EPPING�� For New Hampshire, the perk of being the first in the nation primary is the parade of candidates crisscrossing the state and pressing palms with residents, in hopes of making a real personal connection with undecided voters.

As longtime U.S. Speaker of the House Tip O�Neil would say, �All politics is local,� after all.

But when should a presidential hopeful insert his or herself into a state�s hyper-local issues? If done tactfully, can it give a candidate an edge over his or her rivals? Or will voters within the state pessimistically view a candidate�s sudden interest in local issues as shameless pandering?

New Hampshire civic scholar Dr. Dean Spiliotes� disclaimer for any candidate wading into what can often be unfamiliar political terrain as they make declarations regarding New Hampshire-specific issues: Tread lightly.

�It�s always a danger for a national candidate to weigh in on a local issue if they don�t get it right,� said the Southern New Hampshire University professor and founder of the political blog NHPoliticalCapital.com. �The main issue is the trade-off between giving visibility to a major local issue of importance versus being seen as pandering to a particular state�s voters. With congressional candidates, it�s a little different because there could be federal dollars at stake for a local initiative.�

One Democratic presidential hopeful, Washington State Gov. Jay Inslee, stuck his neck out into a major New Hampshire energy project. On July 26, Inslee issued a statement saying he opposed the construction of the 27-mile Granite Bridge fracked natural gas pipeline proposed to be constructed between Exeter and Manchester by Liberty Utilities, running along the Route 101 right of way.

�It is long past time for the U.S. to end its dependence on fossil fuels,� Inslee, who is polling at less than 2% in most national polls, said July 26. �In New Hampshire, we have an opportunity to begin that transition now, by preventing Liberty Utilities from cementing its reach across New Hampshire through the Granite Bridge pipeline. This pipeline would raise costs for consumers, threaten our public health, and weaken our planet. It�s time to stand with local New Hampshire leaders fighting the pipeline�s construction."

The Granite Bridge application is under review by the state Public Utilities Commission. Liberty officials previously said they expect an approval within the next several months. The application then goes to the state Site Evaluation Committee for review, a process that can take up to another full year or longer before construction can begin.

The project would be the first of its kind to utilize the state�s Energy Infrastructure Corridors, along major state highways, if approved and carries an estimated cost of $440 million. A 150- to 170-foot-tall liquefied natural gas storage tank with a 200-foot diameter is proposed to be constructed in an abandoned quarry in West Epping as part of the project.

However, Inslee appears to be out of step with the state�s lawmakers with respect to Granite Bridge, as 22 of 24 state senators of the 2016 to 2018 General Court supported the project when its application was first submitted to the state Public Utilities Commission in December 2017. The only two not to support the project at the time were Republican senators.

Neither Inslee nor representatives for his campaign responded to multiple requests for additional comment on this story made over the span of the previous 10 days seeking to clarify his specific opposition to Granite Bridge.

John Shore, senior manager for communications for Liberty Utilities, did not respond to Inslee�s criticisms of Granite Bridge directly but said his company was, �happy with the support they have so far.�

�We feel (Granite Bridge) is the right project for New Hampshire with our harsh winters, there�s a huge demand for energy for heating,� Shore said. �The political figures expressing their opinion, which is respected, they have a campaign to run, but a lot of local political leaders approve of this project.�

Dr. Dante Scala, political science professor at the University of New Hampshire�s Carsey School of Public Policy, said for a candidate in a position like Inslee, he did not have much to lose because Scala considered Inslee�s presidential bid to be very much a �one issue campaign� centered around action on climate change. Scala said generally, presidential candidates run risk of alienating voters in a given state if they take a stance on in issue, such as Granite Bridge, in opposition to stance taken by their party brethren among elected state politicians.

�Inslee is so far down, he�s not too worried about risks,� Scala said. �It�s better for his campaign if he keeps putting the environment first and foremost event though some state Democratic office holders have taken an opposite stance (on Granite Bridge).�

Scala said presidential candidates will attempt to score easy local political points by taking shots at opposition state politicians. Though he said he could not think of a specific candidate historically who he thought deftly navigated local political issues to parlay their stances into a significant jump in national polls.

As an example, Scala cited New Jersey U.S. Sen. Cory Booker�s attacks on Gov. Chris Sununu for lowering state business taxes and opposing gun safety bills. On Friday, Booker issued statements criticizing Sununu for vetoing three bills related to gun safety reform that included background checks for commercial firearms sales, imposing a waiting period between the purchase and delivery of a firearm, and prohibiting firearms on school property.

�Speaking out on local issues in which all the Democrats are lining up against a state opposition politician are a pretty safe stance to take, but it can be risky to do it too often,� Scala said. �It�s risky because the more national politicians get into the weeds of local issues, they are likely not as briefed and informed as they could be and could find themselves running short on facts.�