The results in Iowa were predictably jumbled but they did begin the process of winnowing the field. New Hampshire tomorrow likely won't lead to any dropouts (except maybe Jon Huntsman), but should add a bit of clarity to the race.
Here's how I see things playing out:
6. Rick Perry/Buddy Roemer: 1%
Perry isn't actually competing in New Hampshire. In fact, after his bizarre indecision over his own place in the race on the night of the caucus and morning after, it was leaked that Perry would head to South Carolina directly after the back-to-back debates in New Hampshire this past weekend. He performed well in the debates, but got very few questions. Perry really doesn't have a chance in the race because he's so damaged from his early gaffes, but, like Fred Thompson in '08, is going for a last stand in South Carolina that will likely splinter the conservative vote once again and lead to a win for the moderate Romney, just like what happened for McCain in '08 putting him on fast track to the nomination.
There's also a legitimate chance that former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer, who hasn't made it into any debates because he's polling so low, will beat Rick Perry. That's embarrassing for a big state governor, and illustrates why he should have just cut his losses after Iowa like his advisers were clearly telling him to do. Perry will stay in for South Carolina, but it's bye-bye after that.
5. Newt Gingrich: 8%
Newt is a truly pathetic candidate at this point. He feels like he's the smartest man alive and hires few political consultants, which has just made him lack organization and be the single most off message candidate in the race. Exhibit A, his speech after Iowa: He looked like he wanted to cry, was nasty about Romney without mentioning his name and drove no message. It was a total waste of free media and came off as petulant to the voters. Also, his whole positive campaign thing was stupid, it was because he had little to no money, and now that he has the money and a SuperPAC on his side, he's going negative too.
His Union Leader endorsement will get him some support, but that can only take a candidate like Gingrich so far. He will go down South and also make a stand in a place where he has the chance to gain some traction, but as long as he remains the whiny Newt who has no message, he'll be stuck around 10% for good.
4. Rick Santorum: 11%
Santorum emerged out of Iowa with a chance to be the long awaited for conservative alternative to Romney. He still has a chance to be it, but his insistence to talk incessantly about social issues in New Hampshire is a pretty horrendous idea and is winning him no support in the state. Santorum camp has set expectations pretty low saying that double digits would be a win, but he's wrong. He was smart to go to New Hampshire and prove that he's more than just a Bible belt and Midwest candidate, but he should have tailored his New Hampshire message to New Hampshire. They don't want to hear you rail about gay marriage, Rick. As James Carville would say, "It's the economy, stupid!" Talk about your Grandpa who dug your freedom again, quit talking about social issues!
Santorum has squandered his chances of making an impact in New Hampshire because he's treating the state like Iowa. Some may like Santorum's "consistency", but focusing on the economy instead of social issues in the Live Free or Die State is a guaranteed winning message for a credible Republican. He could have reached the top tier in New Hampshire too, but instead Santorum will finish disappointingly low tomorrow night. He still is strong in South Carolina, but with Perry in, the aforementioned Huckabee-Thompson scenario will likely take hold there.
3. Ron Paul: 19%
I'm not going to say much about Paul here, he's basically running in a different primary because he gets independents and Libertarians, not Republicans. Like I said before, the motto of the state of New Hampshire is Live Free or Die. Sounds like a pretty nice place for a Libertarian to me. So Paul Will get his 15-20% from his supporters and grab some other independents, no more and no less. His strategy of trying to wrestle delegates from the Republicans to get pieces of the Libertarian philosophy in the Republican platform seems to be working well and Paul will certainly be an annoying mainstay in the race to the end.
2. Jon Huntsman: 23%
Huntsman has bet everything on New Hampshire and just like the rest of his campaign's decisions, this has been an awful one. John Weaver might think it's fun to try and make moderates out of everyone and move the Republican Party to the left, but he should at least do it with candidates who have the record to do it. Huntsman, had he used an intelligent campaign strategy that focused on his conservative credentials and not on his moderate temperament, would be considered the conservative alternative to Romney undoubtedly. The Wall Street Journal calls his economic plan the best, he's pro life, pro gun, and his only moderate position really is the whole civil unions thing, which the Republican Party as a whole is going to have get over unless they want to get their brains beaten in electorally for the next 25 years.
Instead it's been mixed message city from Huntsman, he displays himself as an independent conservative on the stump, which is why he'll get some serious support in New Hampshire, which is essentially a center-right state. But the SuperPAC supporting him has focused on his conservatism and even he has talked a lot about that recently. He should've done it from the start; instead he's moved himself to the left because of a moderate temperament. If Huntsman does anything but win in NH, he should drop out, but a second or third place finish might cause him to stay in for South Carolina and Florida. However, it's hard to see a path forward for Huntsman. Unfortunately, I agree with Huntsman on pretty much everything, he just doesn't have much of a chance.
1. Mitt Romney: 36%
Romney has a home in New Hampshire and is from a neighboring state therein lies the reason that it's always been considered to be a place he should do very well. I don't tend to break from the conventional wisdom on that. However, expectations are sky high for Mitt and anything other than a 15 to 20 point win could very easily be spun as a loss for the Governor, especially with the possibility of a Huntsman surge into second. Still if Romney wins New Hampshire, as he without a doubt will (his worst poll has him up by 13 on Paul), the air of inevitably around him only thickens. This is especially true if Perry and Santorum split the social con vote in South Carolina, which basically guarantees a Romney win there.
In both debates, more so the Saturday nighter, his opponents treated him like the nominee, letting him bash Obama and quickly deflect any of their criticism. A particularly telling moment was when Jon Huntsman killed Mitt on his job creation numbers in Massachusetts (47th) and talked about how he was number one in Utah. Romney responded by basically patting Huntsman on the head and congratulated him, then moved on to bashing Obama. Conversely, on Sunday morning, Newt and Santorum teamed up to knock Mitt off his stride by killing everything about his record. In the campaign, if the first dynamic continues to be the dominant one, then Romney glides to the nomination. If it's the second, he could be in for a fight. Either way he wins, but it's probably better for the party if he has to fight for it a little bit because it will make him a stronger general election candidate.
No comments:
Post a Comment