Considering the fact that Mitt Romney recently made his first visit to Iowa of this election cycle, it appears that he doesn’t intend to seriously contend in the state. And considering that there are a plethora of socially conservative candidates running for the Huckabee vote, and that that vote is therefore likely to be divided up among more than a have dozen candidates, it seems to me like it should be possible for a more mainstream candidate to win the caucuses with a very low overall percentage of the vote.
I have read in several places that former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman doesn’t plan on competing in Iowa either, and probably for the same reasons as Romney. Iowa’s Republican base is evangelical and not too open-minded about supporting Mormons, regardless of what policies they advocate. That’s the theory, anyway. But Huntman’s road to the nomination has to start somewhere. He can’t skip Iowa and think he will win New Hampshire. And if he doesn’t win in either of the first two states, he certainly won’t win in South Carolina or have any momentum in Nevada. If I were advising Huntsman, I would advise him to compete heavily in Iowa with the goal of finishing in the top three. Assuming that Palin does not run, I don’t think a second place finish in Iowa would be out of the question and a third place finish should be eminently doable.
Why do I feel this way? Well, part of it has to do with the Iowa caucus system. Here’s an amusing anecdote.
Most grating to Iowa Republicans have been the snide comments from their fellow early state, New Hampshire, which has a more conventional primary election.
In a recent column for the New Hampshire Union Leader that was reprinted in the Des Moines Register, former New Hampshire GOP chairman Fergus Cullen wrote that important issues don’t get debated in Iowa, because “three quarters of the audience wears tinfoil hats.”
“Iowa Republicans didn’t set out to marginalize themselves, but it’s happened — to New Hampshire’s benefit,” Cullen added. “With several major candidates likely to bypass Iowa, and the odds rising that Iowa’s skewed caucus electorate could support candidates with limited general election appeal, the likelihood of New Hampshire being called upon to make a correction” increases.
Barack Obama won the Iowa caucuses because he performed a minor miracle in getting as many people under the age of 30 to show up as people over the age of sixty-four. But, this time around, Romney isn’t even going to try to overcome the tinfoil-hat nature of the Republican base in Iowa. By conceding, he leaves a quarter of the electorate without a candidate. Rep. Steve King, who exemplifies the Crazy, is set to endorse Michele Bachmann. Pawlenty is positioned to straddle the sweet spot between the lunatics and the Establishment. But he’s going to get pulled far to the right. This is where Huntsman can come in and make an electability argument. He can say that unlike Romney, he’s not a career flip-flopper.
The goal is not necessarily to win Iowa, which is probably unrealistic, but to be positioned to pick up the pieces for the Establishment when Romney crashes and burns in New Hampshire. And, make no mistake, every GOP outlet that communicates with voters is going to be gunning for Romney because of the health care issue. He is going to take so much friendly-fire that you could use him as a sieve. He has no chance of retaining his lead in the New Hampshire polls, especially after the winner of Iowa steals all the media attention for a week or two.
Let me put this another way. If Huntsman has not positioned himself to pick up the pieces, the GOP is going to nominate Pawlenty or, shockingly, someone else from their field of loons.
I think Herman Cain has the best chance of winning Iowa. Nobody likes Huntsman. Nobody likes Pawlenty much, but at least he’s trying to impress actual Republican voters. Cain offers right-wing whites the chance to admire themselves for supporting a black person, and he brings the crazy like no other:
Obama isn’t a patriot
NO MUSLIMS!
Zero Capital Gains Tax
Planned Parenthood = Planned Genocide
Debated Clinton on Health Care in the 1990’s
The TeaBaggers that I work with are in love with Cain. They have abandoned Palin and Bachmann for Cain. Also, they hate Romney (because of Romneycare) and disdain Pawlenty. Cain! Cain! Cain! He’s their man. He’s going to sweep Obama out of office! No kidding. That’s straight from the horse’s mouth.
Bingo! The more bigoted they are, the more they are enthusiastic about Cain.
BTW, AA bloggers, does this make Cain an Uncle Tom?
Cain is an Uncle Tom, because he’s a Black man who pimped Birtherism. I can say, without equivocation, that makes him and Uncle Tom.
And putting a Black face on right-wing bullshyt only means that he’s a Black face.
Black folks will not be leaving Barack Obama for the likes of Herman Cain.
That’s what I figured. They think black voters will turn out Obama because they are disappointed with him. They are disappointed with him. I know, all my black friends tell me so, but they plan to hold their noses and vote for him. One friend told me (I hope this is an accurate quote),”Listen, I’m disappointed with Obama. Bitterly disappointed. Probably more disappointed than you. But their is no alternative. There will be no primary challenge, so stop talking about it. No national white Democrat is going to run against him and there is no national black Democrat who has a chance. These piss-ant whacked out crazy Tea Baggers think Cain has a chance just because in their pea brain racist so-called minds he is a black alternative. No black except rich whitey wannabees is going to vote for a hard Right Tea Bagger just because he’s black and it is very insulting that they even think so. They think it’s true because they think color color color. Black folks are more practical. We vote based on what the candidate is going to do for us or against us and whether they have a chance. So stop talking about it! There is nothing we can do, so stop making me think about it.”
I think I went over the line with my buddy.
I’m not disappointed in the President. I have issues with certain things that he’s done, but it’s obvious, he’s the better choice than anything the GOP can come up with….the whole Herman Cain thing is the same thing as the Illinois GOP bringing in Alan Keyes to run against Barack Obama. He was a Black right-wing clown, and Black folks were like ‘ I don’t think so’, and voted for Barack Obama for the Senate.
Once Cain continues to open his mouth about ending Social Security and Medicare, his numbers with Black folks will go nowhere. Along with him pushing that Birtherism bullshyt. it’s a non-starter.
My sense is that Republicans think that most black Americans voted for Obama primarily, or even only because he’s black. Ignoring of course the fact that blacks are the most committed part of the Democratic coalition and have been for some years, based on the parties’ differing issue positions.
Now, I’m not saying at least some black folks weren’t motivated to vote for Obama because of his historic status as the first black major party Presidential nominee. Obviously that’s not true and the enormously high percentage of black support for Obama (96%?) speaks to that.
But under the GOP’s Cain or Keyes electoral theories, if you just throw any random brown dude up there lotsa minorities will vote for him. Because, well… it doesn’t take much to see the racist implications of that theory (black people aren’t smart enough to vote for their own interests, they’re easily bamboozled by a charismatic “one of their own,” etc.). And that dog just won’t hunt. Especially when the GOP’s candidate is as crazy and unqualified for the Presidency as Cain.
Like my buddy said, it’s projection. They would vote for any white guy over any black guy, so they think blacks think the same. I’m sure there are black racists who think like that, but like my buddy also said, most (black) people are smart enough to look out for their interests and ignore race.
Black vote for John Kerry – 90%
Black vote for Generic Democratic Candidate -90% .
How did Barack Obama get to 96%?
More than half the Black REPUBLICANS voted for him….
since they didn’t vote for other Democratic Candidates, what made Barack Obama different?
oh yeah, he’s BLACK.
SO, if there was a group voting for Obama because he was BLACK – it was BLACK REPUBLICANS not Black Democrats.
Black Democrats voted for the Democratic Candidate – that he was Black, was icing on the cake this past election.
And, Barack Obama has done nothing to break the support that he will receive from the Black community in 2012…IMO.
It’s not just what Obama has done as President…it’s how he’s been TREATED as President. The ‘average’ Black person in the beauty and barbershops has never followed politics as closely as they have when Obama was elected. They might not be saying anything, but NOTHING is getting by them. Not the routine disrespect towards this President AND HIS FAMILY that goes on on a daily basis…
Oh yeah, I hear this loud and clear and I see the anger on the faces.
I feel privileged that my black co-workers trust me enough to criticize Barack Obama to this pale-faced dude. I’m gratified that they understand that my criticisms are ideological and not racial.
Yeah, I don’t think Cain will last long as of right now because he can’t raise money worth a damn — that’s why I believed Bachmann would probably go farther and win. But if he does well in Iowa, he might bring in enough cash to last longer than originally predicted.
Also, Tucker Carlson is in love with Cain.
Anyone here laugh at loud at the NH GOP chair talking about wearing tin-foil hats? The NH GOP is just as nutty, they don’t have the religious component the Iowa GOP does.
Sorry, I still think it’s extraordinarily unlikely that Huntsman survives the first 4 primaries. Go eat some BBQ and wait for Pawlenty.
There comes a time when too little too late is gonna hit the boys over the head when Bachmann steps in. She owns Iowa!
Brooks on MTP was hillareous on Palin. Whew what trash talk!
Seems like the niche you’re reserving for Huntsman is already occupied by Pawlenty. Huntsman, unless he deprives himself of beltway “strategists”, would feel just as driven to veer right as Paw.
Booman, I don’t think we should give public advice to Huntsman ha ha !
I’m more than happy to imagine a radical getting the nomination, or either Romney or Pawlenty. For the record, I don’t think Romney or Pawlenty stands the slimest chance against Barack Obama. Not enough gravitas.
Prediction: Romney wins New Hampshire, and handily.
He’s a native — he has a big estate on Lake Winnipesaukee, and is well-known in a state that gets more than half its media from neighboring Massachusetts.
He’s leading in the polls there, as of last week, anyways.
He got bushwhacked in NH in 2008 by McCain largely on the strength of the 2000 romance between McCain and the voters of the Granite State.
And reflex anti-Mormonism isn’t much of a factor that far north…