What did Iowa tell us?
Tony McNulty thinks the real winner in Iowa is Barack Obama.
5 Jan 2012, 11:09
Romney Celebration
So, Mitt Romney has won in Iowa – albeit by the narrowest of margins. It was hardly a ringing endorsement and he should have done much better – although he appeared to be dead in the water a couple of weeks before Christmas. Crucially Iowa was not a game-changer – and, much to Romney’s great relief, his major challenger in Iowa proved to be outsider Rick Santorum, rather than one of the stronger contenders.
Rick Santorum will not get anywhere. He is this week’s ‘sideshow Bob’ – this week’s challenger who managed to gather sufficient support to stand out from the also-rans and never-will-bees. A Pennsylvania Catholic, he has no resonance in the South – Gingrich territory. He just happened to be the king of the sort of retail politics that Iowa likes – the personal touch, largely because of a lack of money to do otherwise. The strong right-wing/evangelical/tea party tendency in Iowa was looking for a candidate to stop Romney and whilst some chose Ron Paul, the more purist amongst them opted for Santorum. Of course, it will be Santorum’s fervent hope that Iowa is the start of a national trend.
Romney will welcome such a divided opposition, but not for long. He will want, as frontrunners do, the weak and wounded to fall by the wayside as the campaign progresses. He will hope that, to varying degrees, as they fall out they bow to the inevitable and endorse him as the likely winner.
Although Santorum has gained enough momentum (Daddy Bush’s ‘Big Mo’) to stay in the race – he sits on only 3% share in the latest New Hampshire polls. Ron Paul also emerges from Iowa in a mixed position. He should have done better given his momentum on the run-up to the caucus, but still his 21.4% will worry the right-wing/evangelical/tea party tendency – he is not of their faith or cause. They want to spend their time and energy attacking the ‘evil’ that is Romney rather than waste time on Ron Paul. They want more than simply to provide this week’s ‘sideshow Bob’. They know that Santorum will not be the contender that takes down Gingrich and Romney, but nor will Ron Paul.
The big loser in Iowa has to be Newt Gingrich. Having spent most of November leading in the polls, his dip in support happened at entirely the wrong time for him. He appears to be fatally wounded and may not last beyond New Hampshire, although he may hold on for South Carolina (21/1) and Florida (31/1) to show how much his support in the South means. If his current dip in the polls is not permanent, he may seek to hold on as long as possible to see if he can garner the support of those who fall out of the race but remain anti-Romney.
It looks like Iowa also marks the end for Rick Perry, Michele Bachman and Jon Huntsman. It is only a matter of time before each one bows out of the race, but, as this is US politics, how they bow out is loaded with tactical considerations. If it appears likely that Romney is going to win, do they quit now and endorse him or wait and see if someone else prevails? If they don’t endorse him, what does it mean for their future if he goes on to secure the nomination? Each of these candidatures is completely dead in the water, but the ‘corpses’ may twitch and linger on until this year’s ‘super-Tuesday’ – the 6th March when 8 state primaries and 5 caucuses are held.
The next stop is New Hampshire on the 10th January – where Romney has a commanding lead over the other contenders – 43% to 17% for Ron Paul. Gingrich has gone from 20% to 8% over the course of December in New Hampshire. Most commentators are already writing off New Hampshire as a foregone conclusion and non-event. This is dangerous territory for the front-runner – fine if it comes off, but troublesome if it doesn’t. If Romney does prevail, the most interesting issue will be the support for the surviving contenders. In 1992, Paul Tsongas won the Democratic Primary by almost 10%, but this was expected as New Hampshire bordered his home state of Massachusetts, so it was largely discounted. But the real ‘winner’ of the 1992 New Hampshire Democratic primary was Bill Clinton – who hung to second place despite the debilitating ‘bimbo eruption’ courtesy of Gennifer Flowers. The ‘comeback kid’ was born and the rest is history. Romney will hope for a major and uneventful win in New Hampshire.
After New Hampshire comes the first test in the South – South Carolina. Currently Gingrich has a 38-21% lead over Romney – although that was in a state-wide Clemson poll from Dec 6-19 so it is not up to date. How Gingrich’s support in South Carolina holds after Iowa will be crucial to his ability to attract money and to hold on. In the same poll Ron Paul was on 10%, so has a base to build on, but it is not natural territory for him. He has started airing adverts on South Carolina TV stations, but has yet to announce any visits. Santorum, Perry, Huntsman and Bachmann will all try to hold on until South Carolina as it is seen as their home turf – nearly 60% of the South Carolina vote is evangelical. Romney’s Mormon faith sits uneasily here, but so did Kennedy’s Catholicism is overwhelmingly Protestant West Virginia in 1960. South Carolina may prove to be the game-changer in this year’s race
Gingrich also has a large lead in Florida’s primary – 31st January – although the latest poll is over a month old. The NBC/Marist poll held over December 4-7th put Gingrich at 44%, Romney at 29% and Paul on 8%. Although the world, and the list of remaining candidates, could look very, very different by the time Florida goes to the polls.
So, what did Iowa tell us about the real winner? Given that the Iowa result was not definitive; that Romney did not emerge triumphant; that at least 3 contenders are still alive (Santorum, Paul and Gingrich); that 3 others will try to hang out although probably fatally wounded (Huntsman, Bachmann and Perry); and that the only certainty is an ongoing very competitive and increasingly fractious contest throughout January – the winner has to be………Barack Obama. Surely?
Comments (1)
Subscribe to this posts's comments feed
Huntsman didnt even try in Iowa so its perhaps too early to write him off, and I agree that Santorum is this years Huckabee and will probably disappear at the first sign of wind, but otherwise I agree that Obama is in a very strong position.
I would also add that Ron Paul's numbers should cause whoever does win the nomination (I cant believe for a moment that it will be him) serious concerns - he still hasnt said that he definately would not run as an independent if he didnt get the nomination, and 10-20% of the Republican vote sticking with him (which would almost certainly happen especially if another RINO is the nominee) would hand Obama the election.
08/01/2012 00:48