Mitt Romney skipped yesterday’s debate in Iowa sponsored by a social conservative group. Those in attendance took it as a sign that the former Massachusetts governor isn’t competing in the Hawkeye state. However, as the New York Times reports today, though Romney spent this weekend in New Hampshire, he is planning an all-out push in Iowa in the last month of campaigning, aiming at a knockout blow that will give him a stranglehold on the nomination in January.
The idea of a Romney win in Iowa seems farfetched if you take the latest Rasmussen Poll of likely caucus-goers seriously. In the survey conducted on November 15, Newt Gingrich vaulted to an improbable 32-19 percent lead over Romney. This survey certainly confirms the strength of the Gingrich surge, but the volatility of these numbers even when compared to past Rasmussen polls in the state undermines the notion this race can be easily predicted. Less than a month earlier, Rasmussen had Gingrich trailing Romney by 12 percentage points with the former Speaker of the House only being supported by 9 percent. Though some very smart analysts, like the Weekly Standard’s Fred Barnes, are claiming this latest twist in the race is not a fluke and Gingrich won’t fade as others have, it’s difficult to place much faith in numbers that fluctuate that much.
Though he was absent from yesterday’s family values debate (which was not televised and thus had less impact than the previous GOP tussles), the scrum among those competing for the role of conservative “not Romney” points as much to Romney’s opportunity in Iowa as anything else. With Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry and Herman Cain competing for social conservatives and Tea Partiers and with Ron Paul maintaining his slice of voters who prefer an extremist libertarian/isolationist, there’s little likelihood of any of them being able to win the 30 percent or so of the vote that would guarantee victory in such a divided field. That leaves Romney–who has maintained a steady 20-25 percent figure in the polls–with a good chance of finishing first.
As for Gingrich, the spin coming out of his camp and from some conservative writers is that the “new Gingrich” — as opposed to the “old Newt” who appeared dead in the water over the summer and who could be relied on for a daily gaffe — is a disciplined and experienced politician who will cruise down the home stretch and easily outpace Romney and the other candidates. It’s been a crazy year where the old rules of primary elections don’t always apply, but the idea that Gingrich, who is clearly to the left of Romney and the field on the economy and the budget, somehow becoming the favorite of the Tea Party as well as the champion of family values boggles the imagination.
This is, after all, the same man who earlier this year blasted Paul Ryan’s plan for reforming Medicare and other entitlements as “right-wing social engineering” and also has a record of supporting a federal individual personal mandate for health care that is arguably even more heretical for Republicans than Romneycare. If Tea Partiers think ill of Romney, one has to ask why they would trust Gingrich, who has flip-flopped on all these issues?
The President Gingrich scenario also presupposes that Barack Obama is such a weak candidate that any Republican, even one as flawed and as widely disliked as Gingrich, can beat him. That is a myth. Despite his problems, Obama will be a formidable and well-funded incumbent who will have a number of natural advantages next November.
Gingrich has benefitted from being ignored by the media for months. While other candidates were scrutinized for flaws, Gingrich, who has more skeletons in his closet than the rest of the field combined, has flown under the radar while doing well in the debates. That should change in the next few weeks, and some of the luster may fade from Gingrich’s boomlet. Gingrich may be up in the polls this week, but if Romney makes an all-out effort in Iowa, he could still squeak by to a victory that could effectively end the GOP race.
I look forward to reading your first column after Dr. Paul wins Iowa. You call him an extremist. I argue that today's insane overspending on foreign adventurism is what is truly extreme. And you might give yourself some much needed credibility if you looked up the difference between isolationist and non-interventionist. More likely you actually do know the difference and are just trying to mislead your readers. I will concede that you make many valid points about Newt though. But the establishment was out of options for "the anti-Romney" guy. Look for Perry to get moved back up into the spotlight when Newt begins his downward spiral.
Paul all the way, the only honest, wise and intelligent between a bunch of ignorants and dumbs.
It is indeed perplexing how so many people who professed to hate Romney's flip-flops and professed to be in the Tea Party would embrace Gingrich. It is as though they heard Gingrich give a speech in 1994, took him at his word as a conservative, and then fell asleep for 17 years. Many people over the years have been beguiled or bewitched by Gingrich, but nearly all have gone away feeling bitter and betrayed. Can he win the nomination? Maybe. Can he win the presidency? With his baggage? Stranger things have happened–just look at 2008.
Sorry Johnathon, Gingrich is not left of Romney. This article is on bended knee hoping that Romney can find a way to get over a 25% ceiling. Romney is a progressive. His MA record dictates such. I'm in the anybody but Romney camp. Romney would be an unmitigated disaster for the country.
Obama = Romney = Perry = Cain = Gingrich = different puppets, same federal reserve/bankster masters. n nGingrich = endless wives, endless wars, freddie-mac 1.8 Million $, medical mandates, 3rd world amnesty/welfare, TARP/bailouts. n nCain = Kansas Federal reserve thug, "libya swirling in my head", finger in panties, TARP/bailouts. n nRomney = commie medical care, racist quotas, bailouts, TARP, abortion, gun control, bloodthirsty war-lust, campaign funding by Banksters. n nPerry = Gardasil for little girls, free health/ education/house/food for 3rd world aliens, "niggerhead" on farm, "oops" in his brain, "bank-of-america helping him out". n nEnd the wars/empire, end the federal reserve/IMF/World Bank/BIS, end UN/WTO, end racist quotas, end unconstitutional departments, end TSA/DHS/ADL/SPLC and other crime syndicates. n nRon Paul will restore Sound money, strong national defense, liberty, free enterprise, local government, strong traditional families, western civilization. n
As an Iowan I do not think that Romney is going to win the caucus. Ron Paul will pull in some significant votes but do not see him taking first. The Iowa race as I see it is as follows: Cain takes first, followed by Gingrich/Paul, Romney/Perry, then Bachman/Santorum.
My prediction is that Iowa will be inconclusive until we know the results.
Ron Paul an extremist libertarian/isolationist? Hmmm… You mean as in if the status quo is mainstream and perfectly normal right? If the corporatocracy, which has destroyed capitalism and which we now live in and where a simple emergency room visit cost us $6,000+ and surgery cost us our home is your normal, then Dr. Paul is indeed, extreme.. n nDo you mean your "NORMAL" world where both the Democrat and Republican establishment and their lobbyist partners in crime sell us out on a daily basis. Do you mean a "NORMAL" world where all our technology and industrial power and our jobs and trade secrets are shipped overseas and where the revolving doors spins and spin? n nYou seriously use the word "Isolationist" and expect your readers to be so dumbed down they will believe this? This "NORMALl” world you live in where friendship and respect and trade is called "isolationist" but bombs and threats are thought to be "Mainstream"? n nThis historically new world of continued war to keep the Military Industrial Complex running on all cylinders along with all the other "industrial complexes" like Prison and health care and the banksters and the printing presses and the scams? n nSorry fella, telling us the green grass is red isn't gonna work anymore, Many of us really do care about National Defense and WE REMEMBER it was our factories and the millions of airplanes and tanks and ships and our industrial capacity along with our free trade capitalism that won WWII ! n nWe know what the neoconservatives from both the democratic and the Republican parties have done. We know they are one and the same. We are not afraid of Freedom or Liberty. n nIn fact, those are the simple things we fight and die for, not the world bankers bottom line or the crooked congressman’s bribes or security. This guy you call an "Extremist"? He's the guy we're voting for!