Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Five Paths to the GOP 2012 Nomination
Pajamas Media ^ | November 10, 2010 | Ryan Mauro

Posted on 11/10/2010 7:15:03 AM PST by Kaslin

Let’s face it. We are all excited for the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination to start and there’s no shortage of candidates, with 18 making moves towards running according to my list. National polls do not matter at this point, as one victory in Iowa or New Hampshire can catapult a candidate to frontrunner status. More than anything, each candidate must decide where they fit into the primary calendar and where they will make their triumphant stand. And there appears to only be five realistic strategies available.

The first strategy is the most obvious one: Win both Iowa and New Hampshire and ride the tidal wave of momentum to victory. At this stage, only Mitt Romney can pull this off. Polls in Iowa vary, but he’s always at or near the top and he has a massive lead in New Hampshire. Although the one-two punch strategy didn’t work for Romney last time, it is not unrealistic to think he could pull it off this time with a higher profile and no candidate like John McCain with a base in New Hampshire from a previous race.

The second strategy is to win Iowa and South Carolina and use the momentum to take on the winner of the New Hampshire primary. The bulk of the candidates will be following this road and will drop out after Iowa. Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Mitch Daniels, Jim DeMint, John Thune, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Pence, Rick Santorum, Haley Barbour, and Herman Cain are all included in this category.

A slight variation of this strategy would be to fight for a strong finish in Iowa and win in South Carolina, making it a three-person race if two different people win Iowa and New Hampshire. This modified plan is best fit for Jim DeMint, as he’s the senator from South Carolina, and Herman Cain, as he’s from neighboring Georgia (and no, I’m not suggesting he’ll be a major candidate or will even get a spot at the debates). Some candidates that disappoint in Iowa may stick around in the hopes that the winner there trips up and they can offer themselves as the alternative in South Carolina.

The third strategy is to win New Hampshire, perhaps while trying to make a symbolic showing in Iowa. This path will be looked at by Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Rudy Giuliani, George Pataki, and Donald Trump (should he make the publicity stunt of running and not just talking about it). A number of the candidates listed thus far won’t run, but their names are included because they’ve done at least minimal work towards a candidacy. Giuliani may run, thinking that he can win the independents and he won’t have McCain around splitting votes with him. As for Paul and Johnson, expect one of them to drop out and endorse the other before the voting begins. They may both run initially in order to increase the amount of time allotted for libertarians during the debates.

The fourth strategy would be to win Nevada, which would require a strong showing in either Iowa or New Hampshire in order to withstand the momentum and media coverage the winners there receive. Romney won here last time, so this will be tough to do especially if he wins New Hampshire. The closeness of this contest to the others means that the results in Iowa and New Hampshire will be the biggest factor and so it is a long shot for any candidate to claim Nevada as his staking ground. It didn’t work out so well for Duncan Hunter last time, and it probably won’t work this time, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be tried.

You may notice that John Bolton and Newt Gingrich have not been included yet. That is because, as of right now, I don’t see what primary strategy they can have. Gingrich will have too much baggage for social conservatives in Iowa and his fiery partisanship won’t play well in New Hampshire and he’ll have a lot of catching up to do to tackle Romney. Absent a meltdown of the leading candidacies and his emergence as a compromise candidate, Gingrich’s only chance appears to be to embrace a fifth strategy made possible by changes to the primary calendar.

The Republican Party has voted to only allow Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina to hold their contests in February. In March, the states with proportional representation of the vote will hold their contests and in April, the winner-takes-all states will have their chance.

That means that it is possible that at the end of the February as the race falls to two or possibly three or four candidates, another alternative like Gingrich could emerge as each candidate’s negatives grow as they attack each other. However, this is not terribly dissimilar from the Super Tuesday plan of Clinton and Giuliani last time around. The candidates who have won contests will have tremendous momentum going into March and it will be hard for another candidate to break in.

At this juncture, Mitt Romney is the in the best position to win the nomination, but it is a fragile lead. The Tea Party could easily turn its wrath upon him for his health care plan in Massachusetts.

The 2012 race has already begun and with so many candidates considering a run, it should be expected that a few will essentially declare themselves in the contest in the weeks following the congressional elections.

The next election cycle began on November 3, 2010.


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 11/10/2010 7:15:04 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Romneycare! Romneycare! Romneycare!


2 posted on 11/10/2010 7:24:44 AM PST by Sybeck1 (Conservative yes, Republican no.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: Sybeck1

Baloney! Baloney! Baloney!


4 posted on 11/10/2010 7:42:12 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’m not excited. I regret we can’t have a few years of peace from the campaigning but it’s neverending.

Right now I’m holding back. When all the entrants are known I’ll pick a side. I’m hoping conservatives will pick a few they like and then rally to which one of those has the best chance of winning the nomination and election. If we have another primary like 2008 where someone like McCain sneaks by because conservatives are split half a dozen ways I’ll be ticked.


5 posted on 11/10/2010 7:48:24 AM PST by Soul Seeker ( I was there when we had the numbers, but didnÂ’t have the principles.---Jim that leans conservDeMin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

We must never let the lame stream media push a candidate on us, like they pushed McCain on us


6 posted on 11/10/2010 7:57:01 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; BlackElk
I am going to disagree with the article. The writer is basically going back to about '76 for his patterns, and even that doesn't work so well. Did Clinton win Iowa or New Hampshire in '92? No.

Who won Iowa? Tom Harkin.

Who won New Hampshire? Paul Tsongas.

Clinton managed to "exceed expectations" in New Hampshire and held on for the South. He also managed to paint Harkin and Tsongas as "favorite sons" who would be expected to win their home states.

But wait. Tsongas isn't from New Hampshire. Correct. Where is he from? Massachusetts. Romney's win in New Hampshire, if he gets it, could be painted in the same light.

Tsongas was a Dem, you say? What about Republicans? Yes. Pat Buchanan won in '96. Dole, almost a favorite son in farmy Iowa won there. Buchanan overplayed his insurgent hand and faded fast. New Hampshire was a non-factor.

The field is going to be huge in 2012, and some of the players are just there for the VEEP stakes, others are there to claim a pole position in 2016 or 2020.

Because the March primaries are proportional this time around, there won't be a lock on the nomination before Ash Wednesday like there was last time. I am frankly surprised that true Favorite Sons (state figure running only to control a state's delegation) have not made a comeback.

If Palin wins Iowa, and Romney wins NH, neither will be anointed--Palin because the Republican machinery can't stand her (whether it's because they think she'll be Goldwater II or because she upsets their apple cart doesn't matter.), Romney because he is completely unacceptable to both very wide swaths of the Republican Party and to an entire region of the country (the South).

If you have a dozen candidates, and Palin doesn't run away with it in the south and midwest, you might see many of these candidates with significant numbers of delegates.

Let's say Palin wins narrow in Iowa, with Daniels, Pawlenty and/or Thune finishing close. Romney wins NH, with Bolton and Gingrich finishing in the upper tier. Romney wins Nevada, with Gary Johnson and Palin strong. DeMint wins SC. Perry wins Texas. Romney wins Utah. Palin and Romney carve up the mountain states. The strongest of Daniels, Thune and Pawlnty split with Palin in the midwest. Palin and DeMint in the South, with pockets of strength by Bolton and Gingrich in both the south and the northeast.

You could have a multi-ballot convention.

Or not. The smart candidates don't look only at what happened in the past, but also take into consideration rules changes, the political landscape and the current field to see how they can break the pattern to their advantage.

Here is where Palin would have an advantage. She will have the money and the clout to stay in and have a following even with a loss in Iowa and a weak finish in New Hampshire. She is not Giuliani. AS LONG AS NO ONE POPULAR ALTERNATIVE BREAKS AWAY FROM THE PACK, THERE IS NO REASON FOR HER TO QUIT.

The closest parallel I can see to what is shaping up is the 1976 Dem contest. Carter won big, but largely because Jerry Brown, Scoop Jackson and Frank Church jumped in way too late, not seeing how the new rules would affect the process.

Even so, guys like Mo Udall, Jerry Brown and Scoop Jackson stayed in rather late because they saw Carter as a regional candidate. It was a weak field. UNCOMMITTED won Iowa.

There are not five paths to the 2012 nomination. There are about a dozen.
7 posted on 11/10/2010 8:10:08 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (There is no salvation in politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
One way NOT to win is to advocate reform of Social Security and Medicare.
8 posted on 11/10/2010 8:23:51 AM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1
I agree..Romneycare means that he won't get the nomination..Heck..even Dude hung that on Romney in an interview last week.

I almost stopped reading when I saw the name "Trump"..Oh, puleeeze..let's trya nd be semi-serious, at least..

There isn't enough $$$$$ to go around to support all these pretenders and wannabees..the winnowing process needs to start soon..

Given the GOP's winner-takes-all primary rules, it is not inconceivable that the nominee could emerge with only 40% of the total vote..

9 posted on 11/10/2010 8:42:56 AM PST by ken5050 (I don't need sex.....the government screws me every day..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson