Democrats & Liberals Archives

How Iowa Might Impact GOP Candidates

Who wins in Iowa tomorrow is not the only story that will come out of the Caucus process. A big story will be what happens to the candidates that don’t win 1st place. Here are my thoughts on tomorrow’s events.

Mitt Romney:

Whether Romney wins or loses it won't matter. He has to be feeling pretty good about New Hampshire so he's sleeping well tonight on the eve of Iowa. If he wins, that's great. If not he'll point to how well he finished and try and use it to motivate his base into action in the next few states.

Ron Paul:

Sorry, Paul supporters. Paul could very well win but it won't matter. The average Republican will not support Paul, let alone the average American. Republican voters understand this. If Paul wins there will be a whole lot of buzz up until Paul finishes last place in New Hampshire and South Carolina. After that it will just be a question of when Paul decides to give it up or whether he stays just to stay in as he did last time.

Rick Santorum:

Santorum wants an upset big time but he probably will not get it. He's a lot like Paul except Paul gets more press somehow. He's been surging in Iowa but that's pretty much the only place. A surprise win might do him a lot more good than it would Ron Paul but don't count on many people talking about Santorum if he loses tomorrow. I doubt Santorum will win. He may drop out tomorrow.

Newt Gingrich:

Gingrich won't win Iowa but you can't count him out in the long run. He's still leading in other states and his un-serious campaign has not completely imploded just yet. If he manages to finish 3rd tomorrow he'll keep things rolling. If he finishes in the very bottom ranks it might not be long before the fame train leaves without him and he's back on a book tour.

Rick Perry:

Perry won't win Iowa but if he finishes stronger than expected it could generate a lot of buzz and put the idea of him back in the minds of voters. He'll be hard pressed to beat Romney in New Hampshire but the nature of the schedule means momentum could help him stay in the race. He's got some money to spend and that could buy him a lot of spin. He's prone to high profile verbal screwups on the campaign trail though so it will take a lot to get voters back in his corner after his initial bump dissipated. Perry is the one long shot candidate I will not count out until he's out for sure. There's too much anti-Romney sentiment left in the process for Perry to join Gingrich in cashing in on.

Michelle Bachmann:

Crazy never dies. That being said, expect Bachmann to lose big tomorrow and drop out soon after. She may be ideologically unsound but she's not completely stupid. Expect her to get back to work trying to protect her seat in Congress instead and perhaps maybe making it to a vote for a change.

Jon Huntsman:

No matter what was going on in the primary with the ups and downs, Huntsman has still not gotten the Iowa buzz he wanted. That has to worry his campaign. He's doing better in New Hampshire but he's having no impact in South Carolina. He won't win Iowa and no placement will matter. The race within the race is who will have the sense to drop out first: Bachmann or Huntsman.

Posted by Adam Ducker at January 2, 2012 9:38 PM
Comments
Comment #333978

The best case scenario for the GOP and for America is that Romney locks up the nomination relatively early. A few months ago, most liberal pundits averred that he was too moderate to be nominated. He has tacked right to win. If he wins quick, he can move again to the center, where he is most comfortable and where most Americans live.

Obama has messed up big time, but he still can count on the shrill support from the left (no matter what they say now) and from the main steam media. He also has a mountain of money, so he will be hard to be. But Obama is beatable and Romney can do it.

It will be good to have some adult supervision in the White House again. This will also be the first time since 2000 that we have had a really good alternative.

Romney is super intelligent, with successful experience in business, the non-profit world and government. No candidate probably since Eisenhower has brought such a broad background of successful leadership to the presidency.

Romney is no Ronald Reagan, when it comes to communication and that is his biggest weakness. He will not be as good a campaigner as Obama but he will be a better president.

Posted by: C&J at January 3, 2012 4:43 AM
Comment #333979

I too think Romney holds the best hope for the GOP to beat Obama. But will he energize the base the way Bush did in 2004 and the way Obama did in 2008? Voters have been test driving multiple candidates the last 6 months so I have a feeling many folks doubt Romney will.

So far in the primary buildup Romney’s campaign looks pretty solid. If he suffers a few surprising defeats we may see how strong it really is soon enough.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at January 3, 2012 8:21 AM
Comment #333985

Romney can solidify the base by picking a evangelical running mate. I think Huckabee would be the best choice rather than one of the current contenders.

The Republican race has been one of unsuccessful surges, with Santorum being the latest and perhaps the last unsuccessful surge.

The sad part is that the center will be the losers and the status quo will be the winner, no matter who wins the nomination and the presidential election.

One, if not the biggest concern of the center, is the direction the government has been taking the country. With Obama, the center has a tiny hope that a change of course could be possible. Personally, I think that is wishful thinking, but the people have to have some hope. With Romney, there is no chance at all for that happening.

Moving to the center is nothing more than a political ploy.

The center is the middle class. The middle class has been under attack for several decades and it is shrinking daily. Economic recovery will slow but not stop the deterioration of the middle class.


Posted by: jlw at January 3, 2012 2:56 PM
Comment #333987

jlw

Obama was the most liberal member of the the Senate. He came closer to the center as president, although he is still pretty far left.

Romney’s political record is much more to the center. He has had to tack right. His move to the right has been more of a political ploy. I don’t hold that against him.

As I wrote in my post on the other side, there are certain things that each party faithful demand. National Republicans must be against abortion, for example. National Democrats have to be for abortion. It doesn’t make a practical difference in how they government, but they have to genuflect in the direction of the respective little extreme gods.

Posted by: C&J at January 3, 2012 5:08 PM
Comment #333995

I believe the election in November will hinge upon the decision of Americans who favor more government handouts and those who oppose them. Whether it is proper to benefit some at the expense of others. Whether we have new rights conveying the property of some to others under our Constitution or whether we attempt to stay with what that document declares.

The usurpation of Constitutional Rights flies high upon the liberal banner. Equality without regard to effort has become their watchword. With largess for their followers comes the taking of the liberty of all.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 3, 2012 7:14 PM
Comment #334004

Royal Flush,

Exactly what property are you talking about? What are the government “handouts” that you oppose? What “usurpation of Constitutional Rights” are you talking about?

Posted by: Rich at January 3, 2012 10:22 PM
Comment #334011

I completely agree with you Royal. And I will again ask a question I asked in the conservative column; I want the liberals on WB to declare they accept the Constitution as written, or do they believe it is flawed? Rich blew off the question with stupid talk, but perhaps some socialist liberal in this column can answer?

“What “usurpation of Constitutional Rights” are you talking about?”

Posted by: Rich at January 3, 2012 10:22 PM

We already know rich is unable to answer a question, unless it is with another question.

Is the Constitution flawed and does it need to be re-written, or is it acceptable in it’s current form? One would not think it that difficult to answer.

Posted by: Steve at January 4, 2012 9:10 AM
Comment #334012

The GOP had fielded such a weak group of candidates that there is little chance of recapturing the White House. Romney is likely to get the nomination and is not one that will excite the base or provide enough of a contrast to Obama to get a lot of people who voted for Obama last time to switch. He’s gonna have a tough time winning Ohio with its strong union/labor ties. Getting rich by firing people isn’t going to make him popular. He’s trying to portray himself as a regular guy and not a silver spoon kid who hasn’t had to do anything for himself in his life - that ain’t workin’ either. I’ve never seen anyone look so uncomfortable not wearing a suit in my life. I’d guess he sleeps in one.

Santorum ain’t makin’ it either. A guy who claimed that bestiality is a logical progression from gay marriage is going to alienate a lot of people. He’s a bad mix of a big government Republican with a way too uptight social agenda.

Plus, while the economy is still going to be pretty awful at election time but it is looking to be headed in a better direction and that will hurt their chances too. Plus, popular sentiment is turning against billionaires and having one at the top of the GOP ticket is not gonna play well.

The Republicans that have presidential possibility wisely stayed out this round. The only one out there that I see could’ve unseated Obama is Chris Christy. Even though I agree with none of his policy ideas, he’s a likable guys, has a no BS way about him, and has a sense of humor. He’ll probably be the next POTUS.

Posted by: tcsned at January 4, 2012 9:31 AM
Post a comment