Posted on 07/19/2007 3:47:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
Mitt Romney must win Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada to have a chance at the nomination.
All presidential campaigns are near impossible. But even when almost impossible is the norm, Mr. Romney faces a daunting challenge.
With numbers showing that a South Carolina win might be impossible, Mr. Romney must take Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada to have a shot at winning Florida, and then go on to success on Super Tuesday.
Iowa campaigning is unique. To be counted in the caucuses you have to participate all the way through a four or five hour meeting, and so only the truly committed participate. Moreover, these voters are savvy and informed.
New Hampshire also is in a class of its own. These voters take their role seriously, and you need to make quite an effort talking with them and making your case to earn their vote.
And now Nevada has taken the unprecedented step of moving its caucuses up to January 19, just days after the first two contests and before South Carolina. More than 90% of the population in Nevada lives in the Las Vegas area, so in essence it’s a Las Vegas caucus. And since it’s a caucus, we’re again looking at only true believers voting. Since the state borders a Mormon-majority Utah, Mr. Romney has a unique advantage in Nevada.
Against that backdrop, Mr. Romney’s strategy comes from his unusual set of strengths and weaknesses.
He is well-educated, a successful businessman, and was an effective governor. He’s a pro-business, economic conservative. He is a good speaker with a charming and friendly manner. He has tremendous wealth, $9 million of which he’s already contributed to his campaign. He even looks presidential, with his good looks and a supportive wife and family. That’s all positive. But he also has three tough obstacles to overcome.
First is his inconsistency. He has reversed himself on the three biggest social issues for conservatives. Just four years ago he was pro-choice, pro-homosexual agenda, and anti-gun. Today he’s pro-life, pro-family, and pro-gun.
Second is his relative inexperience. Having only one term in office and no experience in the military or with foreign policy are bigger deals now since we are in a long-term global war.
And third, fair or not, is his Mormonism. Many evangelicals, a key base element, take issue with his religion, and a recent poll shows that many moderate women, a key swing bloc, also have a problem with it.
So Mr. Romney has no choice. An aggressive strategy is necessary. While he’s up in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls, Nevada polls are mixed and he’s fourth in national polls. He’s not nearly as well known as Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, or John McCain.
Something has to explain the difference between Mr. Romney’s high numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire versus his low national numbers.
The Romney campaign would say that as voters get to know him, he’s winning them over with his vision and values. That might be true.
But critics argue that Mr. Romney’s strong polls in those states are the result of paid advertising there. Spending vast sums of money for press in the early states is bound to bring in results while most other candidates have not yet done the same.
They also point out that many core GOP voters have serious problems with Mr. Giuliani’s liberal views and personal life, and a there are a host of grievances against Mr. McCain. These people speculate that Mr. Romney is ahead with those people by default, but that they’re open to an alternative.
Mr. Romney has packaged himself as the only conservative who can win. Mr. Thompson entering the race imperils that strategy.
Mr. Romney’s greatest concern must be South Carolina. Despite spending a fortune in the most conservative early primary state, he remains in fourth place in polls. That is why Mr. Romney must win in all three of the early states.
Northern Florida is similar to South Carolina. A South Carolina loss puts Mr. Romney at a disadvantage there. With three wins under his belt, he could launch an aggressive, and expensive, campaign trying to leverage that momentum across Florida. A win in Florida, if coupled with winning the first three states, could make South Carolina look like an anomaly and give him exactly the national poll surge he needs for Super Tuesday.
One good sign for Mr. Romney is that 23% of GOP primary voters are undecided about whom to support. With Messrs. Giuliani and McCain, both well-known and having been in the race for months, this gives Mr. Romney an opening to pick up support among voters who do not know him yet. This poll is also good for Mr. Thompson, since he’s not officially in the race yet.
Mr. Romney cannot be pleased with Mr. Thompson’s imminent entry into the race nor can he like Mr. McCain’s recent woes. Mr. Romney’s best shot is a three-way contest against Messrs. Giuliani and McCain, with those two splitting more moderate GOP voters.
No one has enough money to lay a paid media carpet across the entire country. A week’s advertising costs in some markets overshadows a month’s costs in Iowa. And there’s not time for in-person retail politics in every small town across America.
Mr. Romney will need to find a way to project his image to the people without face-to-face interaction and without paid advertisements. If he does, and wins the first three contests, he just might make it.
It seems almost impossible. But like I said, that’s the norm for presidential campaigns.
Not correct. The vote is taken at the beginning and many leave afterwards.
A Triple-Win Would Be Romney's Chance
Thanks in advance
Romney’s organizational skills and fund raising abilities should not be overlooked. I don’t expect him to win the nomination (barring unforeseen circumstances) but could see him with either the VP slot or some other prominent position in a Republican Administration.
“Mr. Romney has packaged himself as the only conservative who can win. Mr. Thompson entering the race imperils that strategy”
PACKAGED = enclosed in a package or protective covering
Mitt is NOT a Conservative, he is a Liberal with ideas and no plans to execute his idea’s.
When you read, hear his speeches, and commercials, ask yourself the following. Who, What, Why, Where, When and How.
When you apply these words to one of his many “idea’s” planning to increase the military by 100,000 active duty personnel he misses the Why, When and the most important, How. We have an all volunteer military, will Mitt re-institute the draft, call up the reserves and or the national guard to satisfy the the "How" requirement?
Mittbot hissyfit in 3... 2... 1...
Could someone please explain how firearms ownership is a *social* issue?
It’s a basic freedom issue, plain and simple.
I don’t think Romney can win the nomination, and if he does, I don’t think he can win the Presidency.
Out west and down south we refer to people like romey as "all hat and no cattle".
____________________________________________________________
Perhaps there is a way to apply this statment that makes some sense, I don’t know. I do know that Mr. Romney has been a formidable candidate before. Mr. Romney has been successful at nearly everything he has done, he seems to have the Midas touch.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not judging as to whether he would be a good president or not, I’m just saying that you shouldn’t count him out until he is out. He has money, looks and speaks very well. He does have some things going for him. I really think as I have for some months that there are really only two candidates in the race at this time that have a chance, Mr. Thompson and Mr. Romney. If something happens to Mr. Thompson I think Mr. Romney will be a shoe in. The same is true of Mr. Romney, if something happens to him I think Thompson will have a downhill ride to the nomination.
It so unthinkable, it will probably happen! :^)
Better than an RAT.
Proves my point all hat and no cattle.
That fits pretty well also.
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.