Politics 2012: The GOP Nominating Race

[sagegrouse]

What's the weather like, anyone know?

Mid-30s in Des Moines, no precip, a bit windy. Bad news for Ron Paul, whose supporters will brave the fiercest blizzard.

sagegrouse

[gus]

The media spin will be how close Romney came to 3rd place and how he simply cannot connect with true Conservatives.

That's the currrent race's political media mad lib.

"The media spin will be how [adjective / adverb] Romney [verb] [preposition] [noun] and how he simply cannot connect with true Conservatives."

[OldPhiKap]

Romney 26%
Santorum 24%
Paul 19%
Perry 12%
Gingrich 10%
Bachman 7%
Huntsman 2%

Good a guess as any, I suppose.

[JasonEvans]

What's the weather like, anyone know?

Forecast for Ames is clear skies with a high of 35 and a low of 24. Des Moines is high of 40, low of 30. Not bad for Iowa.

Here is the Weather Channel's writeup on how weather will affect turnout. The short story-- weather will be good.

-Jason "I expect moderate turnout-- voters are not excited about most of these contacts" Evans

[tommy]

Yeah, looks clear and windy, and in the low 30's around most of the state. Except it's currently in the low 20's in Ottumwa. Cold, but not too cold for Walter to get Mrs. O'Reilly to the local caucus.

Tommy "I think Walter would go along and vote Romney, but his mom, well, she kinda likes that Rick Perry. Good looking and real conservative and all . . ." R.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Ok, my fellow horse-race fans, lets do some predictions about today in Iowa. Anything done by, say 7pm ET, is legit in my book.

I'm going with:

Paul 26%
Romney 22%
Santorum 21.5%
Gingrich 14.5%
Perry 8%
Bachman 5%
Huntsman 2%
Other 1%

The media spin will be how close Romney came to 3rd place and how he simply cannot connect with true Conservatives. Bachman drops out by Thursday. Perry sticks around through New Hampshire but is gone after that.

-Jason

So hard for me to even guesstimate here, but if any of those top three are not in the top three I'll be very surprised. The more fun for me is the last part of your quote...when do the flies drop? Gingrich is in until SC of course...but he may go away if he has even a mediochre showing. I agree on MB, she's gone some time tomorrow, along with Huntsman. I could see Perry at least trying SC..it's in the south and he will have 10 days to work them good 'ol boys. After Florida I think there will be only 3 left...Romney, Paul and one other..but I'm not positive it will be Santorum. I could see Newt being in it still...lord that man has a way of coming back from the dead. I think it will be a three man race then until after Super Tuesday, when #3 bids his adieu.

[gus]

So hard for me to even guesstimate here, but if any of those top three are not in the top three I'll be very surprised. The more fun for me is the last part of your quote...when do the flies drop? Gingrich is in until SC of course...but he may go away if he has even a mediochre showing. I agree on MB, she's gone some time tomorrow, along with Huntsman. I could see Perry at least trying SC..it's in the south and he will have 10 days to work them good 'ol boys. After Florida I think there will be only 3 left...Romney, Paul and one other..but I'm not positive it will be Santorum. I could see Newt being in it still...lord that man has a way of coming back from the dead. I think it will be a three man race then until after Super Tuesday, when #3 bids his adieu.

Isn't Huntsman putting all his eggs in the granite state basket? I wouldn't expect him to drop out until after NH.

[OldPhiKap]

Isn't Huntsman putting all his eggs in the granite state basket? I wouldn't expect him to drop out until after NH.

Yes. And yes.


Other news, the Wall Street Journal's opinion column supporting Mitt Romney was titled:

"Mr. Good Enough"

Feel the love from the Murdoch empire.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Isn't Huntsman putting all his eggs in the granite state basket? I wouldn't expect him to drop out until after NH.

His campaign manager ain't earning his paycheck then.

The Suffolk University/7NEWS two-day tracking poll of likely voters in New Hampshire's GOP presidential primary showed Romney with 41 percent of the vote, Mr. Paul with 15 percent, and Mr. Gingrich with 11 percent. Mr. Huntsman had 9 percent, while another 8 percent was split between Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. Sixteen percent remained undecided.

And with Santorum showing well in Iowa, I'd give him a higher percentage than that with MB and Perry pulling in less. As far as Huntsman's 9%...pfft. Drop out, dude.

[CameronBornAndBred]

So while looking ahead to NH, it amazes me that in one state a candidate can do so well and in another do so lousy. Some are consistent (Romney=well, Bachmann=lousy), but others like Santorum are mind boggling in the difference. Today in Iowa, he's clearly a top 3rd choice, while in NH, he's clearly in the bottom 3rd.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...mary-1581.html

And nationally, it's also way different. Newt is dragging along in Iowa, not quite as bad in NH...but nationally he's in front. Bizarre. There have been more lead changes in the last month than we'll see in the NCAA tourney in March!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-1452.html

[JasonEvans]

And nationally, it's also way different. Newt is dragging along in Iowa, not quite as bad in NH...but nationally he's in front. Bizarre. There have been more lead changes in the last month than we'll see in the NCAA tourney in March!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-1452.html

This is because the voters in Iowa have been exposed to a barrage of anti-Newt ads that remind everyone of his history with ethics violations and his recent ties to Fannie/Freddie. The rest of the nation has, for the most part, not been exposed to this information (unless you are among the small, small percentage of folks who follow politics very closely -- like we all do). As the campaign moves into more states, assuming Newt is still around, more and more voters will be exposed to these facts and one would expect Newt's numbers to slide.

I don't say any of this to criticize Newt -- heck, I think he has been the target of an unfair amount of negative ads in Iowa -- but to point out why there is this seeming disconnect between his national numbers and his numbers in the first couple voting states.

It will be interesting to see if Newt can hang onto his lead in SCarolina and Florida once the attack ads come into play there. Voters in those states would seem to know him a bit better than those in Iowa (he has always polled better in Southern states and only came on strong in Iowa in November). He may be able to stand up to the criticism and make himself a viable candidate.

-Jason "too late to revise my prediction? I am really starting to think the Santorum surge is gonna take the day in Iowa" Evans

[luvdahops]

[QUOTE=CameronBornAndBred;539226]So while looking ahead to NH, it amazes me that in one state a candidate can do so well and in another do so lousy. Some are consistent (Romney=well, Bachmann=lousy), but others like Santorum are mind boggling in the difference. Today in Iowa, he's clearly a top 3rd choice, while in NH, he's clearly in the bottom 3rd.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...mary-1581.html

There are far fewer evangelicals and other fervent social conservatives in New Hampshire than in Iowa. It is no accident that Santorum, Bachmann and Perry pull barely 10% combined there.

[OldPhiKap]

This is because the voters in Iowa have been exposed to a barrage of anti-Newt ads that remind everyone of his history with ethics violations and his recent ties to Fannie/Freddie. The rest of the nation has, for the most part, not been exposed to this information (unless you are among the small, small percentage of folks who follow politics very closely -- like we all do). As the campaign moves into more states, assuming Newt is still around, more and more voters will be exposed to these facts and one would expect Newt's numbers to slide.

I don't say any of this to criticize Newt -- heck, I think he has been the target of an unfair amount of negative ads in Iowa -- but to point out why there is this seeming disconnect between his national numbers and his numbers in the first couple voting states.

It will be interesting to see if Newt can hang onto his lead in SCarolina and Florida once the attack ads come into play there. Voters in those states would seem to know him a bit better than those in Iowa (he has always polled better in Southern states and only came on strong in Iowa in November). He may be able to stand up to the criticism and make himself a viable candidate.

-Jason "too late to revise my prediction? I am really starting to think the Santorum surge is gonna take the day in Iowa" Evans

To add to this, most of the polls in the other states are pretty stale by now last time I looked.


Meanwhile, the "Drudge Caucus" currently has Paul, Mitt, Santorum in that order:

http://drudgereport.com/

[Wander]

Isn't Huntsman putting all his eggs in the granite state basket? I wouldn't expect him to drop out until after NH.

Huntsman has more or less said if he doesn't finish in the Top 3 in New Hampshire he'll drop out. There's no point in him dropping out before that - if Romney does surprisingly poorly in Iowa, maybe some former Romney supporters go to Huntsman in that state.

[Mike Corey]

Spoke with a tuned-in Republican operative today and he said the expectation is that Santorum will come in just behind Paul and Romney, with Perry coming in fourth.

[Highlander]

Spoke with a tuned-in Republican operative today and he said the expectation is that Santorum will come in just behind Paul and Romney, with Perry coming in fourth.

Given Santorum's emphatic ouster from Pennsylvania's house seat and his general far right stance on pretty much every issue, the fact that he's still in the race and may beat Perry is a big surprise to me. I don't think he would have a great shot in a general election because he is so polarizing, especially compared to the likes of Perry and Gingrich who are slightly more well rounded (and less polarizing) candidates IMO. I don't think he could beat Obama in a head to head matchup under any circumstances, while I think Perry, Gingrich, or Romney would fare much better.

Personally, I think he's surging just because everyone else has and failed, and he's the only one left. I've seen him as more of a male Michelle Bachman, and think once people take a good hard look at him, he will fade. If I were Romney, I would be counting my chickens.

[OldPhiKap]

Given Santorum's emphatic ouster from Pennsylvania's house seat and his general far right stance on pretty much every issue, the fact that he's still in the race and may beat Perry is a big surprise to me. I don't think he would have a great shot in a general election because he is so polarizing, especially compared to the likes of Perry and Gingrich who are slightly more well rounded (and less polarizing) candidates IMO. I don't think he could beat Obama in a head to head matchup under any circumstances, while I think Perry, Gingrich, or Romney would fare much better.

Personally, I think he's surging just because everyone else has and failed, and he's the only one left. I've seen him as more of a male Michelle Bachman, and think once people take a good hard look at him, he will fade. If I were Romney, I would be counting my chickens.

Exactly.

The question is, once they swing down to SC and FL, does one of the other non-Romneys (particularly Gingrich or Perry) find a second wind? I think that is a distinct possibility, and both of them could push this fight for awhile.

(I assume Paul will continue to attract his core group, but with a defined ceiling, all the way to the convention unless he decides to go the third party route).

[Wander]

Given Santorum's emphatic ouster from Pennsylvania's house seat and his general far right stance on pretty much every issue, the fact that he's still in the race and may beat Perry is a big surprise to me. I don't think he would have a great shot in a general election because he is so polarizing, especially compared to the likes of Perry and Gingrich who are slightly more well rounded (and less polarizing) candidates IMO. I don't think he could beat Obama in a head to head matchup under any circumstances, while I think Perry, Gingrich, or Romney would fare much better.

Polarizing and being far-right/left often come in one package, but they aren't actually the same thing. Santorum vs Gingrich is a good example. Based purely on voting records, Santorum is more conservative than Gingrich, but Gingrich's rhetoric and manner of speaking makes him far more polarizing, to say nothing of his past personal history.

[Duvall]

Given Santorum's emphatic ouster from Pennsylvania's house seat and his general far right stance on pretty much every issue, the fact that he's still in the race and may beat Perry is a big surprise to me. I don't think he would have a great shot in a general election because he is so polarizing, especially compared to the likes of Perry and Gingrich who are slightly more well rounded (and less polarizing) candidates IMO. I don't think he could beat Obama in a head to head matchup under any circumstances, while I think Perry, Gingrich, or Romney would fare much better.

Personally, I think he's surging just because everyone else has and failed, and he's the only one left. I've seen him as more of a male Michelle Bachman, and think once people take a good hard look at him, he will fade. If I were Romney, I would be counting my chickens.

A male Michelle Bachmann-equivalent probably has a better chance of getting elected than a female version. But I think you're right - the Santorum surge is probably just the same group of anti-Romney voters that briefly boosted Perry, Gingrich and other flawed candidates.

[mph]

Romney 26%
Santorum 24%
Paul 19%
Perry 12%
Gingrich 10%
Bachman 7%
Huntsman 2%

Good a guess as any, I suppose.

Santorum 27%
Romney 24%
Paul 21%
Gingrich 12%
Perry 11%
Bachmann 4%
Huntsman 1%

Book it!