With just one week to go before the Iowa caucuses, uncertainty is the word that can best describe the situation in the Republican presidential race. The polls have been all over the place in recent months as one candidate after another took turns trying on the mantle of frontrunner. Newt Gingrich’s moment appears to have come and gone. The affections of the social conservative and Tea Party wings of the party are split between three candidates who can’t seem to shake each other. Libertarian Ron Paul is making a splash — largely on the strength on non-GOP voters — but revelations about his extremist connections and hate-filled newsletters may limit his chances at a first place finish. Which leaves us with the same guy whom the media anointed as the frontrunner back in the spring as the most likely to be nominated: Mitt Romney.
New York Times statistical analyst Nate Silver asks today whether it is possible for Romney to lose. The answer is yes he can, but the odds still favor him for the same reason they have the past few months: none of the alternatives turned out to be viable. A poor showing in Iowa would be a setback for Romney, but it is still difficult to construct a scenario by which any of his rivals can chart a path to the nomination. For all of his manifest flaws as a candidate and his inability to convince conservatives that he is one of them, it’s hard to envision Romney losing at this point.
The worst-case scenario for Romney in Iowa would be for Newt Gingrich to finish first there. Such an outcome would undermine Romney’s argument for inevitability and give Gingrich momentum going into New Hampshire and South Carolina, the one state that the former speaker must win. But with Gingrich sinking in the polls as voters come to grips with his record, the next most likely first place finisher is someone who presents no long term threat to Romney: Ron Paul. Though a Paul victory would be embarrassing for Republicans and diminish the reputation of the Iowa caucus itself, the chances of the Texas congressman getting the nomination are nil.
The other possibility in Iowa is that one of the current members of the second tier was to pull off a last-minute upset victory. Given the volatility of the polls and the nature of the caucus, that is also not an impossible dream. Both Rick Santorum, who has shown some life after months of hard work in the state and Michele Bachmann, who won the Iowa Straw Poll back in August, have some ardent supporters, but they’re essentially competing for the same votes which may make it impossible for either to break through.
More intriguing is the possibility that Rick Perry, the third member of the conservative troika in Iowa, could somehow catch lightening in a bottle and vault to the top. A Perry win in Iowa could turn the race around and give him back some of the luster he lost virtually every time he opened his mouth in the GOP debates. But since he, too, is competing for the same voters as Santorum and Bachmann, it’s hard to see how he can do it. While it is not out of the question one of the three could ride a last-minute surge into third place all that would accomplish would be to prolong their campaigns. It would take a win in Iowa to make Republicans believe in any one of them, and that’s a long shot at best.
Which leaves us with just one more scenario: a Romney victory in Iowa. Silver estimates that the range of possible outcomes in the Hawkeye state for Romney to be from a high of 36 percent of the vote to a low of 8 percent. But the chances of him getting closer to the higher number are far greater than a lesser result. In the final days, enough Republicans may decide that voting for a loose cannon (Gingrich) or an extremist (Paul) is not the way to beat Barack Obama while the social conservative vote is split three ways. A Romney win in Iowa would not completely end the race before it has hardly begun, but it would take a lot of the mystery out of what would follow.
A Perry win in Iowa could turn the race around and give him back some of the luster he lost virtually every time he opened his mouth in the GOP debates. n nMr. Tobin, that's very unlikely. You can't regain an ephemeral status brought to earth and below by concrete revelation. n nPerry seems to champion "conservative" prinicples but they're not principles that can forge a governing majority. n nThe NY Times piece on Romney confirms my suspicion that he's a technocrat without a dream. That's a problem.
And the dream that I think he should be dreaming is one that's willing to take a risk: n n n
This is all very nice but the dream the base is hearkening to for the moment is Ron Paul's and no, all that support is not just random crazies or Democrat spoilers–in the final days enough GOP Republicans may decide, hell, they aren't neocons and they like their anti-Obama moonshine direct. And who more to attack the Federal leviathan than a guy who opposed the Federal tyranny's unconstitutional attempt to overthrow Confederate states' rights and human chattel property rights, and FDR's unconstitutional intervention in the peaceful Axis new order merely to placate Jewish money interests.
"Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist. He denies this charge vociferously. But I can tell you straight out, I had countless arguments/discussions with him over his personal views. For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that 'saving the Jews,' was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just 'blowback,' for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such." n nThis guy is so wrapped up in his black helicopter Jew banker delusions he has forgotten that Hitler declared war on us. n nA conspiracy, pro-secessionsit crackpot fixated on imaginary cabals emanating from the Trilateral Commission or the Bilsberger Group, trailing psychotic delusional dream fantasies of the Feds putting chemical tracers in our currency and embracing every conspiracy within his grasp to excuse or explain away foreign attacks on American soil from 9-11, to 1993 World Trade Center, to Pearl Harbor to Fort Sumter is a GOP LEADING CONTENDER. And the actual GOP establishment is afraid to denounce him and even Commentary only hems and haws. With Ron Paul "extremist" is a euphemism. n nNo, Romney is not inevitable.
Rick Perry is also going for veterans, hunters, farmers, small business, in other words, the entire Iowa spectrum. n nNot to mention anyone who really does not want Romney, especially when he tries to fake being normal by weaing $100 blue jeans. n nRomney v Obama will be lowestturnout in history, and Romney will drag the GOP Senate hopefuls down with him. n nThe GOP is unbelievably stupid – almost reaching the Democratic Party level of stupidity. n nAmazing that Gary Johnson might be the only way to 1) stop Ron Paul, and 2) inspire a glimmer of hope amongst the 60% of us disgusted with the duopoly force-feeding Romney and Obama. n nI hope Perry wins Iowa and Huntsman wins New Hampshire. Then all you pundits on Romney's payroll can navel-gaze…