I’ve generally been of the view that the earlier that the Republican primaries and caucuses begin, the better off Mitt Romney’s campaign will be. 
 
 This is a pretty straightforward case: Mr. Romney is a well-prepared candidate and leads the field right now according to most polling and non-polling indicators. It isn’t a very large lead, and as Chuck Todd notes, I’d be a little bit careful in anointing any candidate with the “inevitability” label when he’s still polling at just 20 or 25 percent. But it’s a lead nevertheless, and the sooner the voting begins, the less chance there will be for another candidate like Gov. Rick Perry to gain a firmer footing as his campaign gains experience. (Earlier voting dates have also made it much harder for additional candidates like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to enter the race.) 
 
 Mr. Romney’s campaign evidently agrees with this thinking: it pushed for an earlier date for the Nevada caucuses, according to reporting by the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Des Moines Register, which were recently moved to Jan. 14 from Feb. 18. 
 
 But there is one potential wrench the works — which could cause the plan to blow up on Mr. Romney and harm his chances of winning the nomination. That is if New Hampshire were to move its primary date all the way up to December, as New Hampshire secretary of state Bill Gardner has threatened to do in response to the moves made by Nevada and other states. 
 
 New Hampshire’s laws require that the state’s primary be held on a Tuesday, that it occur before any other primary (but not necessarily any other caucus), and that there is a full week’s buffer between it and the next nomination contest. The latest date that would meet these rules is Dec. 27, 2011. But that date, as well as Dec. 20, would come too close to the Christmas holiday, so Mr. Gardner has instead suggested dates of Dec. 6 or Dec. 13. 
 
 This would leave New Hampshire as something of an orphan on the schedule. Holding its primary on Dec. 6, for instance, would leave a four-week gap between it and the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3, during which time much egg nog would be consumed and much of the momentum from the contest might be lost. Some research suggests that the “bounce” from winning an early primary, while it can be significant, tends to evaporate relatively quickly. 
 
 Meanwhile, although the first four or five states have moved up their dates, the primary calendar is still fairly back-loaded overall. Based on the dates listed at Josh Putnam’s excellent Web site, Frontloading HQ, the bulk of primaries and caucus are not taking place until March or later, with some important contests like California and New Jersey not scheduled until June. 
 
 So chances are that a December date would diminish the importance of New Hampshire from an electoral perspective, both because it is so disconnected from the rest of the calendar and because Mr. Romney’s rivals might have more of an excuse for a poor performance there. Candidates like Mr. Perry and Herman Cain could cite the difficulty of competing in New Hampshire on a compressed schedule, and against a candidate in Mr. Romney who has a residence in the state and is something of a native son. The news media, annoyed that the earlier date would require them to revisit their own plans for the campaign, might be happy to play along. It’s hard to know exactly how the spin war would unfold, but it’s possible that New Hampshire could come to be regarded as something of a curiosity or even a beauty contest. 
 
 Now consider how these scenarios might play out given the rest of the calendar. First, imagine that we had a schedule like in 2008, with Iowa voting in the first week of January and New Hampshire about a week later. A loss in Iowa would not be good news for Mr. Romney — particularly given that in the past, New Hampshire has shown something of a penchant for underdog, up-and-coming candidates. Still, New Hampshire would represent a hedge or buffer for Mr. Romney, and a win there would allow his campaign to recover from any loss in momentum. 
 
 If New Hampshire were already to have voted in December, however, the sting of a poor performance from Mr. Romney in Iowa could linger. While the next voting contest — Nevada on Jan. 14 — would still be a relatively good one for Mr. Romney because of the high number of Mormons there, he’d be more likely to enter the contest with unfavorable rater than favorable momentum. By the time Nevada voted, and South Carolina voted the following week, any gains Mr. Romney might have made by winning New Hampshire in December would long have been forgotten about. 
 
 Fortunately for Mr. Romney, there is a relatively elegant solution to this problem. Although Mr. Gardner has threatened the “nuclear option” of moving his state’s primary to December, he ultimately isn’t asking for all that much. If Nevada moved its caucus date to Tuesday, Jan. 17 from Saturday, Jan. 14 — just a 72-hour shift — New Hampshire’s statutory requirements would allow it to slot in on Jan. 10, giving us a January calendar that very much resembled the one we had in 2008. 
 
 If Mr. Romney’s campaign had significant enough influence on Nevada to compel it to move its caucus to January in the first place, it might now benefit from encouraging the state to comply with Mr. Gardner’s demands and move its caucus back a few days. ||||| Nevada Republicans on Saturday moved the GOP presidential caucus to Feb. 4, giving up their No. 3 spot in the nation's early voting line-up to end a standoff with New Hampshire over the election calendar. 
 
 State party Chairwoman Amy Tarkanian noted Nevada would still hold the first caucus in the West. And she said the Silver State remains a major prize in the early going of the White House race, especially if leading GOP candidates split victories in the first four states. 
 
 "We could be the tipping point in the race," Tarkanian said. "Anything can happen in the first four states. And we're first in the West." 
 
 In this stage of the presidential contest, Mitt Romney is favored to win in New Hampshire and Nevada, while his Southern conservative rivals such as Herman Cain are proving more popular in Iowa and South Carolina while Florida could be up for grabs. 
 
 Former Gov. Bob List, a GOP national committeeman, said that as a swing state Nevada remains a key battleground in both the primary and caucus season as well as in the 2012 general election. 
 
 "I think Nevada is going to be very relevant in the presidential sweepstakes," List said. "And we are very much respected for stepping up and resolving this dispute with New Hampshire." 
 
 The vote to shift the caucus date back from Jan. 14 came during a meeting of the Nevada GOP Central Committee, which has several hundred members. Only a few people objected in a voice vote. 
 
 As a result of the move, the Nevada GOP will be fifth in the early voting line-up behind Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida. 
 
 New Hampshire officials were clearly happy with the Nevada GOP's move. 
 
 "It's a win for the process, and it's certainly a win for New Hampshire," said Phyllis Woods, an RNC member from the Granite State. "Going forward, we really want to have Nevada as an ally. We really don't want to have enemies as we go into the next primary calendar." 
 
 In arguing for the move, Tarkanian told the meeting at The Venetian that Nevada's voice would still be strong and the date dispute with New Hampshire had become a "huge debacle" and distraction. 
 
 "Our focus should be on defeating (Barack) Obama," she said, adding, "It's time to move forward. We will be the good guys in the end. We don't need to be New Hampshire's piñata." 
 
 The Republican National Committee had urged Nevada to move its date, and Tarkanian won support for the idea from Gov. Brian Sandoval and other GOP leaders in the state and nationwide as well. 
 
 Sandoval and U.S. Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., also both endorsed Tarkanian for election to a full, two-year term as party chairwoman. She won Saturday, running unopposed after one potential challenger refused the nomination by Republicans upset with the recent party turmoil. 
 
 Tarkanian said she would focus on a voter registration drive and had raised $70,000 since she became party chairwoman in June. 
 
 Ahead of the meeting, party leaders had rejected the idea of same-day registration after rank-and-file members of the GOP Central Committee worried it could allow for fraud or havoc on caucus day. 
 
 The GOP meeting instead voted Saturday to put into the party platform opposition to same-day registration for both caucuses and elections. The Republicans also said they wanted to require voters to register at least 14 days before any vote. 
 
 The Nevada GOP will retain its full 28-delegate slate to the nominating convention by setting its caucus for Feb. 4. The date is two weeks earlier than the state's original Feb. 18 date that had been set before Florida jumped into January to upset the early voting calendar. 
 
 New Hampshire had threatened to hold its primary in December if Nevada Republicans didn't pick a new date so the Granite State could schedule its vote for Jan. 10, a Tuesday. 
 
 New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner insisted a state law required at least seven days between contests and Nevada's vote was too close. 
 
 Several lower-tier candidates had threatened to boycott Nevada's GOP caucus if Republicans didn't cede to New Hampshire, as well as Hermain Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza who's leading in some polls. 
 
 Under the new calendar, the Iowa caucus is scheduled for Jan. 3. Iowa GOP chairman Matt Strawn confirmed Saturday that the Hawkeye State will keep its caucus date despite Nevada's move. 
 
 New Hampshire will likely be on Jan. 10, the South Carolina primary is set for Jan. 21 and the Florida primary is scheduled for Jan. 31. 
 
 Florida started the calendar scramble by moving its primary into January despite RNC rules that said states weren't allowed to vote before Feb. 1, 2012. The states that moved primaries to January will be penalized half their delegates to the nominating convention. 
 
 While Nevada Republicans will vote fifth in 2012, the state's Democrats have decided to maintain the original early voting schedule and No. 3 spot in the calendar behind Iowa and New Hampshire. 
 
 The Nevada Democratic Party on Saturday announced it will hold its presidential caucus on Jan. 21, two weeks before the Republicans. South Carolina Democrats said they would caucus on Jan. 28. 
 
 U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who pushed hard to get the early voting spot for Nevada in 2008, criticized the GOP for giving in on the date. 
 
 "I'm deeply disappointed that the Nevada Republican Party has caved to the will of the Republican National Committee and New Hampshire," Reid said in a statement. "By working with South Carolina, Nevada Democrats have not only preserved our position in the nomination process but will ensure the West plays a crucial role in selecting our nation's president in future contests." 
 
 If there was any question, the state Democratic Party made it clear they would be working to re-elect President Barack Obama. 
 
 "Next year, we are pleased to stand firmly behind President Barack Obama as he continues fighting to create good paying jobs, protect Medicare and Social Security and help families struggling to keep a roof over their heads," the statement said. 
 
 The Associated Press contributed to this story. Contact reporter Laura Myers at lmyers@reviewjournal.com or 702-387-2919. Follow her on Twitter @lmyerslvrj.
– New Hampshire may be forced to hold its GOP primary as early as Dec. 6, and it will be all Nevada's fault for moving up its caucus date, the Granite State's top election official warns. Secretary of State William Gardner says New Hampshire has no intention of surrendering its tradition of being the second state to choose a nominee, and the combination of state laws and the Christmas holiday make Dec. 6 or 13 the only realistic dates for a primary if Nevada refuses to move its date back by at least three days, Politico reports. Iowa's caucus is set for Jan. 3, and Nevada's is schedule for Jan. 14. The parties "can discourage other states from trying to leapfrog onto our tradition," Gardner said in a statement. "Right now, the problem is the date of Nevada. We cannot allow the political process to squeeze us into a date that wedges us by just a few days between two major caucus states." Mitt Romney is expected to win in both New Hampshire and Nevada, but an early December win in New England will leave a long time, and probably a big loss in Iowa, between victories, notes Nate Silver at the New York Times.