adapted from fivethirtyeight.com
Wow. That was some fun primary. And now we have an invisible winner (Rick Santorum, IA), a winner on the way down (Mitt Romney, NH) and one on the way up (Newtmentum! in SC.)
So what did we learn? Just for grins, let's see how clouded our crystal ball was.
Flashback: A word or two about polling ... (January) noted we did pretty well in the prediction department, at least in knowing who was going to win and when it was too close to call.
See the graphic above for the SC results, and you make the call. Polling is turning out to be pretty accurate, including PPP's call of Newt 37, Mitt 28, Santorum 16, Paul 14. And that makes this comment from the
Washington Post look really stupid:
In the last few days, some polls have shown Gingrich leading the race here although those polls have methodology problems that could skew the results.
Get over it. Automated calls work, and comments like that, based on outdated prejudice against robo-call methodology, are simply inappropriate and wrong. What's much more important than live vs automated calls is realizing that volatile races require calling up to the last minute.
Flashback: Who cares which non-Romney wins Iowa? (October):
The GOP field's poor quality candidates means the Iowa winner would be a loser. If so, Romney wins Iowa and it's over. And if, as seems likely, it's a not-Romney that wins, who will care? An Iowa win won't make Rick Santorum into a GOP primary winner. And that means in the end, Iowa loses.
Still true. Does anyone care that Santorum won Iowa? Well, except Romney. But the voters and the media sure don't care.
Flashback:
GOP contest may be a marathon, not a sprint (early December, when Gingrich led Romney nationally
37-22)
The article notes the possibility, however unlikely, of a late entry (i.e., unlike other years, it's not impossible this year). But even without a late entry, this may be a slow motion knife fight, since the GOP’s early contests are not winner take all, and most of the delegates are later.
So, it's a reason not to anoint Newt yet. Romney (and Perry) have the resources to slog on beyond Iowa, while it's not clear Newt's organized enough to take advantage of his advantage. And it also provides time for:
a) Newt to self destruct, and
b) everyone in D.C. and the media that dislikes him—and that's a lot of people—to assist with a)
Yet another reason not to have IA and NH tie us in knots.
Still true. These results suggest a longer process, but keep in mind what
Charlie Cook noted:
The important thing to watch is not who has a lead in the polls in mid-December, before the individual contests begin, or even who specifically places first in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. The focus should more appropriately be placed on who will likely be standing at the end of the race and on who will be standing at the podium on the night of Aug. 30 in Tampa accepting the Republican nomination.
Money and organization still favor
Romney:
None of this automatically translates into voter support. But it’s a very strong wind blowing at Romney’s back, and in everyone else’s faces. The stronger that wind gets, the less everything else matters. And at this point, it’s getting stronger every day.
Flashback:
Four reasons why Mitt Romney will be the nominee (January, between IA and NH)
1. Rick Santorum is unelectable
2. Newt Gingrich is a jerk
3. Rick Perry is damaged goods
4. Ron Paul, libertarian, doesn't share a Republican foreign policy
The funny thing is that each of them by themselves, one on one, might—I say, might—have a chance simply because Romney has his own major issues with the Republican base that votes in a primary. But with each of these less than stellar candidates running against each other and splitting the non-Romney vote, Romney will sail through unimportant New Hampshire and have a real shot at South Carolina. If he does well there, why should he do poorly in Florida and points beyond?
Well, those may still all be true, but it turns out South Carolina specifically wanted a jerk, the meanest, nastiest guy on stage. Romney, despite the game-changing endorsement of John McCain, still hasn't won. And in South Carolina, Newt managed to outmaneuver the others and consolidate the non-Romney vote (yes, Virginia, there is one.)
How? It's Bain, you say? Not what the polls say, at least directly.
Still, there’s little evidence that such attacks have taken root. More than twice as many likely voters said the attacks were unfair than fair to Romney in an NBC News/Marist poll released this week.
And more than six in 10 in the poll said investment firms like Bain help the U.S. economy; about a quarter say they hurt it.
Nationally, Republicans have soured somewhat on Romney’s work restructuring companies, but it remains a net positive in the latest Post-ABC poll.
No, it's more than just Bain. It's the whole gestalt of an out of touch 1%er Romney paying (maybe) 15% taxes—but who knows, since we haven't seen Romney's tax returns—reinforced by two terrible debate performances ("maybe" is not an acceptable answer to calls for releasing your taxes, and how unprepared and unprofessional did that look?)
But this is Romney's biggest problem: the
exit polls showed Gingrich winning the electability question:
According to exit polls, nearly half of voters said beating Obama was the main factor in their choice, and among those voters, Gingrich took about half the vote, beating Romney by more than 10 percent.
If Romney can't address that, he loses.
What about Newtmentum? Gingrich won by being mean, dumping on Juan Williams and food stamp recipients in the midst of a Great Recession, as if a black president forced welfare on an unsuspecting populace. His win is based on that. And the SC Republicans (and a large part of the Republican base) want mean.
But Newt's got a problem beyond lack of money and organization (I sure hope he wasn't counting on VA delegates, because he failed to qualify to be on the ballot), and that is that no one likes him. Check this out:
and this:
Newt Gingrich’s woman problem
If the general election had been held in mid-January – before news of the Marianne Gingrich interviews had broken -- the CNN survey shows President Obama would have taken 54 percent to Gingrich’s 41 percent. Among only men, that gap narrows to a six-percentage point difference: 49 percent for Obama and 43 percent to Gingrich.
But among women, it widens to 18 points: 58 percent for Obama and 40 percent for Gingrich.
And that's not even taking into account the largest group of Newt haters on the planet: anyone who ever worked with him. In other words, "mean" may work for SC Republicans, but it won't work so well in the general election.
Of course, as Nate Silver notes, lately no one likes Romney, either.
The longer this goes on, the worse for the GOP.
Still, this Gingrich win reinforces the Romney vs not Romney narrative, highlights the
booing from Republican audiences at inopportune points, and challenges the idea that moderation is somehow winning in the Republican Party.
Ron Paul? Unless he runs third party, there's nothing to say about Ron Paul.
So what about Santorum? Well, what about Santorum?
He over-performed his poll numbers, but if he can't win in South Carolina, with that many conservatives and evangelicals, where can he win? With no money, how can he compete in Florida? Santorum will stay in the race, but even if he stays, he's a non-factor. Still, it'll be fun to see whom he attacks.
So, to summarize:
• Mitt's still got money and organization, but...
• He's lost 2 of 3 primaries and
• He lost on electability in SC and in addition many Republicans clearly just don't want him
• He's a 1%er in the year of the 99%, giving no leeway for him to screw up his tax releases the way he's done
• Both Newt and Mitt have deteriorating unfavorables, a consequence of a nasty primary
Maybe it's still possible for no one to win.
And that's how it looks this morning. Tomorrow's another day.