The New Year is finally upon us, and that means, finally, that it is time for Iowa to vote. When we last visited the Iowa polls, Newt Gingrich had replaced Herman Cain as the leading contender for the top spot in that state's caucuses. Since then an unrelenting barrage of negative advertizing has knocked the former Speaker of the House out of first place and into a life-or-death struggle for 3rd with Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. Some polls even have the former Senator from Pennsylvania pulling away and fighting for the win himself.
Despite all the protestations to the contrary ahead of voting Tuesday, several candidates will be eliminated after Iowa. Historically, there are only 3 tickets out of that state: Win (1), Place (2), and Show (3). In the Republican Party, a Win gets you into the final two, Placing gives you a shot at the final two, and 3rd, historically, has only been worth one week of favorable press coverage that goes nowhere. (See Lamar Alexander and Fred Thompson). This year, however, there may be evidence that the process is about to unfold differently and that 3rd spot may hold the key to victory.
If Ron Paul wins the caucuses, the establishment of the GOP will run scared trying to stop him. The question will then be whether such a win results in Mr. Paul moving into the top two in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Doing so would likely unite the party behind Mr. Romney. In New Hampshire, Paul is already there, despite being about 20 points behind the governor. But in South Carolina he's never gotten above single digits. Unless Paul becomes a serious threat to win there by climbing into second, the opening should still remain for an alternative to emerge in the Palmetto State. And given past nomination fights there is every reason to believe that honor would go to the 3rd candidate in Iowa.
If Romney wins the caucuses, the media will attempt to coronate him assuming a follow-up win in New Hampshire will seal the nomination for the Governor. In the Republican party, however, South Carolina has always been a more consistent predictor of who the eventual nominee ends up being, than either Iowa or New Hampshire. To think Romney closes out the contest within the next week or so would be to assume South Carolina Republicans had conceded the race to Romney. The problem with this scenario is that South Carolina polls show that Romney hasn't been very popular in that state either. Governor Romney has consistently held a weak second place there and often fallen to 3rd. That's a worse condition than he's faced nationally, where he's always been a consistent second to a series of alternatives and as I said in my last post, Romney came in 4th South Carolina in 2008.
So unless Mr. Paul scares voters into the arms of Romney, whoever takes the 3rd spot in Iowa, regardless of rank, will have a unique opportunity to consolidate the opposition to Romney and go on to win the nomination. And if this happens despite failing to win either Iowa or New Hampshire, the process will have fundamentally changed in the Republican party for years to come.
I have great respect for Cavalier's assessment of politics. Can you tell me why Ron Paul wouldn't be a better candidate for the Republican party its conservative values and adherence to the Constitution? Is it because: 1. He would let other countries fight their own battles (like Israel, whose political weight in this country would defeat him? 2.Is it because the military establishment would be diminished drastically under a Paul administration? 3. If Paul's policies would (and some say they alone could,) pull us out of our terrible financial situation, would that compensate for numbers one and two? Or is it the conviction most seem to have that Paul is unable to win against Obama? One more question. What do you think of Ron Paul's positions?
ReplyDelete