How the Framing of the Story Changed, Newt - Get Out!, Looking Ahead to the General

The Inevitable Story Gains Legs
One of Mitt Romney's selling points to the GOP for the past couple of months has been that Romney inevitably would become the GOP nominee and had the best shot of beating President Obama in November and that the party should therefore line up behind him as continuing the primary fight only served to help the President's re-election prospects.

It was not a particularly sexy story - if you are a Republican, you'd much rather your nominee seek your vote because his views align with yours, his vision of the country is compelling, he has proven strong leadership, etc. versus "pick me, because you have no choice", but the story was more or less born out by the facts.  Romney wasn't and still isn't completely inevitable, but the math for anyone else to win is extremely difficult, as detailed in my last post.

The media - both the right (Fox News), the left (MSNBC) and the center (CNN) largely reported on but poo-pooed the assertion of the Romney campaign.  The reason is obvious - a competitive primary season that drags on generates more news coverage and ratings than an inevitable candidate just going through the motions.

The right wing of the Republican party largely rejected the narrative as well.  Romney wasn't conservative enough, was only winning pluralities, just COULDN'T be the choice of the home of the tea party if you were on the right.  So this odd marriage between the mainstream media and the right wing of the party kept the story of a competitive primary alive.

But a funny thing happened after Romney's victory in Illinois.  The GOP finally started circling the wagons.  Jeb Bush gave a belated endorsement to Romney.  Conservative king-maker Jim DeMint stopped just short of a formal endorsement, but made his support very clear.  The media started asking if the thing was over.

The odd thing is, the past week has gone exactly how anybody would have predicted it would have gone.  Romney won a large, urban state outside the south (Illinois) decisively, Santorum won a medium-sized deep south state decisively (Louisiana.)  It doesn't seem like the arc of the campaign has changed at all and yet the discussion has shifted entirely.

Maybe people are just finally realizing the math, maybe the election night coverage ratings are dwindling, maybe Republicans are starting to realize that losing to President Obama in November is quickly moving from a possibility to a probability, I don't know. 

At any rate, the race takes a little bit of lull this week with no contests going on (but surely lots of waving of Etch-a-Sketches), but confronts three winner-take-all contests worth a total of 98 delegates a week from Tuesday in Maryland, DC and Wisconsin.  Romney is leading all of those races and could pad his current delegate lead, which I estimate stands as follows (with some delegates yet to be decided in the last two races, pending final results):
Romney - 538 (53%)
Santorum - 254
Gingrich - 149
Paul - 67
Perry - 3
Huntsman - 2

Drop Out Gingrich - And You Too Ron Paul
I have long enjoyed the romantic story of Don Quixote, the Man of La Mancha, a man convinced he was a knight taking on giants (which were actually windmills.)  The term quixotic has entered our vocabulary as a romantically-inspired quest for a near-impossible goal.

But there comes a time to turn the sword in.  Newt Gingrich's time is here.

Newt Gingrich's power base has always been the deep South.  After having lost both the Alabama and Mississippi primaries, coming in a distant third in Louisiana clearly demonstrates that even his base has abandoned him.  If he can't do better than third in Louisiana, what states will he even be remotely competitive in?

Gingrich clearly cannot win the nomination.  He may be hanging around hoping that nobody gets to the magic number and he is a second ballot nominee.  But only an insane GOP would put him through on the second ballot.  In the unlikely event that Romney doesn't get to his magic number, he'd probably be able to build a coalition to get there.  Even if he couldn't, the GOP would be far more likely to broker a deal for a better candidate such as Jeb Bush or Chris Christie than to give the nomination to the third-place also-ran with more baggage than the cargo area of a 747.

Newt's funding has to be drying up - even rich Super-PAC donors want to know that they aren't just burning the money.  I actually expect that he will finally see the light and drop out soon.  He does like the spotlight, but the media has started ignoring him more and more.  It can't be much fun anymore.

And while we are on the topic of people who should drop out, let's talk about Ron Paul.  In the past 16 nominating contests, the man who has said over an over again that "it's all about winning delegates" has won a grand total of 11 of them out of 557 that were available in those contests.  Not only does Paul not have a shot at the nomination, his delegate total isn't gaining, so he isn't even winning any influence at the convention.

Paul, unlike Gingrich, will be able to keep raising funds for as long as he desires to continue.  But it is wrong for him to do so.  It's a free country and people are giving to Paul freely, but telling the devoted libertarians that give small donations to him that they are doing so because Paul has a real shot at the nomination (something that they are still utterly convinced of if you reading the comments section on any story on Paul) is disingenuous.  Paul had a good run, made some great points and had an unblemished legacy of supporting liberty and freedom in Congress and as a Presidential candidate.  It's time for him to stand aside.

General Election Catch-Up
Part of Romney's urgency to get the nomination locked up is so that he can get on to taking on President Obama, who has been quietly building a sizable lead while the Republicans fight for their nomination.

My average of averages has him up by 4.1% nationally in a heads up match with Romney, short of his 2008 victory, but a sizable lead that would surely deliver an electoral college victory.

In the key battleground states, here is the state of things:
Previously Lean Romney States:
Missouri - remains a Lean Romney - Romney +9% in recent polling
Indiana - remains a Lean Romney - no recent polling, but Obama needed a 7.2% national win to eek out a win in Indiana, so he would presume to trail by about 3% here
Florida - FLIPS TO LEAN OBAMA - Obama +3% in recent polling
North Carolina - FLIPS TO LEAN OBAMA - Obama +3% in recent polling
Ohio - stays with Romney...for now - the 2 most recent polls tell opposite stories, with one having Romney up by 6%, the other with Obama up a whopping 12%.  Based on the national margin, I'll leave it with Romney for now, but will keep an eye on it.
Virginia - FLIPS TO LEAN OBAMA - three recent polls all have Obama leading by margins of 9, 8 and 17% respectively.

Previously Lean Obama States:
New Hampshire - stays a Lean Obama - up 10% in the most recent polling
Colorado - no recent polling - stays a Lean Obama based on the national polling
Michigan - now a Likely Obama - up by 18% in recent polling
Pennsylvania - remains a Lean Obama - up 6% in recent polling

Other key states I am watching:
Arizona - remains a Likely Romney for now, but definitely one to watch - the two most recent polls have him leading by 5% and 11% respectively
Iowa - moves down to Lean Obama - Romney is leading in one of two recent polls (by 2%, Obama leads by 5% in the other poll)
Oregon - remains a Likely Obama for now, but his lead is 8 to 11% in recent polls, could be competitive if the race tightens
Wisconsin - another one that remains a Likely Obama but is one to watch, with Obama's lead at 5 to 14% in recent polling.
New Mexico - no sign of let-up for Obama, he is up by 19%.  Remains a Likely Obama and probably will not be competitive in November.
Minnesota - Obama up by 10 to 13% in recent polling.  Remains a Likely Obama.
Maine - Obama now up by 23% in recent polling.  Move from Likely Obama to Strong Obama.

So with all of that, we get the following map (assuming neither Nebraska nor Maine split their congressional districts):

Note: Map created with the help of 270towin.com

Clearly at 329-209, Mitt Romney has work to do in the general election.  He needs to take back Virginia, North Carolina and Florida plus one additional state from the Lean Obama column (either New Hampshire, Colorado or Iowa.)

And keep in mind, his war chest is oversized relative to the GOP field, but not relative to the President, who will surely be a fund-raising juggernaut again this year.

Of course, it is way early.  Michael Dukakis looked pretty good against George H.W. Bush at this stage in the race.  The economy, public perceptions, the foreign policy arena, it could all change a lot between now and November.

But what is clear is that Romney has an uphill battle.  Which is why he wants to wrap up the nomination now.

If you like this site, tell your friends.

Is There Any Path Forward for Anyone But Romney After Florida?

It's a dangerous game to call a race before it happens.  It's especially dangerous this year, where late surges in Iowa (Rick Santorum) and South Carolina (Newt Gingrich) have already led to results that would have been surprising just 72 hours earlier, but Mitt Romney sure looks poised to coast to a comfortable win in Florida, having beaten back Newt's surge coming off his South Carolina win with a couple of strong debate performances, matched by Newt's two weakest showings of the long series of debates held this cycle.

If Romney wins Florida, is there a path forward for anyone else?

Rick Santorum already intends to be in Nevada on election day in Florida, trying to build support in that caucus.  And a caucus environment certainly suits him better.  But I can't sketch a possible map to victory for Santorum, especially if he finishes a widely-expected distant third in Florida.

Newt would solider on, no doubt, but if he loses by 8 points in Florida, how is he going to fare in more moderate venues like Nevada and Michigan?  He has no catalysts, with no debates scheduled for three weeks (and Romney not likely to agree to new ones) and will continue to get outspent and out operated by a better-funded and better-organized Romney campaign.

Ron Paul will no doubt solider as deep as his money allows him, continuing to try to amass as many delegates as he can to influence the convention and get a prime speaking spot, but he doesn't even have a state that looks like a possible win for him.

So, Mr. Romneycare, Mr. Bain Capital, Mr. 15% Tax is looking like he is back comfortably in the driver's seat, with no serious opposition, if he wins.  I'm sure President Obama will be disappointed that this primary doesn't drag on, with the candidates throwing rocks at each other non-stop and leaving him above the fray.  And I'm sure Mitt Romney isn't his first, second or third choice in who he will face in the general election.

But it sure looks all over but the crying, unless Gingrich or Santorum completes a hail mary next Tuesday.

2012 and the Fractures in the GOP, In the Real World: There Are Only 3

The Republican Party, 2012
Since Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party for 30+ years has existed as a coalition of groups that have just enough in common to unite (sometimes) behind a common candidate for President.  Prior to Reagan, the GOP was a Northeastern establishment party, a party of fiscal responsibility (not always low taxes, but certainly anti-deficit), but a party that was largely socially progressive.  Ronald Reagan changed the game by putting forward an agenda that was heavy on defense, heavy on tax cuts and brought a new brand of social conservatism into the mix.

There have been more or less four wings to the party ever since, and we see them loudly and clearly in this primary cycle, as each has its representative members.

(1) Establishment Moderates
This wing of the party tends towards social conservatism, but not drastically so.  They are more fiscally conservative than Democrats, but tend to be more concerned with low deficits than with low taxes.  They are pragmatic moderates on foreign policy - they tend to be for relatively larger defense spending but are hesitant to use military force except were imminent risk to US interests are at stake.  In spite of the Reagan revolution, most GOP Presidential candidates since have fit this profile.
George W. Bush was an establishment moderate.  So was Bob Dole.  John McCain fit this description, although at times in 2008, he attempted to shed it.
This cycle, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are carrying the banner for the establishment moderates.

(2) Small Government Libertarians
This group joins the GOP because they hate government in almost all forms.  They are military non-interventionists, still believe the New Deal and the Great Society social programs were a mistake and carry the banner for individual liberty, both socially and economically.
Small government libertarians have rarely done well in GOP primaries.  You have to go all the way back to Barry Goldwater to find a true small government libertarian that got the nod.  Arguably Pat Buchanan fit this bill in 1992. 
This cycle, Ron Paul carries the banner for this group.

(3) Social Conservatives
Evangelical Christians and socially-oriented Catholics that oppose abortion and gay rights make up this group of very-active Republicans.  Straight social conservatives rarely win the nomination but often make waves, Pat Robertson in 1988 being one of the most obvious members of the group to make noise in a nominating process.
This cycle, Rick Santorum runs as a social conservative.

(4) Foreign Policy Hawks
The "strong on defense" crowd focuses its efforts around pushing for American activism on the world stage, increased defense spending and an aggressive foreign policy.
George W. Bush was a foreign policy hawk.  Arguably, it was Ronald Reagan's single biggest issue. 
This cycle, after over a decade of war fatigue, in a stunning reversal, no one is carrying this banner.

The coalition of these 4 groups work when they find a candidate that can more or less align the 4.  But when the group's key interests collide, chaos ensues.

Mitt Romney is unacceptable to Small Government Libertarians and Social Conservatives because of his universal health care plan in Massachusetts and prior support for abortion rights and gay rights.

Jon Huntsman angers everyone but the establishment moderates as he has supported civil unions, has a far less aggressive target for reducing government than other candidates and a less interventionist view of foreign policy.


Rick Santorum is loved by the social conservatives, but angers libertarians with his interventionist view of government and his support for social programs (such as Bush's prescription drug program), bank bailouts and earmarks and scares the heck out of establishment moderates with his extreme social conservative views.

Ron Paul is loved by the small government libertarians but angers social conservatives over his support for gay rights, infuriates foreign policy hawks over his non-interventionist views and is probably most scary to moderates.

Newt Gingrich doesn't fit cleanly into any category but has something for everyone to hate - past support for Cap and Trade makes the libertarians mad, his personal life angering social conservatives and his caustic slash and burn approach to politics maddening moderates.

So, can one of these candidates unite the party?  If Romney gets the nod, libertarians and social conservatives may have to suck it up and vote for him, although Romney almost certainly has to fear the prospect of a third party candidate from the right if he gets the nod.  The same can be said for Huntsman.  The other 3 candidates have almost no hope of uniting the party, with "Reagan Democrats" likely to run for the hills and either stay home or reluctantly support Obama.

And where is the Tea Party in all of this?  It's impossible to say, because the Tea Party is actually not a cohesive movement.  If the Tea Party is about small government, then Ron Paul should be their guy.  But a substantial wing of the informally identified Tea Party are not small government people at all but social conservatives that latched on to an anti-Obama movement. 

I've said it many times, but I'll say it one more time...the Tea Party will NEVER be the path to national success for the GOP.  It created noise and energy but ultimately cost the GOP several Senate seats it should have won in 2010 (Delaware and Nevada most notably) and had far more of an impact on the news discussion than it did on general elections.

It all seems like a can't win for the GOP unless the other wings fall in line behind Romney.  They probably don't have another horse that can run close to a still-cagey President Obama.

New Polling Makes It Clear: Three Candidates and Some Also Rans
Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul finished 1, 2, 3 in Iowa in that order, each close enough to win the same 7 delegates. 

New polling indicates that they are likely to finish Romney, Paul then Santorum in New Hampshire.

If the same candidates are top 3 in those two extremely different contests in extremely different demographics, it is clear to me that there are only 3 candidates left worth talking about.

Sure, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry are apparently going to make a go of it in South Carolina.  But they can't win if they can't crack the top 3 in either New Hampshire or Iowa.

Rick Santorum could still collapse in the next week as he falls under increased media scrutiny, allowing a Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich or even a Jon Huntsman into contention.   But it is also quite possible that the door is slamming shut on those other candidates.

5 short days to New Hampshire....

Does the Firmness of Ron Paul's Support Fortell a Big Win?

Ron Paul's supporters tend to be amongst the most loyal in politics.  If he was slightly ahead in the exit polling, is it possible he could pull off a big win tonight?

It's quite possible I had this race pegged very wrong.  I'm recalling how good Paul is at getting people to show up for Straw Polls and a caucus isn't that dissimilar.  We should have a good feel for the race within the hour.

Tonight Is The Night

Tonight, for at least a while, power gets taken out of the hands of pundits and into the hands of registered voters as the Iowa Caucuses kick off the election season.  I'll be posting live updates as events unfold. 

First, a primer on the caucuses:
Who May Participate: Any registered Republican willing to show up on a Tuesday night, declare openly their support for a candidate and invest three hours or so in the process.

 How It Works:
 (1) At each caucus precinct, 15 minutes are allocated to a representative of each campaign to speak on behalf of candidates.  Typically well funded campaigns have representatives at virtually every location, whereas some of the more shoe-string campaigns may focus only on more populated areas.

(2) A first ballot is tallied with the preference vote of each party member in attendance recorded.  In some precincts, this is done by paper ballot, in others by a show of hands or by standing under a candidate's sign.

(3) Based on the first round results, candidates receiving an insufficient percentage of the vote to warrant a delegate are eliminated from contention and a new round of balloting ensues, with the supporters of the now-eliminated candidates free to join any of the candidates still left.

(4) The results of the second round of balloting are used to award delegates.

Obviously you can see the inherent unpredictability of these events versus a primary.  Whose supporters will show up and invest the considerable commitment?  What will happen with supporters of eliminated candidates?  How will speeches and friends and neighbors sway the more-public voting?

Handicapping the night, there appear to be three viable scenarios that could happen:
(1) The Romney Squeaker
Mitt is able to maintain the 25%ish support that he has been steadily holding in the polls and eeks out a victory over both Ron Paul and Rick Santorum.

(2) The Momentum Play
Rick Santorum's surge from virtually nothing two weeks ago continues and he pulls of an improbable upset.  This could well come into play if some of the lower-polling conservatives, such as Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry are knocked out of contention for delegates in some precincts in the first round of balloting, freeing them up to support someone else.  One would presume that they would break disproportionately for Santorum.

(3) The Passion Play
Ron Paul's avid supporters show up in far greater numbers than the lukewarm support for Romney and Paul outperforms recent polls slightly and pulls off the upset.

My prediction?  I think Scenario 1 is about a 60% probability, scenario 2 about a 30% probability and scenario 3 a 10% probability.  Caucuses are tough to poll for, Santorum is rising and Paul's supporter are passionate, but I'm amazed how often, in spite of all the unpredictable dynamics, these things seem to resemble the late polls in the final tally.  But certainly any of them are possible.

So what would each scenario mean?
Scenario 1 portends a very high probability of a Romney nomination.  He is almost sure to win New Hampshire in this scenario.  Newt Gingrich would likely stay in to make a stand in South Carolina and Florida, where he is still polling more strongly and Ron Paul would stay on, but as more of a sideshow than a serious candidate.

Scenario 2 could create a real horse race.  Other conservatives such as Bachmann and Perry may well withdraw from the race, consolidating the "not Mitt" vote behind one candidate.  Keep in mind though, that because of his late rise, Santorum hasn't really been vetted or taken heat the way the other candidates have.  I still like Mitt in all the scenarios, but this scenario is by far the most intriguing of the bunch.

Scenario 3 could well catapult Ron Paul into contention in libertarian New Hampshire, but even if he wins a one-two in the first two states, does he have any real shot to broaden his appeal in other, later venues?  It's doubtful although this would not doubt leave him in the spotlight until the end and assure that Romney does not wrap up the nomination quickly.

Stay tuned...it's going to be a fun night.

Can Mitt Romney Deliver the One-Two Punch?

In a nomination fight that thus far has been appropriately centered around the debates, tonight's debate is the highest-stakes contest yet, for a number of reasons.  First, it is the last time that all of the candidates will be on stage together before the first-in-the-nation caucuses in Iowa on January 3rd (there are two additional debates between the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.)  Second, being a weekday evening debate on Fox News, it is highly likely to get amongst the highest viewership of any of the recent debates.  Third, support is still very soft among the Republican electorate for all of the candidates and so significant shifts in the polling are still not only possible but highly probable.  The question is in what direction.

Mitt Romney has been quietly making headway over the course of the past week.  He hasn't scored any big knockdowns against Newt Gingrich, but Gingrich's support has slowly started to soften as potential voters begin to evaluate him on his own merits rather than as simply the latest "not Romney" choice.  Also, both Romney and Rick Perry have considerably stronger ground organizations and greater financial resources and are spending like crazy to unseat Newt.

We could see an epic moment that moves the polls.  But if we don't, what will happen over the course of the next couple of weeks?

First, let's understand that while history doesn't indicate that either Iowa or New Hampshire individually is particularly predictive of outcomes, it is almost impossible to win the nomination without winning one of the two.  Looking back at competitive GOP nomination fights starting in 1972 (when Iowa's caucus moved up to its current position), here is how the eventual nominees fared in the contests (I've excluded re-election campaigns where there wasn't meaningful competition - in those cases, the nominees obviously won both contests.)


1976 - Gerald Ford - won Iowa and New Hampshire
1980 - Ronald Reagan - lost Iowa, won New Hampshire
1984 - Not Competitive
1988 - George H.W. Bush - lost Iowa, won New Hampshire
1992 - George H.W. Bush - won Iowa and New Hampshire
1996 - Bob Dole - won Iowa, lost New Hampshire
2000 - George W. Bush - won Iowa, lost New Hampshire
2004 - Not Competitive
2008 - John McCain - lost Iowa, won New Hampshire

So of the 7 nominees in competitive races, 2 won both races and the other 5 won at least one of the two.  4 of the 7 won Iowa and 5 of the 7 won New Hampshire.

Clearly, you can afford to lose one of the two and still get the nod, but winning without at least one of the two hasn't been done in recent history.

Mitt Romney, for all of his soft support, is still a huge favorite to win in New Hampshire.  He has a geographical advantage, being Governor of a neighboring state, he is popular with moderates and independents that have a huge influence on the primary race in New Hampshire's open primary system and he has an average of about a 10 point lead in the polls there.

So Mitt can clear his long-uncertain path to the nomination if he finds a way to land a knock-out punch in Iowa.  But Iowa is very unpredictable at this point.  Newt Gingrich still leads on paper in 2 out of the 3 polls published this week, although Romney leads the third.  But Newt's ground game being week could be very damaging in notoriously hard-to-poll-for caucuses, given that getting a caucus vote involves getting someone to a meeting place and having them stay for hours at a time to be publicly counted, not simply getting them to show up to a poll to vote.  And Ron Paul, darling of the Tea Party and libertarians everywhere, is lurking in the wings with his rabid supporters, consistently only a few points out of the lead.  And rest assured, his supporters WILL show up.  Mitt Romney, though his supporters are soft, has a fantastic ground organization to turn out the would-be supporters.

It's actually close to a pick 'em race in Iowa given all these factors.  A Romney win in Iowa would probably come close to ending the race after New Hampshire, since his one-two punch would be almost impossible to overcome, even if he lost South Carolina.  A Ron Paul win would make for an entertaining showdown between Romney and Paul down the road, as Paul is almost certainly in it for the distance, but few take Paul's chances at winning the actual nomination seriously, and it would likely be a complete disaster for the GOP if it happened.  A Newt win in Iowa sets up a pick 'em horse race for the nod.  So the outcome of Iowa is critical to the whole thing.

Can Romney deliver the one-two punch and sew up the nomination?  Tonight may be our first indicator.