Mitt Romney spent about $660 per voter to win the Ames Straw Poll held yesterday on the campus of Iowa State University. And that might be low balling the amount. Rudy Giuliana said he didn’t want to spend the $3 million it would take to be competitive at the event which means Mitt spent at least that much and probably much more. The long and short of it is that Romney could not afford anything less than a big win in Ames and he got it.
Let’s hope Mitt can make some economies between now and election day (if he gets the nomination). Spending $600 bucks a voter might not be too bad for a straw poll but when you multiply it by the 60 million votes that Bush got in 2004, you’re talking about spending an amount equal to the national debt of most countries on earth.
Romney had the most to lose at this straw poll. The question being asked today is does his victory matter? And does the non-participation of Giuliani, McCain, and Thompson hurt their chances when it will count next January?
The answer to both questions is not much. The most recent polls have Romney ahead by 10 points in Iowa. If he can maintain or expand that lead for another 2 or 3 months, look for Giuiani and McCain to pull out of Iowa to concentrate on later primaries. In the game of expectations – which is what the Iowa caucuses are all about – leaving the field to Romney will blunt some of the momentum he would ordinarily get coming out of the Hawkeye state. In fact, it may put pressure on Romney to “run up the score” in Iowa as anything less than a big win without the presence of the other frontrunners will not give him any momentum at all.
Finishing second in the straw poll was Mike Huckawho…or is it Huckawhat. I’ve said it before and I will say it again. If the American people elect a man named Huckabee president, I will move to Australia. Or maybe Montana.
The former Arkansas governor benefited from the absence of 3 of the top 4 candidates, including Fred Thompson who garnered 200 votes without even showing his face in Iowa. The former Tennessee Senator plans on visiting the state this week but it is unclear if he will spend his limited funds in mounting a challenge to Romney.
Finishing 3rd was Senator Sam Brownback, darling of the social conservatives, who closed fast the last two weeks by mounting a negative telephone campaign against Romney, accusing the former Massachusetts governor of switching his position on abortion.
Big surprise since this is where both Romney and Giuliani are most vulnerable; not their positions on abortion but the fact that they’ve changed their minds about the issue. One can just see Hillary and James Carville salivating over running against either one of those flip floppers.
Perhaps the least newsworthy item to come out of the straw poll was the probability of Tommy Thompson withdrawing from the race. Most Americans didn’t even know he was running, don’t know who he is, and could care less. That just about sums up my feelings on the matter as well.
So Romney in a walk with Huckathing crowing that he’s the shocker of the day and Tommy Thompson crying in his beer over what might have been (What might have been if his name was Kennedy and he had a gazillion dollars.)
And many of us could really care less. I don’t think it shows much of anything to hire a couple of hundred buses to get people who may or may not be your supporters to a straw vote. Getting them to caucus sites in the dead of winter will be the real trick. And Romney appears to have the organization, the money, and the strength to carry that off as well.
9:46 am
GOP 2008 Hopefuls Fight for Support in Iowa…
Republican White House hopefuls fight for support in the run-up to Saturday’s Iowa straw poll….
10:03 am
Did you mean to state that you could not care less?
10:06 am
Basically, a meaningless exercise. Romney was expected to win. He won. He spent a lot of money to make sure he won.
I don’t think you can make the argument that anything has changed. It’s not going to boost Huckabee that much nor will it give Brownback anything of note.
In the sense that it is meaningless, yes I could care less. Fodder for the pundits for a day or two and that’s about it.
2:53 pm
Every one every where on earth except for the anti-American “far left” and the anti-American “far right” and the other anti-American groups all around the world know that the US will be completely withdrawing from Iraq very soon. In other words, the rational actors know that the US will be getting out very soon and are planning accordingly.
Even if the Bush Administration, Congress, or the next Administration would like to keep troops in Iraq, they cannot. The Army is nearing the breaking point. This will force the US to withdraw very soon. In addtion to this, a small contingent of troops that some are proposing that we leave behind is worse than useless. It will be insufficient to actually achieve anything and it will be under constant attack.
After our withdrawl from Iraq I’m interested in learning what each candidate plans to do next. How do they plan to secure America? This becomes especially imperative when we consider the fact that, after our withdrawl from Iraq, Al Qaeda, Iran, and other Islamic terror groups will be stronger than they were before the war and we are weaker than we were before the war. How do they plan to secure America in this environment?
Also, Russia is resurgent and China is stronger than ever. How do each of the candidates plan to deal with these threats to American national security?
I’m interested in getting answers from each of the candidates on how they plan to secure America after the withdrawl from Iraq, how they plan to deal with a resurgent Russia, and how they plan to deal with an increasingly beligerent China.
I suggest the following: 1.)redeploy the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to the northern and sourthern borders of the US, 2.)develop all of our own domestic oil and natural gas resources, 3.)build more refineries, 4.)build more nuclear power plants, 4.)increase the capabilities of the US military so that is can serve as an adequate deterent against Russia and China, 5.)Iran is increasing its military capabilities, in the coming years, we will need a military that can serve as an adequate deterent against Iran, 6.)do all that we can to increase the military capabilities of Israel, so as to strengthen the buffer between us and our enemies, and 7.)place a moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries and closely monitor the mosques and the Marxists groups who are allied with them.
What I suggest is some form of containment. We used containment during the Cold War. Some varation of that doctrine is what is called for now. This is my suggestion but I’m waiting to hear from the people who are running for President. The candidate who can best articulate how he or she plans to defend the US after we withdraw from Iraq will be the candidate who will get my vote.
10:27 am
Spot on as usual, Rick.
Can’t wait to get your take on Rove’s resignation and some commentary on the BDS sufferers’ various conspiracy theories for him choosing to do so at this time. With the most hated man on “the right” basking in retirement, where will the petulant, profane and pseudo-prophetic bloggers on the angry left focus their irrational anger now?
P.S. Very nice job of representing us paleoconservatives on Fox the other night. Anyone ever comment on your resemblance to Stephen King before?
12:51 pm
Ennui and boredom. A rather stupid exercise in pointlessness, as I see this “pre-primary”, pre-waste some dough, pre-who gives a rap? Great bunch of nobodies who fancy themselves too much. I like your slant on them. BTW, I think I’d rather live in Australia than Montana.
1:07 am
This country will never elect a mormon to be president. Most republicans I know would rather vote for a Christian democrat than a mormon.
2:57 pm
#7
Pseudo-prophetic malcontents made similar claims about JFK’s chances to be the first Catholic elected to the presidency.
Romney doesn’t wear his religion on his sleeve like other candidates have, although that apparently doesn’t stop the juvenile scoffers in the liberal blogosphere from making a much larger issue of Mitt’s Mormonism than well-informed conservatives who actually understand the difference between the LDS and Christian churches.
If you’re going to speak for “the people” then try to employ critical thinking rather than shooting from the hip based on your emotions.