Romney's Not to Blame for the GOP's Primary Slog

In 2008, 80% of the Republican delegates were chosen before March. This year, only 13% were.

The Republican presidential nomination contest is dragging on because Mitt Romney is a weak front-runner—right? That's the media narrative, but in fact the 2012 race was always going to be a long slog, regardless of which candidates were running. For that we can thank changes to the electoral calendar and the campaign-finance system.

Our system for nominating presidents always changes from cycle to cycle, but the changes in 2012 are particularly significant. They make this year's race echo those of decades ago, when contests started in the cold of Iowa and New Hampshire and ended in late spring and early summer, as big states like Pennsylvania, New York and California weighed in.

That system changed for both parties in the 1970s, when the number of primaries increased, the contests started earlier in the year, and a matching public-finance system came into effect. The combination meant that candidates' momentum from early wins in Iowa and New Hampshire had no time to fade before other big states voted. So candidates without the "Big Mo" found that their money quickly dried up, forcing them out of the race.

Thus we got accustomed to candidates leaving early. By this time in 2008, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson were out of the Republican race and Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and John Edwards were out of the Democratic race.

But things were different heading into 2012. First, the system of public financing—under which fund-raising was limited by law and candidates who couldn't win 10% support in consecutive primaries were denied matching funds—had finally died. Its death had begun with George W. Bush in 2000 and accelerated with both parties' major candidates in 2004 and 2008, but it was assured by recent court decisions that opened the flood gates to unlimited amounts of money and super PACs.

With public finance gone from primaries, all candidates have needed to keep fighting this year is a single wealthy backer such as Sheldon Adelson in Newt Gingrich's case or Foster Friess in Rick Santorum's.

Then there's the decompression of the calendar. For years, states had been moving their primaries and caucuses earlier and earlier, hoping to get in on some of the attention lavished on Iowa and New Hampshire. But faced with the scary prospect of a national primary on Christmas Eve, the two parties had some success combating what came to be known as "frontloading" by states.

The Republican and Democratic Parties both enacted incentives for states to hold their primaries later in the spring. The Republicans did it by allowing only those primaries held after April to have winner-take-all rules, which make them particularly influential. The Democrats did it by giving bonus delegates to states that held their primaries after April.

These incentives have worked. Four years ago, a full 80% of the Republican delegates and 70% of the Democratic delegates were chosen before March. Super Tuesday was in early February and consisted of a huge number of primaries. This year, only 6% of the Democratic delegates and 13% of the Republican delegates were chosen before March—and Super Tuesday was a shadow of its former self. It held only 10 Republican contests, compared to 21 in 2008. Missing were some very big states like California, New Jersey and New York.

The relatively leisurely pace of the 2012 contests—certainly in comparison to 2008—means that no Republican can actually reach the magic number of 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination until much later in the spring. So if a candidate can afford to, it makes sense to stay in for the long haul. Before Super Tuesday, Mitt Romney had more delegates than all the other candidates combined, but his total of 165 was only slightly more than 10% of what he needs for the nomination. Even given the Super Tuesday results, he's likely to have only about 30% of what he needs.

The financing system and the calendar guaranteed that this year's nomination process would have a certain rhythm no matter who the candidates were. Perhaps the press, in its desire for news and excitement, ignores these factors and persists in spending every week drawing premature conclusions. But the candidates are attempting to win delegates because they've figured out that it's a marathon not a sprint. Commentators are running one race, the presidential candidates another.

Ms. Kamarck, a lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and a member of the Democratic National Committee, is author of "Primary Politics: How Presidential Candidates Have Shaped the Modern Nominating System" (Brookings, 2009).