An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Mitt Romney Elopes to Nevada

The U.S. Presidential Election: The Greatest Show on Earth … »

Why Romney Will (May) Win

Posted by MICHAEL STICKINGS, Assistant Editor in Politics.
Jan 17th, 2008 | Comments

The Republican presidential nominee will be Mitt Romney. Here’s why.

Kevin Drum:

As Josh Marshall points out, John McCain got stomped in Michigan among self-described Republicans. He also got stomped among Republicans in Iowa, and even lost (though closely) among Republicans in New Hampshire. Independents might like him, but basically, John McCain just isn’t doing well among Republicans in the Republican primary.

Elsewhere, Ezra Klein highlights Rush Limbaugh’s spittle-flecked hatred of both McCain and Mike Huckabee: “I’m here to tell you, if either of these two guys get the nomination, it’s going to destroy the Republican Party.” Ouch.

Put those things together with the fact that future primaries are mostly closed, which means that only Republicans will be voting in the Republican contests, and McCain’s chances suddenly don’t look so good. Ditto for Huckabee, who’s shown very little ability to appeal much beyond his evangelical base. And ditto for Rudy Giuliani, who might very well be dead before Super Tuesday even rolls around.

Like Kevin, I see Romney as the eventual winner of this race — and, if I may pat myself on the back, I have been saying so for a long time. I never bought into Huckabee — he did well, as he should have, in Iowa, but his appeal is narrow and he peaked early after a sudden rise to the top. McCain did well in New Hampshire, as he should have, and he may yet win South Carolina, but I can’t see the GOP establishment and the conservative movement (other than the neocons, who are on the fringe anyway) fully accepting him as their preferred nominee. He will have renewed momentum if he wins South Carolina — and he is well ahead in the polls — and greater legitimacy in the party if Thompson drops out and endorses him, but it will be tough to beat Romney in the closed, all-Republican primaries to come. (And, yes, Giuliani may be a non-factor now.)

A major concern for Romney, as Kevin mentions, is that he is doing poorly in national polls, but that could change, and likely would change, if the race turned into a two-man contest between him and McCain. Presented with those two options, Romney would look pretty good, and much better than he is looking now, to many Republicans.

McCain’s post-Iowa “comeback” has been impressive, to be sure, and he has a solid base of support not just among independents but within the Republican Party (a base that would possibly be expanded and reinforced with Thompson’s support), but I just don’t see how he can attract majority support in a party that considers him something of a disloyal maverick. It will be difficult for him to win the all-Republican primaries and it would be nearly impossible for him to win a brokered convention. His only hope may be for Huckabee and Giuliani to remain in the race and to squeak out narrow victories in a crowded and divided field — and to maintain a formidable enough lead in national polls to look like a clear frontrunner.

Still, nothing is clear. See Marc Ambinder: “Four primaries and three winners have exposed, according to the dominant media, a Republican party that is listless, demoralized and casting about for unity. There aren’t many Republicans who would disagree.”

**********

A prediction: Romney-Huckabee. What do you think? Any other suggestions?

**********

On our side, another prediction: Clinton-Feingold. Again, what do you think? Any other suggestions?

(Cross-posted from The Reaction.)

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

F_and_B

Good analysis of the Romney vs McCain battle. I would not have agreed a few weeks ago but it looks like Romney is gaining momentum. I don't agree with Romney-Huckabee... more likely that Romney would pick a relatively unknown but highly talented younger politician.

On the dark side, I still think it will be Hillary-Obama ;-)
(i.e. dark side from Star Wars, no racist anything intended - just want to make sure that's clear)

kritt11

Romney won't win South Carolina, or many other states in the South. His business background and message of economic recovery was more suitable in Michigan, where voters were taken in by his promises to do away with the new CAFE standards and bring manufacturing jobs back. He was pandering- on the issue--McCain at least was honest.

DLS

Oh, didn't you know that he changed his story when he campaigned (if you can call it that) in South Carolina? Once there, he said that he would save the Southern economy.

The Dark Side is going to win this year. The (DC) Empire will strike back.

DLS

It's the GOP way this year. Nobody is rising, not McCain, not Romney. It's just that the others are sinking more deeply at the moment than they are.

JSpencer

Kritt, you're right about many voters in Michigan having been taken in by Romney, but they were GOP voters, and desperate ones at that. In the general election Michigan will go with the democrat. I see McCain beating Romney overall; the man has the integrity Romney lacks, and this will become increasingly evident I think.

cosmoetica

Although he's a sleaze maestro, I think Rudy's strategy of waiting out the little states and capitalizing in Fla. & the Super Tuesday states may look prescient. If he can win some of the big ticket states it may signal a shift from the decades old dances in Iowa & NH.

In order of GOP chances, I'd go w McCain, Rudy, Huck, then Romney. Even the shallowest R's tend to see thru him, and the Evangelicals will stay home if he gets the nom. At least Rudy can wave the 9/11 flag and McCain get the rabid pro-warriors. Romney- he's got Staples shoppers?

DLS

Cosmo is close to the current polling information. And we'll see how Giuliani's strategy works. If dimwit college kids can cheer and roar for Bill Clinton, and show robotic-to-fanatical support for Hillary Clinton, then why can't Giulani actually do well in contemporary California, too, despite his undesireability to so many others who know better about him?

Currently McCain is leading on the GOP side. The order is: McCain (29%), Huckabee (20%), Romney (17%), Giuliani (13%), Thompson (9%), Paul (6%). On the Dem side, it's still Clinton with a good lead, though Obama has gained recently. The order is: (46%), Obama (31%), Edwards (13%).

Ideological placement of the candidates is in the latest information as well.

(Pew report -- and when will comment options such as links, bold text, italics, blocks, become available?)

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?Re...

kritt11

The only ones I have any respect for are McCain and Huckabee, because at least they are mostly campaigning as themselves.

Thompson might as well throw in the towel, because he's not going to win in South Carolina either.

The GOP is going to have trouble uniting behind the nominee, unless Hillary is the Dem's candidate- then they can just hope to get voters out who want to vote against her.

DLS

"Huckabee and Giuliani to remain in the race"

Huck's a candidate for VP to keep the GOP-assumed Religious Right votes coming (cannot or should not rely on Clinton's unelectability). But there's another problem, which the foregoing phrase implicates: Huck doesn't have much money. He may last through Feb 5 but not be able to buy much advertising or do much campaigning in Califormia, New York, and New Jersey, and for all the hype and hatred hurled at them, Huck and the Religious Right are far from being dominant or even significant in these states or in numerous others. For him to become VP he'll have to be literally "adopted" and sponsored, and there's no guarantee that would happen, certainly not from the establishment, the business community, or the GOP leadership.

slr38

My friends who work for McCain tell me that McCain considers Huckabee to be a "useful idiot" and that he propped up Huckabee in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan only to try and take down Romney. I hope the evangelical "jesus hates you and loves me" crowd don't ruin the party trying to put a fool like Huckabee in the White House. They'll prove what the Dems have always said about their blind intollerance is right is trying to do so, lose the White House, and ruin the GOP. I'm starting to think we need a third party, the "Jesuscrats" who are all the fools that stand only for making sure a protestant gets elected, no matter how dumb he is.

Ann Coulter said yesterday in her column that after researching Romney's record in detail, the only thing she can see he's flip-flopped on is abortion, which is less than the rest of the candidates, and even then only in whether his views ought to legislated. She's thinks he's the guy for the GOP, and Coulter is as Bible-thumping a Christian as anyone I've ever seen.

DLS

Well, a far larger problem is leftist hatred of anyone religious who doesn't vote Democratic, but as far as the Religious Right is concerned, they aren't large or powerful enough to control the GOP, and their own, in fact rare, instances of intolerance or "closed society" behavior turns off other GOP voters. Huckabee's fine in a VP role and obviously does better, less-painful-to-hear press conferences than Dubya, but would not prevail as a Presidential candidate, even though on decency grounds he annihilates Clinton.

* * *

"The GOP is going to have trouble uniting behind the nominee, unless Hillary is the Dem's candidate" [also likely Ann Coulter's motive]

Don't worry, for once she is crowned, the media will revert to "St. Hillary" mode, Joan of Arc [trumpet fanfare] against the evil fundamentalist dunces with guns [ominous music]. "YOU WILL BE CON-FORM-AL-IZED"

JSpencer

DLS, the way in which you throw the word like "hatred" around suggests to me that you don't really know what it means. It certainly isn't relevant in the context you try to use it here. As for Ann Coulter? The only Ann Coulter I know has an endorsement that's about as valuable as GWB's, and her judgement is worth even less.

kritt11

Without the evangelical's organization and turnout in the 2000 election, Al Gore would have convincingly defeated George Bush, and the course of history would have been irrevocably altered. That makes the religious right a force to be reckoned with. I don't believe the "left" hates religious Republicans- they just don't want to live in a theocracy.

blog comments powered by Disqus