The Primaries Continue

Looking at the results from Iowa: Bachman has dropped out of the race as I suspected she would, Gingrich took 4th as predicted, and Santorum missed my prediction of edging out Romney by 8 votes (pending investigations). The one place I seem to have been significantly off-base was overestimating Ron Paul’s ability to attract voters outside his loyal base.

Paul has successfully been portrayed as “nutty” and “dangerous”, and his stance on gay marriage didn’t help him with evangelicals in Iowa that he might otherwise have found support with for his reliable pro-life position. In a “nut-shell” (pardon the pun!) that is the problem with Paul. He has positions that many republicans and independents find refreshing while holding other positions that people consider scary and that his political enemies can easily exploit. His inability to appear more moderate, or at least more clearly explain himself to assuage peoples’ concerns about him, is preventing him from becoming a mainstream contender. I see him still taking second in New Hampshire, but not garnering over 20% of the vote, which for him is the magic number. South Carolina will now be a real battle for him with Santorum, and going forward I see him fading back to a 10 to 15% candidate unless he can do something to change the perceptions of him. I just don’t think he has it in him.

I still think Huntsman is through after New Hampshire, and possibly Perry as well, although I think he’ll probably hang on until after South Carolina (he has the money to do so). Santorum’s second place in Iowa is viewed as a victory for him in most circles, and gives him publicity and momentum without the stigma of being the “winner” in Iowa, which should actually help him in New Hampshire, as NH voters have an aversion to “following the leader” who comes out of Iowa. That being said, the winner in Iowa, Romney, will in fact be the winner in New Hampshire; though any thing less than 30% of the vote will be a sign of weakness. New Hampshire needs to be the place where Romney proves he can get a convincing victory.

If Gingrich can have some strong debate performances, and Santorum continues to be typically lackluster debating, Newt may be able to signal a comeback beginning with a third place finish in New Hampshire, though he’s more likely to show up fourth behind Santorum. If he continues with his recent “Bachman-like” repetition of sound-bites about being a “Reagan conservative”, he may find himself on the same political path she disappeared on. Newt’s strength is in being able to articulate ideas clearly and speaking intelligently as if he is truly expressing his own thoughts rather than regurgitating the results of some focus group that one of his handlers has prepared for him. Going forward Newt will need to play to his strengths which are bold fresh ideas, clear articulation, and a positive cooperative demeanor. Lately he has appeared as a cranky old man, and that doesn’t suit him as well as it does Ron Paul.

Many pundits are suggesting that Romney wants as many candidates to divide the vote as possible, especially the conservative vote. Looking at Romney’s response to the Iowa caucuses, and his congratulatory remarks for all the top finishers, I don’t doubt that this is true. Those same pundits insist that Gingrich needs to winnow the field and take aim at Santorum to eliminate him from the running, instead of shooting for Romney (forgive the inflammatory rhetoric, I’m speaking figuratively and not actually advocating gun violence!), but I see as a more effective strategy for Newt one of joining forces with Santorum and Perry against Romney, so that he will be the heir apparent of their supporters when their campaigns crash and burn. It’s a difficult line to take, because he wants to appear as the leader of the pack without being antagonistic to the candidates themselves. To do this he will need to start finishing at least in second place, which I see beginning in South Carolina. Look for him to come up with something new in his campaign, maybe a Hermann Cain type tax reform plan, or hinting at some possible cabinet appointments of high profile republicans.

All of the current and past nominees have enjoyed brief moments in the sun (except Huntsman). The successful Republican will need to look at what made each candidate popular, and not do whatever it is Huntsman is doing! Bachman stood strong against Obamacare and gave voice to Tea Party concerns; Perry expressed strong conservative values and appealed to the evangelical base; Cain presented an “outsider” disdain for Washington “politics as usual”, and presented a clear concise plan for changing the way taxes are done and promising hope for businesses; Gingrich appeared highly intelligent (a must after George Bush, and the reason Perry won’t make a comeback), and someone with the ideas and experience to make things happen to “fix” the nation; Paul showed strong adherence to constitutional purity, an anti-war stand, and states-rights positions, Santorum is a social conservative with heavy populist leanings and a plan to revitalize manufacturing in the U.S.; Romney’s main strength is that he appears to be presidential, steady, and someone who could defeat Obama by staying out of the way of the President’s self-destructive record.

IMHO: The candidate who can moderate and incorporate many or most of these strengths into their campaign will give himself a chance to garner increasing support as the field thins out. If no candidate can do that effectively, then Romney wins by default, but even he will need to identify with these things if he hopes to differentiate himself from the current POTUS and defeat him in November.