Simulating an alternative 2024 presidential race

Strategies are about planning for the future. Unfortunately, the future has a nasty habit of being different from what we expect.

Legislata offers scenario strategy workshops to help organizations test and develop strategies for what might happen in various situations. This helps organizations be prepared for when something unexpected happens and you and/or your competitors are scrambling to react.

We recently ran an exercise of the 2024 presidential primaries without Biden or Trump as frontrunner as a demonstration of this technique as well as a chance to generate interesting findings about American politics.

There were six teams to represent some of the leading potential candidates: Vice President Kamala Harris, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

We want to stress that this is a simulation, speculating on a plausible course of events and how each candidate might react to the situation. It’s not to say that any of this will happen or that we support any particular candidate.

With that being said, it gave us a fascinating story. To get you through the doldrums of the summer, here is what probably won’t - but might - happen next year.

Opening scenario

January 1, 2024

A political earthquake hit Washington over the holiday break when President Joe Biden suffered a major health scare. He quickly after his return from the hospital announced that he would not be seeking a second term.

Combined with former President Donald Trump’s plummeting poll numbers after the revelations contained in his most recent indictments and his fellow Republican candidates turning on him with all their media attention, it turned the 2024 race into a wide open field. Rather than a repeat of 2020, it became clear we would have two new nominees fighting for the White House in November.

Democratic candidates announced their campaigns and Republican candidates reacted to the news by updating their messaging and strategies. With only a short time until votes started being cast, it meant that each candidate had an uncertain path ahead.

Who will emerge as their party’s nominee and which one will be better set up for victory in the general election?

By the end of this simulation, we will find out.

Turn 1: from January 1 to January 23

Democratic Candidates

To kick off this unexpected race, Vice President Kamala Harris embarked on a "Unity Tour" of the country, aimed at solidifying herself as the presumptive nominee and reassure Democrats that they need not have a bitterly contested primary. Her goal was to gain earned media attention in critical states and pick up Congressional endorsements to show that she is the natural heir to Biden's campaign. It would not have closed out the nomination for her, but would have put her in a comfortable early lead. Unfortunately, some of her early stops had gaffes and poorly-received remarks. It deteriorated and didn’t produce the endorsements she wanted.

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer focused on TV ads telling the "Michigan Story", of a growing economy and political success in a swing state. She put a lot of her attention on the Midwest, building up her polling numbers in critical general election states so that she can tell a national story. This was successful, but had only a minor impact, since much of the Democratic attention in early January was on the polling numbers out of South Carolina, which will be the first state with a sanctioned primary, and New Hampshire, with its noncompliant primary in January. Whitmer was still fighting for attention there, though with a compelling argument to donors that she'd win Midwest states in later weeks.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg visited transportation and infrastructure projects in predominantly Black areas of South Carolina and Georgia, to build up his support among Black voters and get a momentum-propelling win in South Carolina. Despite critiques that these trips were for show, he did gain some traction in the polling, perhaps less because of the trips themselves and more because they position him as the natural successor to Biden's infrastructure policies. He saw minor gains and appeared poised to at least be one of the top contenders after South Carolina votes.

Republican candidates

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis publicly called for a debate with Vice President Kamala Harris to highlight the contrast between what he was calling the two presumptive nominees. Unfortunately, the move backfired. Harris publicly rejected and mocked the move, telling DeSantis to win his own nomination before having a debate with her. His fellow GOP candidates also criticized him, saying that it was evidence he couldn't face them. (Note: we ran this simulation before DeSantis called for a debate with California Gov. Gavin Newsom - Team DeSantis in this exercise was prescient rather than imitative).

South Carolina Tim Scott staked his funding on a national tour to win over former Trump supporters who have only recently turned against the former president and were ill-disposed to DeSantis and Christie for their previous critiques of Trump. His goal was to boost his name recognition and get enough support in the polls to solidify his leading position with the donor class, who are poised to move on from DeSantis. The tour worked and, while it does not give him the nomination, it helped him win in Iowa, shocking the national party and propelling him into a contender position.

Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie spendt the start of January attacking Donald Trump who, despite having lost most of his support, is still a candidate on ballots. As the only candidate to go after Trump when he was the frontrunner, this campaign served to highlight Christie's bravery and honesty (his words in every TV ad running). Unfortunately for Christie, it didn’t resonate with most voters. They have moved on from Trump and they don't want to be reminded of him. Christie was able to gain a hold on the prior anti-Trump vote, but it's not enough to win Iowa. However, he did come close in New Hampshire, enough to keep him in the race.

Situation after Turn 1

Tim Scott won in Iowa and barely squeaked by in New Hampshire, with Christie only a couple points behind him and DeSantis and Haley a few points fewer. Pete Buttigieg won in New Hampshire, but it is being discounted as a state that suits him and not a real primary.

Both nominations are still wide open and there's plenty of time for the situation to change as we head into the early states of South Carolina, Nevada, and Michigan.

Turn 2: from January 24 to February 27

Democrats

Kamala Harris’ pivoted to focus on a series of policy rollouts. It worked out great. It put the focus on what the Biden Administration has been doing rather than her previously maligned campaigning and helped to her a convincing victory in South Carolina. She successfully took the mantle of the Biden Administration avatar from Buttigieg, who has been trying to invoke it with his whistlestop tour around infrastructure sites in January.

Buttgieg broadened his campaign to focus on social issues, seeking to draw a contrast between himself and Ron DeSantis. While it helped earn him media attention, it didn’t help him expand his base. His poll numbers were flat and pundits argued that he had failed to capitalize on his informal New Hampshire win.

Gretchen Whitmer sought celebrity endorsements and to elevate herself into a better known national figure through pop culture savvy. It gained her some buzz, but the polling remained stagnant. 

However, Whitmer won Michigan and Buttigieg, Nevada, which helped to knock Gavin Newsom and other candidates out of the race. Newsom in particular had a compelling message but was boxed out by Harris and Buttigieg taking the DC lane and Whitmer the non-DC lane. The field winnowed down to these three to Super Tuesday. 

Republicans

Tim Scott’s poured all of his money into a media blitz that burned through much of his cash without giving him a commanding lead in the polls. It became an open question whether he has the resources to compete on Super Tuesday. He scored a major victory in South Carolina primary, though it is his home state and so pundits started immediately dismissing its relevance. Haley dropped out after South Carolina, as did Pence. Scott also won Michigan, in a near tie with DeSantis. Despite sweeping the early states, Scott was not seen as a runaway frontrunner - with money tight he may not have the resources for a long campaign, and the other candidates are now training their sights on him, launching major negative ads for the first time.

DeSantis did better in these weeks, despite losing primary states, by racking up endorsements, mainly from those in state legislatures and backbench Members of Congress hoping to be helped by his Super PAC in their next races. He was trailing Scott but in a close second in the polls and with a massive war chest held by his outside allies.

Meanwhile, Christie pulled off a surprising second in Nevada, helped by him putting all his resources there. He failed miserably in SC but finished third in MI and argued he’ll pick up more votes as others drop out and as Scott and DeSantis train their ad campaigns on each other.

Situation after Turn 2

As we approach Super Tuesday, the three remaining Democrats are neck and neck, while for the GOP, it’s Scott, then DeSantis, then Christie hoping for a miracle. 

Turn 3: from February 27 to March 5

Democrats

Kamala Harris conducted a national tour across Super Tuesday states trying to rally voters and dominate the airwaves with earned media. Buttigieg focused on campaign ads. Whitmer put more of her resources into fieldwork and turning out the vote. All three strategies succeeded to various degrees, without any having a convincing success.

Whitmer was hamstrung by the fact that two months had been barely enough to stand up field offices across the country; Buttigieg by the fact that his policies were essentially the same as Harris'; and Harris by questions of how her policies differed as well. By the end of Super Tuesday, the delegate lead belonged to Whitmer, with Harris close behind, and Buttigieg a little bit further back.

The race now turned to the remaining states and delegates, and an anticipation of 2008 when every contest and delegate mattered. However, pundits are saying that the race is Whitmer's to lose - because Harris is the Vice President and Buttigieg ran in 2020, the fact that they were not able to deliver a convincing victory has made their supporters worry, and some endorsers have started to move to Whitmer. Whitmer's promise to deliver Michigan and Wisconsin in the general is also helping her cause.

Republicans

Tim Scott responded to his dwindling campaign cash with an effort to get on the airwaves with non-stop rallies. He was constrained by the fact that contested elections in both parties squeezed him off the airwaves, especially since his message focused on the general produced few viral clips. The speeches received very little coverage and he went into Super Tuesday without the organizing or ad coverage to help.

Chris Christie failed to take advantage of Scott's empty bank account, with his outreach efforts not getting him the votes he needed on Super Tuesday. While he continued to get television attention for his willingness to hit out against Scott and DeSantis, as he had criticized Trump before, they didn't drive many voters to him as the alternative. He dropped out the day after Super Tuesday, acknowledging that there was no path left for him.

DeSantis meanwhile blew out his budget on campaign ads, both supporting himself and attacking Scott. It was a torrent of dirt thrown at the new frontrunner who did not have the money to respond. Unfortunately for DeSantis, it simply didn't move the needle. The ads were dismissed as too little, too late, by a DeSantis campaign that had stumbled ever since its failure to turn him into the presumptive nominee in early January. His budget was gone and he was far behind in the delegate count.

The winners

After the dust settled on Super Tuesday, the Republican campaign appeared close to over - Tim Scott would be the Republican nominee.

However, whichever Democrat he ends up facing will likely be better positioned to win the general election. 

Scott has had to go through most of his campaign funds so far, including his allied PACs spending money for the race, and he’s faced recent non-stop attacks by DeSantis and Christie. The Democratic candidates campaigned on the same basic policies and, more through circumstance than anything else, have not had time to raise or spend much money yet. The Biden team's plan to coordinate much of their election plans through the Democratic National Committee is proving helpful to the eventual nominee, because they can inherit the structure of the campaign when the nominee is settled. At this point that person is likely Whitmer.

However, the race remains to be run and, after all, this is only a simulation.

What we learned

The purpose of this is not just to have fun pretending to be a campaign manager. By asking us to pretend to be a campaign manager and running through one possible world as it unfolds, it forces us to interrogate some of our assumptions about American politics.

When we, as players, choose a particular strategy in this type of game, we have to justify why it’s realistic and why it might work. In essence, the game asks us to explain the underlying structures of a presidential campaign through the mechanism of trying to win. In doing so, we discover things that would have required a lengthy research process to find, but that presented themselves in less than three hours of make-believe.

In no particular order, here were some of the things that this game presented.

Democratic findings

  • With Biden dropping out late, no candidate had any real fundraising, so the early turns were shaped by non-financial efforts.

  • Harris was well-positioned to win South Carolina, which, as the first primary, gave her a major advantage. She also had a built-in advantage being the Vice President, and able to get more free media compared to other candidate.

  • Whitmer’s general election argument was compelling to voters. It’s perhaps her best asset as a candidate.

  • Buttigieg’s leadership in the Department of Transportation was less than effective at translating into popular support. While transportation projects are popular, they aren’t the kind of rallying cries that excite voters.

  • Because two experienced candidates (Harris and Buttigieg) both failed to launch a strong campaign, Democratic endorsers began leaning toward Whitmer, giving her the edge. The incentive to find a winner and end the race quickly became strong after Super Tuesday.

  • We didn’t play as Newsom, but he’d be a credible force as well, likely just behind Whitmer as governors who can win the nomination. We think, however, that he’ll have a hard time getting past Whitmer who can argue that she’ll deliver a swing state, whereas California is already safe.

Republican findings

  • The early states were crucial at winnowing down the number of candidates. When Christie didn’t win in New Hampshire, it basically closed off his path and he was constantly trying anything to get back in the race. In real life, we expect that he’d drop out after NH.

  • We didn’t simulate Nikki Haley, but she probably has a similar profile to Tim Scott. She could do well with the donor class, needs her polling to improve to do so, and a win in South Carolina could be a launching pad.

  • With Trump effectively out of the race in this scenario, his former supporters are a huge voting bloc and explains the collective action problem other candidates have in criticizing him.

  • DeSantis’ money in his SuperPAC is his greatest asset. Once he spent it, there weren’t many compelling arguments for him that his team could make. It may be why in this scenario he’d try to move to create the image of a presumptive nominee before the votes are case.

  • Since Tim Scott is not yet a household name like DeSantis or Harris, and his campaign budget was smaller than many others, he faced an uphill battle heading into this simulation, but a win in Iowa proved very helpful to him. Unlike some past Iowa winners, he has the ability to translate a win there into a successful New Hampshire election.

Want a simulation of your own?

The above exercise was conducted using our scenario strategy workshop methodology. It was conducted entirely asynchronously and on the Legislata app. It included 7 people who each spent an average of 3 hours on the exercise. If you’d like to try out a similar approach for a problem or situation that’s concerning your team, get in touch at chris@legislata.com and we can talk through the details of this type of project.

Previous
Previous

How to use our Constituent Case bot to keep track of your open cases

Next
Next

How to use CrossPostBillBot to create your personal legislative tracker