At what point do we stop granting Giuliani the prestige of being called ”the frontrunner”? He receives this title on account of misleading national polls. In the first four states, he is usually behind, in some cases quite badly. In Iowa, he is tied for third. Iin New Hampshire, he is at best a distant second. In Michigan, he is barely leading the Michigan native Romney–it seems unlikely that he will retain that perch if he drops the first two states. Accordng to the latest polling in South Carolina, his supposed “firewall” state, he is in fifth….behind McCain! When McCain is beating you in South Carolina, it’s time to start thinking about another line of work.
Update: That Clemson poll is apparently worthless. Earlier polls have shown Giuliani doing reasonably well, and now there is one showing him marginally in the lead. The Clemson poll seems to have completely misrepresented the state of the Democratic race as well. Via Michael Crowley. I still think Giuliani’s chances are poor, but he probably isn’t doing as badly in South Carolina as he appeared to be.
That is supposed to leave Romney and Huckabee (this week it’s a three-man race, when just weeks ago the former Arkansas governor was only considered half a candidate until voters started to have something to say about it). Voters are now supposed to choose between a fraud and a huckster. It seems improbable to me that Huckabee can win New Hampshire (Ross is right), and I don’t think he will even manage second place. The trouble with any plan for Huckabee’s success is that Huckabee’s campaign will sooner or later start running out of money, and he doesn’t seem to be raising nearly enough to remain competitive. Meanwhile, the candidates with the money seem to get less popular the more people have a chance to see them up close. I suppose someone has to win, but it’s not at all clear to me how any of the current three in the “three-man race” do that. Can one of the others take advantage of this? At this point, I really have no idea.
P.S. I still don’t believe a Giuliani-Huckabee ticket will ever happen for some of the reasons stated above, but that idea that Ross floated many, many months ago looks a lot more clever today, while my dismissive retort to the same is looking rather less so.
P.P.S. In case someone hasn’t already mentioned this, it’s worth noting that Huckabee’s leap to the top in Iowa makes the NRLC’s endorsement of Thompson look even worse and more bizarre than it already was.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 30th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
tcowan
“I suppose someone has to win…”
For the life of me, I can’t see how any of these guys wins the nomination, but I suppose one of them has to. None has anything even approaching a clear shot at it. At the moment, Huckabee’s all the buzz, and may very well win Iowa. But, as you note, money woes will start to kick in. Also, New Hampshire is its own thing, and his Iowa popularity, coupled with a grating Southern evangelicalism, may work against him there. Finally, increased scrutiny of Huckabee may dull some of his sheen. Both parties have been known to nominate little-known, amiable Southern governors in the past, but I really, really, really don’t see it happening this time.
As for Romney, if he can’t buy Iowa, then where will he pull ahead? He’s expected to do well in neighboring tax-conscious New Hampshire, and of course, Michigan, I suppose. But I suspect that if he leaves New Hampshire with anything less than clear frontrunner status, then he will be perceived as fatally wounded.
[Daniel–when you refer to having to choose between a fraud and a huckster, were you referring to Romney as the fraud, or the huckster? I can make an excellent case either way.]
Giuliani’s reliance on Huckabee to help him beat up on Romney in the early primaries, which will allow him to surge ahead beginning with Florida, is a plan I wouldn’t want to bet on. And in a field of fatally flawed candidates (Paul excepted), surely Giuliani has to be the most flawed of all–almost Dickensian in magnitude.
So, who does this leave us? I don’t have a clue. I wish it were Ron Paul. When the histories of the election are written, he will be cast as the conscious of the party. I suppose one could even make a case for McCain picking up the scaps after Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee have destroyed one another. I do know this–no party in my memory deserves to lose an election so badly as does the GOP in 2008. And loose it badly they will.
November 30th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
tcowan
ahem….make that “conscience of the party.”
November 30th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
Zarathustra
Actually, T. Cowan, the first spelling wasn’t that inaccurate.