... this video put together by a Ron Paul supporter is coasting to victory as the most offensive ad of the 2012 campaign. I cannot imagine anyone else even coming close:
Friday, January 6, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Iowa and Its Aftermath
Some initial thoughts:
1) My predictions were pretty darn good. I over-estimated what Romney would get which leads right into some of my other thoughts ...
2) Mitt Romney is still exceedingly likely to win the Republican nomination but he's a very, very bad candidate. It is widely known that he doesn't connect well with voters but he's actually worse at it than that phrase sounds. For more on this general line of argument, I highly recommend reading Dana Milbank's column on the post-Iowa victory tour for Romney. Better yet, see Stephen Colbert's coverage of Romney's awful post-Iowa "victory speech."
In Andrew Sullivan's words, "he makes plastic look real."
Some metrics on the shallow nature of Romney's victory:
He got a slightly smaller percentage of the vote compared with 2008
He got 6 fewer votes than 2008
75% of Iowa voters said "no" to Romney. It isn't like they don't know him. They just don't like him.
3) What of the rest of the field? Santorum is just too far out of the mainstream but he'll get a nice bump from Iowa and hang on for a while. Paul represents a totally different constituency and will stay in to the end I think. Gingrich will use his money to tear Romney down. This will hurt Romney ... and Gingrich to a lesser extent. Perry said he would suspend his campaign and then he immediately re-started it. This is the kind of crack thinking that led him to spend more than anyone in Iowa and only get 10% of the vote. Bachmann is done. Huntsman will be done after a disappointing finish in New Hampshire.
So there is nobody who can credibly stop Romney. But they can all collectively make Romney spend a bit more money, tack a little more to the right, and waste more of his time on the nomination fight than he wanted to. All that is for the good.
In the end, the Republican base will rally around Romney. But the problem in all this is not the base. The problem is how does Romney compete for independent voters and how much does he energize the Democratic base? What happened in Iowa hurts Romney in both those efforts.
1) My predictions were pretty darn good. I over-estimated what Romney would get which leads right into some of my other thoughts ...
2) Mitt Romney is still exceedingly likely to win the Republican nomination but he's a very, very bad candidate. It is widely known that he doesn't connect well with voters but he's actually worse at it than that phrase sounds. For more on this general line of argument, I highly recommend reading Dana Milbank's column on the post-Iowa victory tour for Romney. Better yet, see Stephen Colbert's coverage of Romney's awful post-Iowa "victory speech."
In Andrew Sullivan's words, "he makes plastic look real."
Some metrics on the shallow nature of Romney's victory:
He got a slightly smaller percentage of the vote compared with 2008
He got 6 fewer votes than 2008
75% of Iowa voters said "no" to Romney. It isn't like they don't know him. They just don't like him.
3) What of the rest of the field? Santorum is just too far out of the mainstream but he'll get a nice bump from Iowa and hang on for a while. Paul represents a totally different constituency and will stay in to the end I think. Gingrich will use his money to tear Romney down. This will hurt Romney ... and Gingrich to a lesser extent. Perry said he would suspend his campaign and then he immediately re-started it. This is the kind of crack thinking that led him to spend more than anyone in Iowa and only get 10% of the vote. Bachmann is done. Huntsman will be done after a disappointing finish in New Hampshire.
So there is nobody who can credibly stop Romney. But they can all collectively make Romney spend a bit more money, tack a little more to the right, and waste more of his time on the nomination fight than he wanted to. All that is for the good.
In the end, the Republican base will rally around Romney. But the problem in all this is not the base. The problem is how does Romney compete for independent voters and how much does he energize the Democratic base? What happened in Iowa hurts Romney in both those efforts.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
My Iowa Predictions
Romney - 26%
Santorum - 24%
Paul - 20%
So there. No point in even watching the coverage this evening.
Actually, the coverage is the whole story because the numbers are meaningless except to the extent they inform the spin. So, what will the spin be if these are the numbers?
Romney: His camp will tout the win in Iowa and begin the mantra of New Hampshire is next and it is an "important test" and so on. The problem for Romney is that he will have won Iowa with just 26%. 74% are for somebody else and those somebody elses are similar enough to one another that it is kind of an embarrassment that so few people support Romney. Tea Party people will make a big deal about this, they will eventually be ignored, and the quality of life will improve.
Santorum: This is a strong enough showing that he will raise a little money from this and get some momentum heading into New Hampshire. A second place showing there is possible. Lost in the shuffle of the Iowa Santorum Surge is the fact that Santorum has a decent organization in New Hampshire as well. But Santorum will not get enough money or enough of a bump to really threaten Romney. The national media will try to make it so, they will be ignored, and the quality of life will improve.
Paul: Just a few points behind Romney, this is still a slight disappointment for Paul. He'll certainly remain in the race for the long haul but, at a certain point, he will start to be ignored again, and the quality of life will improve.
Gingrich: He likely comes in fourth tonight. He will say he's going to fight in New Hampshire and make his stand in South Carolina. He won't place in the top two in either one, then he too will be ignored, and the quality of life will be awesome!
Perry: Fifth place is likely for Perry tonight. He will probably skip New Hampshire and try to make a stand in South Carolina. There is no rationale for Perry going on. Combined with his PAC, he's spent more than anyone and has only slid backwards. He will remain in the race for now though for no good reason other than he's from Texas and "this is like the Alamo." It will not dawn on him that everyone who fought to the death in the Alamo died.
Bachmann: Sixth place is probably assured for Bachmann and she will probably leave the race in the next 24 hours. Nobody will be affected by this.
Huntsman: He's been staked out in New Hampshire hoping that having the state to himself for several weeks will help him. It will not. He will be leaving the race in the 24 hours after the New Hampshire Primary. As Huntsman said the other day, "In Iowa they pick corn. In New Hampshire, they pick presidents." Neither place is picking Huntsman.
Santorum - 24%
Paul - 20%
So there. No point in even watching the coverage this evening.
Actually, the coverage is the whole story because the numbers are meaningless except to the extent they inform the spin. So, what will the spin be if these are the numbers?
Romney: His camp will tout the win in Iowa and begin the mantra of New Hampshire is next and it is an "important test" and so on. The problem for Romney is that he will have won Iowa with just 26%. 74% are for somebody else and those somebody elses are similar enough to one another that it is kind of an embarrassment that so few people support Romney. Tea Party people will make a big deal about this, they will eventually be ignored, and the quality of life will improve.
Santorum: This is a strong enough showing that he will raise a little money from this and get some momentum heading into New Hampshire. A second place showing there is possible. Lost in the shuffle of the Iowa Santorum Surge is the fact that Santorum has a decent organization in New Hampshire as well. But Santorum will not get enough money or enough of a bump to really threaten Romney. The national media will try to make it so, they will be ignored, and the quality of life will improve.
Paul: Just a few points behind Romney, this is still a slight disappointment for Paul. He'll certainly remain in the race for the long haul but, at a certain point, he will start to be ignored again, and the quality of life will improve.
Gingrich: He likely comes in fourth tonight. He will say he's going to fight in New Hampshire and make his stand in South Carolina. He won't place in the top two in either one, then he too will be ignored, and the quality of life will be awesome!
Perry: Fifth place is likely for Perry tonight. He will probably skip New Hampshire and try to make a stand in South Carolina. There is no rationale for Perry going on. Combined with his PAC, he's spent more than anyone and has only slid backwards. He will remain in the race for now though for no good reason other than he's from Texas and "this is like the Alamo." It will not dawn on him that everyone who fought to the death in the Alamo died.
Bachmann: Sixth place is probably assured for Bachmann and she will probably leave the race in the next 24 hours. Nobody will be affected by this.
Huntsman: He's been staked out in New Hampshire hoping that having the state to himself for several weeks will help him. It will not. He will be leaving the race in the 24 hours after the New Hampshire Primary. As Huntsman said the other day, "In Iowa they pick corn. In New Hampshire, they pick presidents." Neither place is picking Huntsman.
Lack of Hotel Space in Des Moines in 1972 Boosts Santorum
If Rick Santorum pulls off an upset in Iowa tonight and then becomes the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, he'll have the general lack of hotel space in Des Moines in the early 1970s to thank for his good fortune.
You heard me right.
It turns out that the reason Iowa is the first to "vote" (they aren't really voting as it is a caucus and there are no delegates at stake tonight but that's a different matter) can be traced back to the 1972 decision to move the Iowa Caucuses earlier because of an anticipated lack of hotel space in Des Moines in June 1972. David Redlawsk outlines the story here and the way in which the Carter campaign took advantage of this in 1976 and the rest is history.
In any case, this quirk of history means Iowa goes first and that means candidates with Santorum's profile have a good chance to emerge from the pack.
We'll see if he cashes in on poor planning by Iowa hotel developers from 40 years ago later tonight!
You heard me right.
It turns out that the reason Iowa is the first to "vote" (they aren't really voting as it is a caucus and there are no delegates at stake tonight but that's a different matter) can be traced back to the 1972 decision to move the Iowa Caucuses earlier because of an anticipated lack of hotel space in Des Moines in June 1972. David Redlawsk outlines the story here and the way in which the Carter campaign took advantage of this in 1976 and the rest is history.
In any case, this quirk of history means Iowa goes first and that means candidates with Santorum's profile have a good chance to emerge from the pack.
We'll see if he cashes in on poor planning by Iowa hotel developers from 40 years ago later tonight!
Sunday, January 1, 2012
The PPP Poll
PPP is a very good pollster and their poll out tonight has Paul at 20%, Romney at 19%, and Santorum at 18%.
This poll is even more good news for Santorum and it is fairly good news for Paul and it is fairly bad news for Romney.
Romney: The topline of 19% is bad, bad, bad. The internals of the poll suggest that if there is a lot of seniors coming out (which normally happens), then Romney will do better than 19% and probably win. But they are not predicting the usual turnout and Romney is not the type of candidate likely to finish "strong." He's basically trying to win by tearing down the others.
Paul: It does seem Paul's decline has leveled off. He's not going up from here (at least not by much). But he doesn't seem to be dropping much below 20% at this point either.
Santorum: My post on the Des Moines Register poll applies here and seems mildly confirmed by this poll. Santorum has the most room for growth. And, if you take this poll seriously, Santorum has room to grow and is statistically tied with Romney and Paul. Santorum is probably a better than a 12% bet (Nate Silver's latest number) to win Iowa at this point. I'm gonna say he's as good as a 25% bet to win. UPDATE: Nate Silver's model updated with the PPP poll numbers has Santorum as a 24% bet to win.
This poll is even more good news for Santorum and it is fairly good news for Paul and it is fairly bad news for Romney.
Romney: The topline of 19% is bad, bad, bad. The internals of the poll suggest that if there is a lot of seniors coming out (which normally happens), then Romney will do better than 19% and probably win. But they are not predicting the usual turnout and Romney is not the type of candidate likely to finish "strong." He's basically trying to win by tearing down the others.
Paul: It does seem Paul's decline has leveled off. He's not going up from here (at least not by much). But he doesn't seem to be dropping much below 20% at this point either.
Santorum: My post on the Des Moines Register poll applies here and seems mildly confirmed by this poll. Santorum has the most room for growth. And, if you take this poll seriously, Santorum has room to grow and is statistically tied with Romney and Paul. Santorum is probably a better than a 12% bet (Nate Silver's latest number) to win Iowa at this point. I'm gonna say he's as good as a 25% bet to win. UPDATE: Nate Silver's model updated with the PPP poll numbers has Santorum as a 24% bet to win.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Des Moines Register Poll
The Des Moines Register Poll came out Saturday night and it shows Mitt Romney as the nominal leader at 24%. Ron Paul is second in the poll at 22% but the more recent two nights of polling (the poll was conducted over four nights) shows Rick Santorum still surging garnering 21% and Paul fading a bit.
So what are we to make of all this?
First, as Nate Silver points out, even with the best polls, there are a variety of reasons to be cautious in treating a polling result as a prediction. The most important reason in this case is that the poll was taken over four days with the most recent interviews conducted a full four days before the caucus. This is a particularly volatile electorate as 41% of caucus-goers said they could still change their minds.
But there are some things we can probably draw from this poll:
1) Romney's ceiling: Romney attracted 24% in the poll on the first two nights ... and on the second two nights. We can expect everyone's numbers to go up just a little bit as the undecideds find a home but it is clear that Romney is not going to go significantly higher. A really good guess for Romney's topline on Tuesday night is 28 - 30. I'd guess 28.
2) Paul's ceiling: This poll is particularly good for a lot of reasons. One of them is that it includes cell-phone only voters. Paul did a bit worse in the second two nights of polling as his crazy newsletters got more coverage and as Santorum's surge got more coverage. Paul is not likely to go away as his supporters are somewhat unique but he probably won't move much higher either. Moving lower is possible. A really good guess for Paul is probably right around what he got in the poll here ... 20 - 24 is my guess. UPDATE - Paul actually did a lot worse the second two nights. I'd revise my estimate for him down to 17 - 21. The attacks on him are taking a bigger toll that I had thought.
3) Santorum's surge: Santorum is the only one with real upside. He got just 15% in the four-night sample but did A LOT better on the last two nights. I have a good theory on what is happening. Conservatives who don't like Romney had gone from Bachmann to Perry to Cain to Gingrich and a few went to Paul when he surged. Now they are moving to Santorum. Bachmann, Gingrich, and Perry are not doing very well in this poll but there is still a combined 30% slice of likely caucus-goers supporting these three also-rans. The shift of some of their supporters moving to Santorum is what has fueled his surge in recent days. As more of those 30% see that Santorum is the conservative with the best shot (the Des Moines Register poll will get lots of coverage, especially in Iowa), I think some of those supporting these voters will move to Santorum. Will it be enough for Santorum to catch Romney? I doubt it ... but it is possible.
4) Partly for the reasons in #3, Gingrich, Perry, and Bachmann are done. Gingrich is the most likely to keep going as polls in South Carolina still show him in the lead. That will change quickly with a 4th or 5th place finish in Iowa though. Perry could keep going as he has money. It is hard to see what his path to the nomination would be but remember, logical reasoning is not his strong suit. Bachmann will likely pack it in.
5) Huntsman is still running for President. Seriously.
So what are we to make of all this?
First, as Nate Silver points out, even with the best polls, there are a variety of reasons to be cautious in treating a polling result as a prediction. The most important reason in this case is that the poll was taken over four days with the most recent interviews conducted a full four days before the caucus. This is a particularly volatile electorate as 41% of caucus-goers said they could still change their minds.
But there are some things we can probably draw from this poll:
1) Romney's ceiling: Romney attracted 24% in the poll on the first two nights ... and on the second two nights. We can expect everyone's numbers to go up just a little bit as the undecideds find a home but it is clear that Romney is not going to go significantly higher. A really good guess for Romney's topline on Tuesday night is 28 - 30. I'd guess 28.
2) Paul's ceiling: This poll is particularly good for a lot of reasons. One of them is that it includes cell-phone only voters. Paul did a bit worse in the second two nights of polling as his crazy newsletters got more coverage and as Santorum's surge got more coverage. Paul is not likely to go away as his supporters are somewhat unique but he probably won't move much higher either. Moving lower is possible. A really good guess for Paul is probably right around what he got in the poll here ... 20 - 24 is my guess. UPDATE - Paul actually did a lot worse the second two nights. I'd revise my estimate for him down to 17 - 21. The attacks on him are taking a bigger toll that I had thought.
3) Santorum's surge: Santorum is the only one with real upside. He got just 15% in the four-night sample but did A LOT better on the last two nights. I have a good theory on what is happening. Conservatives who don't like Romney had gone from Bachmann to Perry to Cain to Gingrich and a few went to Paul when he surged. Now they are moving to Santorum. Bachmann, Gingrich, and Perry are not doing very well in this poll but there is still a combined 30% slice of likely caucus-goers supporting these three also-rans. The shift of some of their supporters moving to Santorum is what has fueled his surge in recent days. As more of those 30% see that Santorum is the conservative with the best shot (the Des Moines Register poll will get lots of coverage, especially in Iowa), I think some of those supporting these voters will move to Santorum. Will it be enough for Santorum to catch Romney? I doubt it ... but it is possible.
4) Partly for the reasons in #3, Gingrich, Perry, and Bachmann are done. Gingrich is the most likely to keep going as polls in South Carolina still show him in the lead. That will change quickly with a 4th or 5th place finish in Iowa though. Perry could keep going as he has money. It is hard to see what his path to the nomination would be but remember, logical reasoning is not his strong suit. Bachmann will likely pack it in.
5) Huntsman is still running for President. Seriously.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Why Paul is Likely to Win Iowa ... And Why Democrats Should Hope I'm Wrong
Mark Blumenthal has a piece on the latest Iowa polling and argues that the polling doesn't provide very certain answers about the outcome. The crux of his argument is here:
All this is true. However, if Blumenthal is right about all this, and if you think about the people these polls are missing, it would seem a lot of Paul voters are getting left out. For instance, "most are missing voters who don't have landline telephones." Who doesn't have landline phones? The young voters Paul attracts. Pollsters are not reaching voters who are traveling over the holidays? I'll tell ya who is not traveling: older voters. In short, these latest polls have Paul with a slight lead and yet they seem to be oversampling voters who are not inclined to vote for him and undersampling voters who are likely to vote for him. Finally, everyone has made a big deal about the lack of organizing in this year's Iowa Caucuses. Maybe it won't matter. But the polls will not necessarily reflect the advantage a well-organized campaign has and, if anyone has that advantage in Iowa, it is Ron Paul.
If you're a Democrat and you're excited that Paul may knock off Romney in Iowa, don't be. This actually works more to Romney's benefit than anyone else's. We all know the race will boil down to Romney and someone else. If that someone else is Ron Paul, Romney wins easily. So, to the extent that Paul gets a boost from Iowa or (more importantly) Gingrich and the rest of the alternatives to Romney under-perform and fail to get a boost out of Iowa, Romney is better off for the long haul.
But be wary of placing too much faith in Iowa's current polling snapshot. The coming week will bring another round of surveys that may once again reveal changes in the standings. Equally important, the state's Republican caucuses will attract a very narrow slice of the potential electorate, historically about 3 to 5 percent of Iowa's adult population -- a group that pollsters cannot identify with precision beforehand. Most of the recent surveys depend on automated methodologies, most are missing voters who don't have landline telephones, and all will face the challenge of reaching Iowa voters between Christmas and New Year's, a time when many Americans are traveling away from home.
All this is true. However, if Blumenthal is right about all this, and if you think about the people these polls are missing, it would seem a lot of Paul voters are getting left out. For instance, "most are missing voters who don't have landline telephones." Who doesn't have landline phones? The young voters Paul attracts. Pollsters are not reaching voters who are traveling over the holidays? I'll tell ya who is not traveling: older voters. In short, these latest polls have Paul with a slight lead and yet they seem to be oversampling voters who are not inclined to vote for him and undersampling voters who are likely to vote for him. Finally, everyone has made a big deal about the lack of organizing in this year's Iowa Caucuses. Maybe it won't matter. But the polls will not necessarily reflect the advantage a well-organized campaign has and, if anyone has that advantage in Iowa, it is Ron Paul.
If you're a Democrat and you're excited that Paul may knock off Romney in Iowa, don't be. This actually works more to Romney's benefit than anyone else's. We all know the race will boil down to Romney and someone else. If that someone else is Ron Paul, Romney wins easily. So, to the extent that Paul gets a boost from Iowa or (more importantly) Gingrich and the rest of the alternatives to Romney under-perform and fail to get a boost out of Iowa, Romney is better off for the long haul.
Friday, December 2, 2011
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Memo to Mitt ... You're Losing
Each time someone (Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, etc.) has risen to challenge Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination, they have fallen apart as fast as they rose. So Mitt might think this is what is going to happen with Newt.
I don't think so. If I had to bet who is going to win the nomination, I'd bet on Newt right now, not Mitt. Several reasons why:
1) Newt is ahead of Mitt in several national polls by statistically significant margins. I do not recall seeing that from any of the others. Perry was the closest to achieving this but he was such an awful candidate, he couldn't possibly remain up there.
2) The polling numbers out of some of the early states are particularly alarming for Mitt Romney. Gingrich has a solid lead in Iowa and in South Carolina. He has a massive lead in Florida. But Mitt does not even have a solid firewall in New Hampshire if the latest numbers are to be believed. If Mitt loses Iowa and New Hampshire to Newt, the game is over. And Newt is already close enough in New Hampshire that an Iowa win could push him over the top.
3) Much has been made of Newt's lack of a ground game. I think the ground game is important in Iowa but not as important as it used to be. In addition, Newt does still have time to build his ground game up a little. Right now, Iowa is probably Newt's to lose.
What's striking about Newt's rise in the polls is that national media, etc. are sticking with the view that Mitt is still the front-runner. But, we've always known that if the anti-Mitt folks coalesce around a non-Mitt candidate, Mitt would lose. Conservatives appear to be doing that.
If I were a betting man, I'd give Newt the better shot at the nomination right now.
I don't think so. If I had to bet who is going to win the nomination, I'd bet on Newt right now, not Mitt. Several reasons why:
1) Newt is ahead of Mitt in several national polls by statistically significant margins. I do not recall seeing that from any of the others. Perry was the closest to achieving this but he was such an awful candidate, he couldn't possibly remain up there.
2) The polling numbers out of some of the early states are particularly alarming for Mitt Romney. Gingrich has a solid lead in Iowa and in South Carolina. He has a massive lead in Florida. But Mitt does not even have a solid firewall in New Hampshire if the latest numbers are to be believed. If Mitt loses Iowa and New Hampshire to Newt, the game is over. And Newt is already close enough in New Hampshire that an Iowa win could push him over the top.
3) Much has been made of Newt's lack of a ground game. I think the ground game is important in Iowa but not as important as it used to be. In addition, Newt does still have time to build his ground game up a little. Right now, Iowa is probably Newt's to lose.
What's striking about Newt's rise in the polls is that national media, etc. are sticking with the view that Mitt is still the front-runner. But, we've always known that if the anti-Mitt folks coalesce around a non-Mitt candidate, Mitt would lose. Conservatives appear to be doing that.
If I were a betting man, I'd give Newt the better shot at the nomination right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
