wondered if John Edwards could win Iowa and then "if he's able to follow it up in New Hampshire ..." Others chimed in about momentum going from Iowa to New Hampshire.

Wait a minute. Isn't there a state betwixt Iowa (Jan. 14) and New Hampshire (Jan. 22) in the White House contest? I can't remember. And neither, it seems, can anyone else.

Less than six months before Nevada's debut as second-in-the-nation (assuming no mischievous leap forward by New Hampshire) in helping select presidential nominees, the state is hardly even a blip on the national radar screen.

Yes, candidates, especially de facto resident Bill "Nevada or bust and make me veep" Richardson, are passing through all the time. But they generally are doing quick hits - a union pander visit here, a town hall forum there, an appearance (crucially important) on "Face to Face" there.

The campaigns are skimming Nevada's surface while they are submerging themselves in the traditional early states of Iowa and New Hampshire. Four months after my colleague Michael Mishak penned a piece for the Sun about Nevada's importance or lack thereof, national pundit Charlie Cook's words seem prescient: "Nevada will get more attention from presidential candidates than it did in previous years but far less than it wants or expects ... There is no question in the minds of the candidates or the political press corps how enormously important Iowa and New Hampshire will be, enormously important. But there is still a question mark about whether Nevada will be important, somewhat important or not very."

You don't need Tevye to tell you that traditions are hard to change. The Iowa-New Hampshire reflex is there for presidential campaigns and the national media alike. Inserting Nevada in the middle of that hyphenate is as unnatural as, well, Nevada is to much of the political elite.

One local operative said there almost seems to be "a conscious effort not to mention Nevada. It is further confirmation of Nevada as a pariah state."

So what's the solution, or is there one for poor, poor pitiful us? Only one: patience.

Even though some of the locals have let their excitement erase their self-editing mechanisms - estimates of 100,000 caucus participants are just insane - Nevada's invisibility is not the fault of the parties, especially the Democrats, who have been hyping the Jan. 19 caucus every chance they get. Just Tuesday, we Fourth Estaters were treated to a news release about a soccer game with Assemblyman Ruben Kihuen captaining a team designed to reach out to Hispanic voters.

Gimmickry or innovation? At least they are trying.

The Democratic candidates also are paying lip service to the state, making regular visits and insisting when they are here that Nevada is critical. What else can they say? The Republicans, so far at least, are not doing as much, but they also took longer to focus on moving up their caucus to five days after Iowa.

So can Nevada be a real factor?

It depends.

In a business replete with cliches, this is the time to trot out the "marathon not a sprint" conceit. Some of the candidates running right now may not be around come the first of the year, which could have a tremendous impact.

As we move closer to the caucus, the calendar will come more into focus for the campaigns and the media, and you will start to hear chatter about getting a bump from Nevada after Iowa to help in New Hampshire. A first-place Iowa finisher will want to keep the tide rising; a second-place finisher will look to do well in Nevada, too; and a third- or fourth-place finisher will desperately need a good showing in Nevada to stay alive for New Hampshire.

I think the national folks - campaigns and media alike - will start talking more about Nevada as the winnowing process begins in a few months. And think of this: At least from Jan. 15 to Jan. 19, New Hampshire may be mentioned, but all eyes will be on Nevada.

They might even talk about it on "Meet the Press."