My explanation is dirt simple. The mid point of the electorate is about 5 points to the left of president Bush, instead of being 2 points to his right as it was in the last election.
McCain is 5 or 10 points to the left of Bush. Romney is 5 or 10 points to the right of Bush.
Romney is a higher "bid" by conservatives, hoping that we can get more on policy. If the country were truly with us in that respect, Romney would poll well ahead of McCain against Democrats - and Bush would also poll well above 50%. McCain would lose the right wing and fail to pick up any numbers of people centerward, because there wouldn't be much room between Bush and Hillary, so nearly every voter to Bush's left would be a convinced Dem.
But instead, it is not true that nearly everyone to Bush's left is a convinced Dem. Instead, the Dems are bidding very high on pacifism as well as economics and social policy. And plenty of people in the country are not willing to follow them all the way on such things. Bush is perceived as failing and as too far right overall. But the Dems do not have over 50% of the public sewn up.
Instead there is ground between Bush and Hillary, and McCain is attempting to stand smack on that ground. He has positioned himself close to the Dems on numerous high profile issues, but kept strongly to their right on the war and security. He thinks war and security is our big winning issue against them, while he has tried to neutralize their other differences.
Huckabee is an attempt to neutralize differences with them over economics by selling economic populism, and even to limit differences with them over the war (see his foreign affairs love letter to the Kennedy School of Government), while distinguishing himself from them over the social conservative issues, faith and abortion etc. It has not sold, even to Republican primary voters. It performs horribly against the Dems in head to head polling.
Romney has attempted to neutralize the Dems on health care, through policy wonkism and reference to his past Massachusett's-required socialist compromises. Although he has softpeddled it in a conservative Republican primary process, he has in the past also attempted to neutralized social issue divisions e.g. gay marriage etc. He has bid right on economics, the war, and immigration, making him by far the most conservative candidate left in the race.
But it hasn't won him even half of the republican primary vote, at least not yet. And it so far leaves him 15-20 point behind the Dems in national head to head polls. He might improve that with better name recognition etc. But he represents a much higher "bid", expecting the electorate to be considerable more conservative than they were last time, or the time before that, or the time before that. Because Romney is running to the right of either Bush term, and to the right of Dole in 1996.
We lost one of those against triangulating Dem centrism, and barely won two rounds of it against pretty hard left pols. The pres and republican in the house and senate have lost at least 5 and perhaps 10-15 points of support since then. Some of the latter may be particular to Bush, but at least 5 of it is not (see congress last time). The electorate, in other words, has trended left, largely because of discontent over the war.
Perfectly conventional political expectations when the public has moved left by a substantial amount, when we barely won the last two times, is that it would be necessary to move somewhat left merely to remain as competitive as the last two times. That is what McCain thinks is required and positioned himself for. The same conventional political expectations would say, if instead we tried to move 10 or more points to the right, with the public going the other way, then we would lose by double digits. Which is exactly what the head to head polls of Romney vs. either Dem are saying.
All of that conventional understanding might be wrong. The country might epically shift by more than Reagan revolution amounts, in favor of true blue conservatism, in the brief span between now and the general election. But that is what it would take to elect a president Romney. As currently positioned, only Goldwater 1964 and Reagan both times, were more conservative stances. The public is not remotely as hostile to Democrats as in 1980, nor remotely as happy with current Republican governance as in 1984.
So why, exactly, should we expect Romney to be more likely to win that McCain? Or forget relative chances, why exactly should we expect Romney to pull more than 50%, when he is to Bush's right, Bush is well under 50%, and the electorate is trending left?
One might, I suppose, pretend that Bush is failing because he isn't right enough. But if that were the true reason, then Dems would be getting slaughtered in the congressional and governor level races, because they are positioned way, way to Bush's left. Instead they are pulling more than half the electorate.
I do not have to like any of this to be able to see it. The right simply is not strong at this time, because we are held responsible for what are perceived as failing Bush policies. Our own attacks on Bush over other issues, and conservative attempts to distance themselves from him, have weakened the entire right.
I don't care about blame questions for that, just the accuracy of the assessment. I want to live in the real world, and the real present strength of conservatism is important to me. I do not think wishing or pretending it is 25% stronger than it actually is can make it so. I see how few republicans voted for the likes of Thompson, or even for a Romney. The center of my own party, let alone the whole electorate, is far to my own left. I see it, I face it, I reason about its consequences.
And it entirely explains McCain. He is moving left chasing the median voter. He needs me and those who agree with me far less than even Bush did. He is finding more votes toward the center than he is losing to his right - I can tell, because he is winning primaries and because everyone else still standing is doing similar things in one fashion or another. I can also tell because all the big republicans who have to fight and win state wide races are also running centerward and many are endorsing him - not chasing after the approval of the Ann Coulers and Rush Limbaughs of the world.
You don't need to be a weatherman to see which way the wind blows...
More importantly;
All of the candidates being offered up are globalists.
The economy is being managed by the people who control the money.
Freedom of religion is the best you can hope for on that front.
The real risk, for the future of this country and the rest of the world, is ISLAMIC Terrorism.
McCain is to the right of everybody running on that issue. People in the middle are less emotional and more pragmatic than the true conservative and the true liberal. That is why he will be elected.
Furthermore if he doesn’t get the nomination he will break ranks and run with Lieberman as an independent. He may not win but the Republicans will lose by a landslide.
That sounds a bit like: If you’re going to be raped, lay back and try to enjoy it.
Romney is not to the right of anyone, that’s his main problem, and what electorate are you speaking of? The total electorate,or the Republican electorate? It should be up to the Republicans to pick their own candidate. Independents should have no say, at all. If a person doesn’t care enough to get involved with one of the two parties, they shouldn’t have any say who the parties pick.
McCain has been acting as a fifth column within the Republican party ever since he lost the 2000 election. His actions have been both vindictive and self-aggrandizing.
As Thomas Sowell said, Benedict Arnold was a war hero, too.
Total Primary Votes: Romney McCain Huckabee
Iowa 29,494 15,559 40,841
New Hampshire 75,202 88,447 26,760
Michigan 337,847 257,251 139,699
Nevada 22,649 5,651 3,521
S. Carolina 64,970 143,224 128,908
Florida 598,152 693,425 259,703
Total 1,128,314 1,203,557 621,579
Total Delegates: 74 97 29