I can’t stand the way that the media has been talking up the Republican race is if it’s McCain’s to lose. The facts point to a race that is far from decided and less favorable to McCain than the news lets on. The current delegate counts are 97 for McCain and 92 for Romney with 1191 needed to win the nomination. It’s also rather pitiful to read the professions of the Huckabee campaign that they are in a close race with the front runners – they have 29 delegates.
Of the 8 nominating contests so far the results for each of the 4 remaining candidates are:
- McCain
- 3 wins
- two 2nd place finishes
- one each of 3rd, 4th, and 6th place
- delegates from 5 of the states
- Romney
- 4 wins
- three 2nd place finishes
- one 4th place
- delegates from 6 of the states
- Huckabee
- 1 win
- one 2nd place finish
- two 3rds, three 4ths, and one 5th place finish
- delegates from 5 of the states
- Paul
- one each of 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 7th place
- four 5th place finishes
- delegates from 2 of the states
Don’t be fooled by the message of the media – Romney has every bit as good a chance at the nomination as McCain if not better. And don’t be fooled by the bravado of Huckabee – his best opportunity is to be a spoiler for Romney (those who still support him are unlikely to support McCain).
Some things to keep in mind. Mitt won Wyoming where the Mormons voted en block for him and gave him a huge victory. Mitt won in Nevada where 95% of Mormons voted for Mitt securing a victory for him. He won in Michigan, the state he was born in and where his father served as CEO as a major employer.
On the other side, Mitt lost in New Hampshire and Iowa where he significantly outspent his opponents. He also outspent his opponents in Florida, a critical victory for McCain. A careful examination of the breakdown of which states voted early, Mitt had a significant advantage, and even with that advantage, he trails in the delegate count.
The vote tomorrow will tell us more about the Republican race. If it eliminates Huckabee, it may give Mitt an opening in the succeeding races. But Huckabee made a good point that Mitt is a newcomer to the conservative fold. When Mitt has been the most vocal critic of other’s conservative credentials, you shouldn’t be surprised that McCain and Huckabee have no use for Mitt Romney.
I seriously question Mitt’s authenticity and honesty. Mitt seems to believe in Mitt more than he believes in any salient principles. To Mitt, power is an end, not a means to an end. Mitt will continue to pander to the worst currents in American authoritarian thought.
I respect courage, open-mindedness and devotion to principle. Because of that, I despise Mitt. Please don’t think that my opposition to Mitt is because he is a Mormon. Most of the people I have voted for in my life are Mormons. But Mitt represents to me the worst apects of Mormonism.
The old Mormon myth that the constitution will be hanging by a thread, and a Mormon will come to the rescue: I fear Mitt is the one holding the scissors.
But I was wrong once before, so who knows.
Best regards.
Obi Wan,
Again we disagree – I think Mitt is great, and not because he’s LDS. I think he’s honest and authentic. I here lots of people that agree with you, and I can’t understand it. If you would, please elaborate. If you’d prefer, you can contact me directly, as I’m curious to understand your point of view.
That said, I want to clarify some facts about Mitt’s success in the west:
In Nevada, Mitt won 95% of the Mormons that voted Republican, but only 73% overall – some went for Democrats. 7% of Nevada Republican voters said they were Mormons – even if Mitt had received zero Mormon votes he still would have won in a landslide. Michigan has a similar Mormon population, so the landslide cannot be defined by the Mormon voters. What can be said is that in those states, the Mormon population is such that the LDS church is not considered an enigma like it is in many eastern states. Lots of non-Mormon voters in the west have Mormon neighbors or friends, and recognize them as normal people, so they’re less prejudiced to begin with. That is the real reason that the Mormon population in western states is a factor.
Obi wan,
Much of what you say is true, but I think that one portion of it misses slightly:
“A careful examination of the breakdown of which states voted early, Mitt had a significant advantage, and even with that advantage, he trails in the delegate count.”
I would agree with the fact that Mitt has significant advantages among Mormons and in Michigan but even if you removed every vote by a Mormon so far and the entire state of Michigan Mitt would have received more votes than any other candidate. Second, regarding being behind in the delegate count, unless you can show me some advantage for Romney in Florida – a reason that he should have been expected to win there – that race is the only reason that any of the other candidates are close to him in the delegate count. Without it being a winner-take-all format Romney would have received at least 3 of the 57 delegates and would still be leading the delegate count. If Florida had not voted yet the delegate counts would be 92 for Romney, 40 for McCain, and 29 for Huckabee – even while you include South Carolina where Romney had significant disadvantages.
I’m still voting for Obama today (especially since Romney doesn’t need my vote here) – I just want to dispel the media myth that McCain has any significant advantage in this race. That advantage is a myth whether any one person supports or opposes Romney. (I guess what I’m trying to say is that, while I have a favorable view of Romney, the point of my post was to dispel the the McCain-as-presumptive-nominee feeling that the media has been playing to – not to try to convince anyone that Romney is the best candidate for our country.)
While I was responding Jason seems to have made some of the same points (more clearly) that I was trying to make.
Let me clarify. I think Mitt had advantages in Nevada and Wyoming that were religion-related. Michigan, he had the advantage of it being one of his “home states.” In New Hampshire, he had the advantage of being Governor of a neighboring state and couldn’t take advantage of it.
Florida was the big prize, no doubt, but what my point was, that outside of Florida, Mitt had a significant advantage, one that he hoped to have exploited in Iowa as well where he outspent all the other Republicans.
Mormon block voting will secure Mitt a victory in Utah. It may make things closer in Arizona and California than people think. And he might actually take one of those states, though I think Arizona is unlikely. Mitt will probably take Mesa (a heavily Mormon area). Atleast that is my prediction.
I would say that’s a fair assessment, and outside of Florida (meaning in the places where you see him as having an advantage) Romney has 92 delegates to 40. The real question is, what will that translate into today.
McCain had advantages in New Hampshire, Michigan, and South Carolina in that independents could vote in the Republican primaries which is where he got his support. He won’t have that luxury in most other states. In Florida, with no delegates at stake for the Democrats, it would not surprise me to learn that there were plenty of people voting in the Republican primary who otherwise would not have voted in that primary – people had plenty of advanced warning that the Democratic primaries would have no delegates at stake so they could change their affiliations if they wanted to vote in the Republican primary.
Plese note that while Mitt has not performed well in states with primaries, he has performed quite well in most states with caucuses — except for states with a high percentage of evangelicals. Caucuses are the domain of grass roots Republicans. They are dominated by politically informed people that consider themselves conservatives. Primaries are far more open.
Even today, when it is now apparent that McCain is the clear GOP front runner, Mitt has received more votes by actual Republicans than anyone else. He has won the conservative vote except in states with lots of evangelicals. McCain has won among independents and liberal Republicans. Huckabee has won among evangelicals.
This means that even if Mitt wins all of the remaining caucuses, he still can’t capture the nomination. He obviously can’t win over anti-Mormon evangelicals. And he isn’t appealing much to Republicans that aren’t serious conservatives. Even if he could capture the nomination, it would appear that he wouldn’t be able to successfully appeal to many of the independents and the non-ideological voters.
For being the GOP front runner, McCain’s support is awfully weak. He might be the default lead guy, but he doesn’t generate much GOP enthusiasm. This bodes ill for November, because both Democratic candidates have generated substantial enthusiasm in the Democratic Party.
Reach,
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with respect to today and also the prospects for November.
I really don’t see any way that Republicans will be able to close the enthusiasm gap by November whether McCain gets the nomination or whether there is a major surprise ahead (not that I am predicting one). If Republicans had been able to get behind a single candidate before now they might have had a chance at closing that gap. Now the best thing that can happen for the Republican party would be for Clinton to get the Democratic nomination because she would most likely deter some of the independent or vaguely Republican voters who are unenthusiastic about the Republican nominee but who recognize how divisive a Clinton presidency would undoubtedly be. (Inevitably divisive because of the Republicans vehemently fighting her even if she does not make any attempts at being divisive.)
Pingback: Pursuit of Liberty » Blog Archive » Thoughts On Caucuses