Romney vs. Santorum, Part 2

How will Republican voters weigh the factors of electability and conservatism when deciding whether to nominate Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum? First, we should consider some basics, which should be fairly obvious. The following scenarios form the framework in any two-man race in a Republican primary. Voters make the decision between Candidate A vs. Candidate B; we'll use Romney as Candidate A and Santorum as Candidate B, but they are interchangeable:

Scenario 1
Romney is more electable than Santorum.
Romney is more conservative than Santorum.
Result: Romney wins.

Scenario 2
Romney is more electable than Santorum.
Romney and Santorum are equally conservative.
Result: Romney wins.

Scenario 3
Romney and Santorum are equally electable.
Romney is more conservative than Santorum.
Result: Romney wins.

Scenario 4
Romney is more electable than Santorum.
Santorum is more conservative than Romney.
Result: ?

Note that each scenario has a mirror image made by swapping the names (e.g. the reverse of Scenario 1 is that Santorum is more electable and more conservative, and Santorum wins). Interestingly, the winner in almost every scenario is easy to predict, except for the scenario in which Candidate A is superior on one attribute and Candidate B is superior on the other. As we've said before, history suggests that Republican voters prize electability over conservatism. But the result is not guaranteed as it is in the other scenarios.

To help us determine how the Romney vs. Santorum dynamic will play out, recall the two previous duels that occurred during this election season: Romney vs. Rick Perry and Romney vs. Newt Gingrich. We'll start with Romney and Perry, who were considered the two frontrunners back in August and September of 2011.

The duel between Romney and Perry went through two phases. That's because electability and conservatism are based on voters' perceptions, which can change. As we discussed back in December, candidates repeatedly crashed this season because voters (wrongly) assumed that each new candidate was perfectly electable and conservative--they were unaware of the candidates' weaknesses. When Perry first came on the scene in August, voters assumed he was a perfect conservative, and assumed he was fairly electable, though they may have initially had some concerns about nominating another Texas governor. The voters' thought process went as follows:

Romney vs. Perry
Romney and Perry are equally electable--or fairly close.
Perry is much more conservative than Romney.
Result: Perry wins.

In consequence, Perry skyrocketed in the polls. It wouldn't be the last time Romney was overtaken in the polls by a newcomer. Shortly after Perry entered the race, Elephant Watcher predicted Perry's electability and conservatism would both come under attack. In September, this "two-front war" indeed occurred, weakening Perry. Perry wasn't as conservative as voters hoped, and his debate performances proved he was not nearly as electable as they assumed. By October, voters perceived the race this way:

Romney vs. Perry
Romney is much more electable than Perry.
Perry is somewhat more conservative than Romney.
Result: Romney wins.

Perry took a nosedive in the polls, and Romney was back on top. His frontrunner status in the polls wouldn't last very long. After Herman Cain caught fire and went down in flames in October/November, Gingrich was the next to challenge Romney. As before, Gingrich's duel with Romney went through two phases as voters discovered Gingrich's weaknesses. In the beginning, they assumed Gingrich didn't really have any:

Romney vs. Gingrich
Romney and Gingrich are equally electable--or fairly close.
Gingrich is much more conservative than Romney.
Result: Gingrich wins.

Gingrich took big leads in national polls and polls of every state but New Hampshire. By early December, he was the man to beat. Back in October, Elephant Watcher predicted Gingrich would suffer the same kind of two-front war that Perry had, with attacks against both his electability and conservatism. And Gingrich was even more susceptible to a critique of his conservatism than Perry had been. The attacks against Gingrich were focused in Iowa, where voters had a dramatic change of heart:

Romney vs. Gingrich
Romney is much more electable than Gingrich.
Romney and Gingrich are equally conservative--or fairly close.
Result: Romney wins.

As predicted, Gingrich's numbers tanked. Gingrich finished poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire. But because voters in South Carolina, Florida, and later states were not as tuned in--and because their states were not as heavily campaigned in--Gingrich still got the benefit of the doubt. And prior to South Carolina, questions looming over Romney's unreleased tax returns raised questions about Romney's electability. Here's how the South Carolinians viewed the situation when they went to the polls in mid-January:

Romney vs. Gingrich
Gingrich is more electable than Romney.
Gingrich is much more conservative than Romney.
Result: Gingrich wins.

As one might expect, Gingrich defeated Romney in South Carolina by a wide margin. Romney's campaign decided that in Florida, they needed to recreate what had happened in Iowa. Romney's tax returns were released and demonstrated that he had no skeletons in his closet. Attack ads against Gingrich and more anti-Gingrich coverage from conservative media outlets recreated the "two-front war" against Gingrich's electability and conservatism. Here's what Floridians were thinking when they went to the polls at the end of January:

Romney vs. Gingrich
Romney is much more electable than Gingrich.
Romney and Gingrich are equally conservative--or fairly close.
Result: Romney wins.

Using this method of analysis, we can see that the behavior of voters in this primary season was not strange or erratic as it may have appeared on the surface. How does this analysis apply to the current duel between Romney and Santorum? We will discuss that in Part 3.

2012 Republican Primary in Review: January 2012

Each month, Elephant Watcher recaps the activity that occurred in the Republican primary during the previous month. Follow these links to read earlier recaps: May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December.

January 2012 was the month of the early primary states. By tying for first in Iowa, easily winning New Hampshire, and decisively defeating his remaining opponents in Florida, Mitt Romney secured his position as the prohibitive favorite to win the nomination.

As January began, the situation in Iowa was unclear. Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum all had reasons to be optimistic. Newt Gingrich, who had been leading in Iowa only a few weeks earlier, had been devastated by his rivals' negative ads. With no opportunities to debate, Gingrich could not respond. At last, Santorum was given the chance to be the Evangelical Anti-Romney in Iowa. His surge began at the last possible moment; it was spotted by Rick Perry and Paul, who quickly responded with the first attacks ever made against Santorum.

It was a race against time for Santorum, and he lost. Romney managed to squeak out a win in Iowa on January 3rd, beating Santorum by 8 votes. Santorum's spike in the polls was impressive, but so was Romney's ability to make a last-minute play for the state--one he had largely written off since his defeat there in 2008. A recount later found that Santorum had actually won the state by a handful of votes, but he was unable to get the kind of big win that he needed to propel him above Gingrich elsewhere in the country. Santorum was an Iowa-only candidate. Michele Bachmann fared even worse, and she quit the race.

Romney was expected to win the New Hampshire Primary, where he had dominated the polls all year. On January 7th, the candidates finally returned to the debate stage, but they didn't take the opportunity to attack Romney. He easily won the debate; on January 10th he won New Hampshire just as easily. Santorum and Gingrich tied each other for a distant fourth.

Romney's wins in Iowa and New Hampshire gave him a huge bounce in the polls--even in South Carolina, by far the most anti-Romney of the early states. The media began to speculate that Romney might simply win every contest. Seeing no path forward, Jon Huntsman dropped out of the race.

Gingrich and Perry shifted entirely to the offensive against Romney. Their main line of attack was to condemn Romney's success at Bain Capital, a private equity firm. Although they seemed to be scoring points at first, the attacks backfired: They sounded like anti-capitalist critics from the left, and were forced to retreat.

On January 16th, the first of two pre-South Carolina debates took place. Gingrich was given a prime opportunity to attack the liberal media after one liberal moderator all but accused him of being a racist. In attacking the media, Gingrich looked like a genuine Tea Party conservative--enabling voters to overlook his impure record. But that wasn't all: Gingrich was well ahead of Santorum in the polls, and Perry dropped out of the race to endorse Gingrich. It was clear that if anyone would be the alternative to Romney, Gingrich was it. The Anti-Romney vote coalesced, and Gingrich began to surge in the polls.

On January 19th, Gingrich was able to launch a broadside against the liberal media at another debate, when he was asked about his ex-wife's accusations. As with Herman Cain's sex scandal a few months earlier, it took some time before the issue would sink in and drive women voters away from Gingrich. Meanwhile, Romney--who had been able to defeat the Bain criticism--was badly damaged because he refused to release his tax returns. When questioned about it during the debates, he was evasive and defensive. South Carolina's voters began to question Romney's electability: Was he hiding something that would sink him in the general election?

Gingrich won a landslide victory in South Carolina on January 21st. In response, the media narrative shifted dramatically. Romney was no longer the inevitable Republican nominee. Gingrich had the momentum, it seemed. After being left for dead a second time in the campaign, Gingrich had made a comeback. He retook the lead in the Florida polls, a state Romney badly needed to win.

But the situation was not nearly as dire for Romney as it appeared. Despite having been at a severe disadvantage in South Carolina, Romney had nearly doubled his share of the vote there, compared to his run in 2008. And the damage to his electability argument was very superficial: All he had to do was release his tax returns, which he did the following week. As it turned out, there were no skeletons in his closet. Romney had merely been stubborn in failing to release them earlier.

But the Romney campaign knew they had to turn things around. They pulled out all the stops, pouring millions of dollars into negative ads against Gingrich in Florida. As in Iowa, the attacks had a big impact. But Gingrich's real vulnerability lay in the very thing he claimed to be his greatest strength--his debating ability. As Elephant Watcher predicted, Gingrich was not able to debate very well when actually challenged by his opponents. On January 23rd, Gingrich's performance was lackluster. On January 26th, it was disastrous. Romney won the debate by repeatedly hammering Gingrich, who was unable to respond.

In the days following the debates, Romney soared in the Florida polls. Voters' concerns about Romney's electability and toughness were dispelled. By contrast, Gingrich's campaign was left in ruins. Gingrich began to lash out, complaining about the negative ads while taking an increasingly negative tone in interviews. For weeks, Gingrich had claimed that he was the most electable candidate because he was the best man to face Barack Obama in a debate. But after losing two debates, Gingrich found himself making all kinds of excuses for why he was unable to debate properly. All the while, Florida was drenched in attack ads.

On January 31st, Floridians cast their votes in the primary. Romney won an overwhelming victory. Gingrich vowed to fight on, but the situation seemed hopeless. Florida had been very receptive to Gingrich in the past, and was his best hope for building momentum going into a longer race. Romney, having proven he could destroy Gingrich on neutral ground, looked to be in total control.

The Santorum Dilemma

Santorum

Having performed well in the debate on Thursday, Rick Santorum is slowly creeping up in some Florida polls. This should worry Newt Gingrich: In the final days before voting, Santorum's numbers ought to fall as Anti-Romney voters coalesce behind Gingrich. If Santorum's numbers are similar to or greater than Romney's margin of victory in the Florida Primary, Gingrich may be prompted to complain that he would have won if the conservative vote hadn't split. Under such conditions, Gingrich wouldn't be shy about asking Santorum to quit the race.

After Gingrich's win in South Carolina, Elephant Watcher predicted that Santorum's support would melt away. In the days following Gingrich's victory, that's precisely what occurred: Santorum, who had been running close to Gingrich in Florida, plummeted to about 10%. Gingrich was left as the chief Anti-Romney. Watching the debate on Thursday, Elephant Watcher gave Santorum high marks and predicted that his numbers would stop bleeding. If anything, they would recover--but not enough to threaten Romney. Instead, the split would widen Romney's margin of victory.

Santorum's support appears to exist in limbo: It's never big enough to allow him to become the chief Anti-Romney, but it's never small enough to completely die off and leave Gingrich in peace. Why is this?

To understand the Santorum dilemma, one needs to go back to what happened in Iowa. Over the course of 2011, Iowa had seen Bachmann, Perry, Cain, and Gingrich all rise to the top, only to crash and burn once voters learned about their weaknesses. Finally, it was Santorum's turn, and he began to spike in the polls. Santorum was a more natural candidate for Iowa, since he could claim more electability than his predecessors. He was also more believable as a conservative, and his message was aimed directly at Evangelicals. On top of that, Santorum had spent his entire campaign in Iowa.

Unfortunately for Santorum, Florida's decision to push the calendar forward a month ruined his opportunity. He just didn't have enough time. On top of that, Santorum's rivals (e.g. Perry and Paul) spotted the Santorum surge early and responded by quickly unloading some negative ads against him. Santorum essentially tied Romney for first place. At the time, Romney was reported the victor, having won by eight votes.

Later, a recount of Iowa credited Santorum as the winner by a handful of votes. But retroactively declaring someone the winner of an early primary is like putting a sign on a pig that says "horse." The value of winning the early states is getting good media and momentum, neither of which can be awarded in a recount.

(As an aside, Romney didn't get the full benefit of a win, either. Since it was understood he and Santorum got almost a perfect tie, he had to share the headlines. The same would have occurred for Santorum if he had been given credit for the win at the time.)

After Romney's big win in New Hampshire, the Anti-Romney voters understood that they needed to coalesce behind a single Anti-Romney candidate, rather than splitting the vote. The question was whether they should rally behind Santorum or Gingrich. The battleground in which the decision would be made was South Carolina, and that meant Gingrich was the answer: Gingrich had the name recognition, more money, and a big edge in South Carolina polls over Santorum. Santorum performed ably in the debates, but Gingrich overshadowed him when the moderators set Gingrich up perfectly to attack the liberal media. Gingrich had a big win in South Carolina. He didn't just beat Romney; he clobbered Santorum. After that, there was little question Gingrich would be the chief Anti-Romney in Florida.

But then, having watched Gingrich wither under attack ads, and having seen Santorum perform better at Thursday's debate, some Anti-Romney voters are having second thoughts. Santorum is arguably a better fit for the Tea Party than Gingrich, who had been derided as a "RINO" earlier in the year. Did Santorum ever stand a chance? Does he have a chance going forward?

Santorum could have become the chief Anti-Romney. But to do it, he would have needed a big win in Iowa. Losing (apparently) to Romney by a few votes wasn't good enough. He needed to do what Mike Huckabee did in 2008, and take the state by a sizable margin. And he would have needed to distinguish himself in the debates before South Carolina, and at least make it close. Finally, Santorum needed to focus his attacks on Gingrich instead of Romney.

Going forward, the picture looks bleak for Santorum. He needs the debates even more than Gingrich does, as he lacks money and name recognition. His only hope is to somehow place a much closer third in Florida than the polls indicate. Perhaps if Santorum and Gingrich are close enough, the media narrative will include Santorum doing better than expected, and give him some kind of a boost. Otherwise, the problem is that Santorum will only reinforce his position as a lower-tier candidate. This will occur in one state after another before the next debate is held. If Santorum repeatedly places behind Gingrich, it only serves to hammer in the message that there's no turning back--it's too late to switch from one Anti-Romney to another.

Michele Bachmann Quits the Race

Bachmann

In the wake of her sixth-place finish in the Iowa Caucus, Michele Bachmann announced that she was withdrawing from the race. As with Herman Cain's departure, the technical term used is "suspending" her campaign, but it's safe to say she won't return. Bachmann had put all of her time and resources into competing in Iowa, which also happened to be the state of her birth. In August, Bachmann won the Ames straw poll. When the time came to vote, the only person she beat was Jon Huntsman, who was expressly not competing there.

Once again, this reinforces Iowa's non-wildcard history, which we examined back in June. Iowans may flirt with an outrageous candidate for awhile--in this case bringing her to the top of the polls in the summer and giving her the win in the Ames straw poll--but when voting day approaches, Iowans shift toward electable candidates.

Bachmann's inherent weaknesses as a candidate, particularly her lack of electability, doomed her campaign from the beginning. Her early feud with Sarah Palin didn't help matters. Elephant Watcher never gave Bachmann more than a 3% chance of winning the nomination, and set her to 0% about six weeks ago.

Bachmann's departure should give a slight boost to other Anti-Romney candidates by distributing her votes among them. However, Bachmann was already polling badly in the rest of the early states, so there are few votes to distribute.

Romney Wins Iowa Caucus, in Virtual Tie with Santorum

Mitt Romney won the Iowa Caucus on Tuesday, beating out Rick Santorum by a ludicrously narrow margin of 8 votes. Aside from Jon Huntsman, Santorum was the only candidate who never finished first in an Iowa poll. His late rise came at the last possible moment to give him a win--almost. At the final tally, Romney won 30,015 votes to Santorum's 30,007. The following are the vote percentages for each candidate:

Iowa Caucus Results
Romney -- 24.6%
Santorum -- 24.5%
Paul -- 21%
Gingrich -- 13%
Perry -- 10%
Bachmann -- 5%
Huntsman -- 1%

As Elephant Watcher predicted on Monday, Santorum's late momentum gave him the edge needed to outperform his polling and (almost) take first. For the past few weeks, Santorum had the distinction of being one of only three candidates in the race whom Elephant Watcher gave a greater than zero percent chance of winning the nomination. On Tuesday, he demonstrated why. From the start of the race, Santorum was nowhere in the polls--even in Iowa--and was written off by nearly everyone. However, the destruction of one Tea Party candidate after another left Santorum the most natural candidate for the role.

As explained in Monday's preview of Iowa, both Santorum and Romney will claim victory. Romney's campaign will say that he achieved a win in a fundamentally "anti-Romney" state and predict a win for Romney in New Hampshire. Santorum's near-tie will enable him to finally raise his profile elsewhere. Though he's hardly set foot outside of Iowa, he will be able to make the case that all of the anti-Romney voters should rally behind him. Elephant Watcher expects Santorum's numbers to rise nationally and in all of the early states.

The other winner of the night was the state of Iowa, which avoided disaster by not giving Ron Paul (or Michele Bachmann) a win. Back in June, we observed that the history of the Iowa Caucus shows the state is unfairly maligned as a breeding ground for "wildcard" candidates, and that the state's voters actually place a premium on traditional, electable candidates. Tonight's result, particularly with Romney getting first place, is another demonstration of that. Now perhaps the pundits will spare a few kind words about the sober-minded, moderate Iowa voters. However, the anti-Iowa sentiment will return in election cycles to come.

The big loser of the night is Newt Gingrich, who failed to outperform his declining poll numbers. Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann should also be disappointed, as they failed to catch up to Gingrich. New Hampshire's primary will take place next week, and Romney's remaining rivals can spend that time attacking Romney if they like, but afterward they will all need to battle Santorum in South Carolina for the title of chief Anti-Romney.

How did we get here, with Santorum coming from behind to (almost) squeak out a win? It was the first step of Santorum's "winning scenario," charted by Elephant Watcher, along with the rest of the candidates' winning scenarios, back in April:

Scenario: "The 7-10 Split"
Santorum raises his profile among social conservatives in Iowa by focusing on a controversial issue where few dare to tread. Few see Santorum as a threat. As time passes, it becomes increasingly clear that Iowa is hopelessly split among several different candidates. Despite a low vote total in absolute terms, Santorum pulls off an upset in Iowa. Somewhat befuddled, social conservatives and the Tea Party wing see little choice but to rally behind him after a "RINO" wins New Hampshire.

Now comes the real test for Santorum--whether the Tea Party is, in fact, willing to overlook the non-conservative aspects of Santorum's political past. If his conservative credentials are too tarnished by attacks against him, then Romney's electability (along with campaign infrastructure, establishment support, etc.) will easily trump him. In the meantime, Santorum will need to explain to conservative voters who have never heard of him why they should abandon the other Anti-Romneys and support him.

Tomorrow: The Iowa Caucus

On Tuesday, the voting finally begins. The political landscape in Iowa has been very fluid this season. If one includes non-runner Mike Huckabee, seven different candidates have led in the polls at various times: Huckabee, Romney, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, and Paul. And Santorum has come close. It's the complete opposite of New Hampshire, where Mitt Romney has led in every single poll conducted. With one day to go, Iowa is still fluid: Three candidates are in a near-tie in the final polling:

Iowa Caucus
01/01 PPP (D) -- Paul 20, Romney 19, Santorum 18, Gingrich 14
01/01 Insider Adv -- Romney 23, Paul 22, Santorum 18, Gingrich 16
12/30 Des Moines Reg -- Romney 24, Paul 22, Santorum 15, Gingrich 12
12/29 WeAskAmerica -- Romney 24, Santorum 17, Paul 14, Gingrich 13
12/28 NBC/Marist -- Romney 23, Paul 21, Santorum 15, Perry 14
12/28 ARG -- Romney 22, Gingrich 17, Paul 17, Santorum 11
12/28 Rasmussen -- Romney 23, Paul 22, Santorum 16, Gingrich 13
12/28 Insider Adv -- Romney 17, Paul 17, Gingrich 17, Santorum 13
12/27 CNN/Time -- Romney 25, Paul 22, Santorum 16, Gingrich 14
12/27 PPP (D) -- Paul 24, Romney 20, Gingrich 13, Bachmann 11

It's impossible to say for certain who the winner will be. Romney has a very slight lead in most of the polls, has organization, and has the best electability argument. Ron Paul is close behind, and his supporters are intense. Rick Santorum is in third, but has the late momentum and is the most likely to benefit from the coalescing of low-polling Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann. Despite trailing by a few points, Santorum may actually have the edge.

Taking first in Iowa would be a boost for any of the three leading candidates. The size of the boost usually depends on whether the candidate exceeded expectations, and the size of the margin of victory. In this case, no one knows which candidate will win. The only expectation is that it will be close.

In one sense, Santorum is likely to benefit even if he doesn't take first place: He's ahead of other Anti-Romneys like Gingrich, Perry, and Bachmann. He'll have an argument to stay in the race. Ron Paul is going to stay in the race no matter what, and a victory for him would only serve to de-legitimize the Iowa Caucus.

Romney's team will have the most flexible spin on the results. Romney carefully avoided expending too many resources in Iowa, because he wanted to keep expectations low. But he also spent enough to make it possible to win. Obviously a win in Iowa would be an enormous boost to the idea that Romney is the frontrunner. A second-place finish, especially if it's close, would also be taken as a win. If Santorum wins, Romney's campaign would argue something to the effect of, "Iowa is an Evangelical state, and the Evangelical candidate only barely beat Romney." If Paul wins, Romney's campaign would argue that Romney was the highest-ranking sane candidate, and that Iowans should be disregarded. A third place finish behind both Santorum and Paul would be disappointing, but if Paul is close to winning, that fact would be used to attack Iowa's credibility.

Among the lower-tier, it will also be competitive: Bachmann wants to beat Perry to claim her status as the chief Tea Partier. Perry wants to avoid that, and would like to beat Gingrich to claim his status as the chief Southerner to compete in South Carolina.

2012 Republican Primary in Review: December 2011

Each month, Elephant Watcher recaps the activity that occurred in the Republican primary during the previous month. Follow these links to read earlier recaps: May, June, July, August, September, October, November.

December was the month of the rise and fall of Newt Gingrich. Herman Cain was already on the decline, paving the way for Gingrich to become the next Anti-Romney flavor of the month. Most of Cain's support was shifting over to Gingrich. On December 3, Herman Cain dropped out, falling under the weight of yet another sex scandal.

Gingrich's rise took place as quickly as Cain's and Rick Perry's had. Gingrich had become the greatest threat to Romney's candidacy since Perry. But unlike Cain and Perry, Gingrich was able to use his intellect and rhetorical skill to push his numbers higher than those of his predecessors. Rather than collapsing in the debates, Gingrich impressed the audience. In both of the month's debates, on December 10 and December 15, Gingrich was widely proclaimed the winner. While Romney performed ably in the December 15th debate, he made a gaffe in the prior debate when he offered Perry a $10,000 bet.

Gingrich reached his peak around December 13, when he nearly tied Mitt Romney on Intrade. Intrade investors, like the Republican establishment, were skeptical of Gingrich, but his poll numbers washed the skepticism away: Gingrich took a double-digit lead over all his opponents in the national polls, a double-digit lead in Iowa, a lead of about 20 points in South Carolina, and dominated Florida polls by polling at nearly 50%. Even Romney's New Hampshire stronghold buckled, reducing Romney's lead to 10-15 points in some polls.

Notwithstanding Gingrich's performance at the December 15th debate, the tide began to turn against him in mid-December. Romney's campaign, which had shied away from the attacks and negative ads that characterized it in the 2008 primary, understood that it was time to unload. In early December, Romney released a torrent of attack ads against Gingrich, mostly in Iowa. Ron Paul, too, began to spend from his online money chest to attack Gingrich. Even Perry, at long last, realized that he needed to focus on winning the Anti-Romney vote, and shifted his attacks in Gingrich's direction.

It was too much for Gingrich to bear. He had little money to spend on ads of his own to counter the attacks. But what really eroded Gingrich's support was the fact that the ads were based in truth: Gingrich was not the pure, Tea Party-friendly conservative that he pretended to be. Since Gingrich didn't have an advantage in conservatism, there was no counterweight to his baggage and electability concerns. Gingrich steadily fell in the polls, particularly the national and Iowa polls.

By the end of the month, the media increasingly focused on Iowa. With Gingrich (mostly) out of the way there, Romney took a slight lead over Paul, who somehow managed to translate dollars to poll numbers. Rick Santorum, who faithfully waited his turn as the final Anti-Romney, got a last-minute increase in Iowa polls. With the Iowa Caucus just a few days away, polls essentially suggested a three-way tie among Romney, Paul, and Santorum, with the late momentum on Santorum's side. Perry and Michele Bachmann, who placed most (or all) of their hopes on Iowa, were too far behind to hope for a win. Gingrich was left somewhere in between, hoping that a loss in Iowa wouldn't jeopardize his leads in South Carolina and Florida.

Why Isn't Anyone Attacking Mitt Romney?

Romney

Voting in Iowa begins in less than 100 hours. In the latest Iowa polls, Mitt Romney has crept into the lead, albeit a slight one. As of this entry, Romney leads in six out of the last six Iowa polls. Although Romney has placed first in the occasional Iowa poll this year, the last time Romney consistently held the lead in Iowa was...never. Mike Huckabee held the lead until he declared he wasn't running, after which Michele Bachmann entered the race and took the lead, followed by a seemingly endless procession of Anti-Romneys.

Today, the polls in Iowa are close enough that it's possible for any number of candidates to pull out a win: Romney, Ron Paul, the fading Newt Gingrich, and the rising Rick Santorum. On Wednesday, Elephant Watcher wrote that Santorum was well-positioned to make his long-awaited surge, but that he was running out of time. A few more weeks and Santorum might skyrocket in the polls by gathering together the Evangelical voters like Huckabee did in 2008. New polls were released late Wednesday showing the movement occur: Santorum broke the 10% barrier for the first time and moved into third place with about 15%. This was what Santorum was waiting for all along, but it would have been much more helpful if it happened even a week ago. It's a race against the clock--but Santorum could squeak out a win with a percentage in the 20s, as opposed to Huckabee's 34% win in 2008.

Still, Romney is in the lead, and is the only candidate not being attacked at the moment. Paul is being attacked by Gingrich and others; Gingrich is still receiving some flak from leftover attack ads aimed against him; Bachmann is being called on to drop out early; even late-bloomer Santorum has already been hit by some new attack ads from Rick Perry's campaign. Why is Romney getting a pass?

The answer is that the Anti-Romney candidates are looking past Iowa toward South Carolina now. Even if Romney won Iowa and New Hampshire, Romney has been weak in South Carolina. That's the battleground to determine who gets to play the role of the chief Anti-Romney. While a Romney win in both Iowa and New Hampshire would be devastating to the rest of the candidates, they believe it's survivable--but only the top-ranking Anti-Romneys will survive it. There's still going to be room, because many voters don't want Romney, but those voters will coalesce around one or two Anti-Romneys at most.

By this point, Bachmann and Perry have written off a win in Iowa as impossible. Gingrich is probably getting that sense, too. If they can't win Iowa, their mission is to make sure they don't get beaten by other Anti-Romneys. Perry will be hurt more by losing to Santorum or Paul than by losing to Romney. Few of Perry's voters see Romney as an alternative, but if Santorum beats Perry, they might jump ship because they find Santorum acceptable.

Elephant Watcher believes that if multiple Anti-Romneys are close in Iowa's results, as opposed to one Anti-Romney getting a big win, we could see a similar situation develop in South Carolina. If that happens, the Anti-Romneys will still be fighting amongst themselves to determine who gets to be the alternative to Romney. This would infuriate many Tea Partiers, who will demand to know why Romney isn't being vetted. Meanwhile, Romney would keep his establishment/moderate constituency to himself, left in relative peace. After South Carolina, though, all the guns will be aimed in his direction.

Did Florida's Move Ruin Rick Santorum's Chances?

Santorum

At the beginning of October, Florida's Republican Party made a decision that altered the timeline of the entire primary season. Originally, the voting was to begin in early February at the Iowa Caucus. But Florida moved its own date to January 31st. Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina responded by moving up to January so they could be first. As a result, the primary season was cut short by a full month. At the time, cutting the remaining calendar from four months to three months may not have seemed like a big deal. Today, with Iowa's social conservatives divided, we can see the effect it had.

When a candidate is considered a contender--when he's polling high enough and competitive enough to be taken seriously--it's relatively easy for voters to coalesce around him. This season, we witnessed candidates like Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich skyrocket in the polls once they reached that threshold.

The trouble is that it takes a long time to reach that threshold when you're starting from near-zero in the polls. As we discussed a few days ago, even as skilled a debater as Mike Huckabee took a couple months to cultivate his following enough to reach contender status in 2007. This is because going from 0% to 15% is a slow feedback loop: People watch the poll results and gradually become more likely to support a low-poller whom they like as he goes up in the polls. Given the fact that new polls are only released once every few days at best (at worst, once every few weeks), and the fact that it takes awhile for a candidate's rise to filter into the media, it can be an arduous process. The good news is that once it's done, the payoff is big.

This brings us to Rick Santorum. He is only just now approaching the threshold. He's not quite there yet, polling at about 10%. That's even worse than it looks, as Santorum tends to be fifth or sixth due to Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry polling at about 11 or 12%.

Unfortunately for Santorum, Iowa wasted nearly three months by flirting with the disastrous candidacy of Cain and the ill-fitting candidacy of Gingrich. Iowans have even paid attention to Ron Paul. Now, with the bottom of the barrel fully scraped, it's Santorum's turn. Given a few more weeks, he might be the next candidate to skyrocket. But voting takes place next Tuesday. Santorum would probably give anything for another month to be added to the pre-Iowa season. His only hope is to do better than expected. Even losing in Iowa, placing above Gingrich would give him some ammunition for a desperate attempt to become the Anti-Romney in South Carolina.

The 2012 Republican Primary: Phase Four

Back in May, Elephant Watcher broke down the long primary season into four phases. In Phase One, most of the potential candidates made the decision of whether to enter the race, and if so, they got their operations up and running. During the summer, Phase Two, the field took shape and the candidates plotted out their campaign strategies. Then, in Phase Three, the candidates participated in numerous debates, where they were put to the test for the first time. Some candidates, like Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, succeeded. Others, like Rick Perry, fell far short of expectations. And most, like Jon Huntsman and Michele Bachmann, couldn't gain any traction.

Now, as the Christmas season comes to a close, Phase Four has begun. Before, voters in Iowa and New Hampshire were the only ones watching. From this point forward, the rest of the country will start tuning in. Whatever the result of the Iowa Caucus, it will make headlines. Then it will be New Hampshire, then South Carolina, then Florida.

Phase Three narrowed the field to just a few candidates who have a decent chance of winning early states. The polls show Romney, Gingrich, and Ron Paul within striking distance in Iowa. In New Hampshire, Romney is alone at the top. South Carolina will be influenced by the results of the previous two states: If Gingrich wins Iowa, he probably wins in South Carolina; if Gingrich fails in Iowa, he may still win South Carolina but it will be closer. Florida will be decisive if Romney wins there, otherwise Romney will be preparing for a long campaign against Gingrich.

If the minor candidates fail to win any of the first three states, they will start dropping out. An Iowa-centric candidate like Rick Santorum may even drop out after failing to win the first contest. Huntsman may drop out after losing New Hampshire. Some, like Paul and perhaps Bachmann, are running to make a point, and will stay in until the bitter end.

The debates were critical in Phase Three, and they will still be important in Phase Four. There will be one or two debates held before each of the contests after Iowa. With candidates dropping out and debate sponsors setting stricter requirements for participation, the leading candidates will have many opportunities for one-on-one arguments. The two frontrunners today, Romney and Gingrich, are both skilled debaters. Now we'll find out how good they are at getting votes.

Iowa Remains Divided

The Iowa Caucus is imminent: Voting takes place in less than two weeks. Iowans have had plenty of time to rally around a single candidate. They could have united behind the overall Republican frontrunner, Mitt Romney. If they found Romney unacceptable, they could have united behind a single Anti-Romney, selecting the one they felt was the strongest of the remaining candidates. In 2008, Iowans did precisely that, and they gave Mike Huckabee a big win over Romney. This time, Iowa is divided.

A group of influential Evangelical leaders met in Iowa in an attempt to decide which candidate they would unite behind; they ultimately did not endorse a single candidate. The picture was different four years ago when Huckabee was the obvious choice. Back then, Romney had been leading the polls in Iowa for months--then Huckabee went from a low-polling candidate (like Rick Santorum has been this year) to a mid-level candidate in October. Once Huckabee was a realistic choice, his numbers exploded in the "Huckaboom," launching him past Romney by the end of November. It became a two-man race in Iowa, and Huckabee's lead expanded to double-digits in some polls by mid-December.

In mid-December 2007, Romney unleashed a torrent of attack ads against Huckabee--much as he did against Newt Gingrich in mid-December 2011. Huckabee's numbers dipped, and Romney retook a slight lead in some polls by the end of December. But unlike Gingrich, Huckabee never fell too far, staying around 30%. He recovered, the polls favored him again, and he won Iowa 34% to Romney's 25%.

This time around, Gingrich looked to become the Anti-Romney, but his poll numbers fell from an average of 30 to an average of 15, placing him behind both Romney and Ron Paul. Conservative, mostly Evangelical Anti-Romney forces in Iowa have gravitated to a number of other candidates: Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum are all polling around 10 points each. If the voters supporting those three plus Gingrich concentrated around one candidate, as they did with Huckabee in 2008, Romney would be finished in Iowa.

Why the disunity? As with the Republican field in general, each of the Anti-Romney candidates is flawed. And each one appeals to a different segment of the Evangelical Anti-Romney bloc. For those who care little about electability, Bachmann is a pure policy conservative. For those who demand an established, well-funded, experienced candidate, Perry is the obvious choice. For those spooked by electability concerns and bad debate performances from the previous two, Santorum makes sense. For those who think Santorum just can't win because he's a low-polling nobody, Gingrich is the one with the best chance of out-polling Romney. But Gingrich is ill-suited to play the role of an Evangelical conservative, aside from the fact that his name is not Mitt Romney.

What if Huckabee had run for president again this year? Probably all four of those groups would have lined up behind him, and winning Iowa would have been a breeze. But Huckabee didn't run, so Iowa is divided. Ordinarily, low-polling candidates will lose all support at the very end, as voters strategically coalesce. This year, however, the four Anti-Romneys are each polling just high enough to survive.

Newt Gingrich Falls in the Polls

About one month ago, Newt Gingrich started taking the lead in the national, Iowa, South Carolina, and Florida polls. He reached his peak around December 10-12th. At that time, Gingrich's opponents--particularly Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Perry--poured millions of dollars into attack ads against him, mostly in Iowa. When Gingrich was at his height, he was averaging a lead of 10-15 points in the national polls, about 20 points in South Carolina, and most importantly, a lead of 10-15 points in Iowa.

The attacks against Gingrich were very effective, and it didn't take them very long to have an impact. Let's have a look at the most recent polls and see how Gingrich's lead today compares to what he had less than two weeks ago (with G +01 representing a one-point lead, etc.):

National Primary Polls
G +04 12/22 Gallup -- Gingrich 26, Romney 22, Paul 13, Perry 8
G +00 12/18 CNN -- Romney 28, Gingrich 28, Paul 14, Bachmann 8
G +13 12/18 PPP (D) -- Gingrich 35, Romney 22, Paul 11, Bachmann 7
G +00 12/18 ABC/WashPo -- Romney 30, Gingrich 30, Paul 15, Bachmann 7
G +00 12/18 CBS News -- Romney 20, Gingrich 20, Paul 10, Bachmann 6

Iowa Caucus
G -03 12/20 WeAskAmerica -- Paul 19, Romney 18, Gingrich 16, Bachmann 15
G -02 12/19 ARG -- Paul 21, Romney 20, Gingrich 19, Perry 9
G -08 12/19 Rasmussen -- Romney 25, Paul 20, Gingrich 17, Santorum 10
G -03 12/18 ISU/Gazette -- Paul 28, Gingrich 25, Romney 18, Perry 11
G -09 12/18 PPP (D) -- Paul 23, Romney 20, Gingrich 14, Perry 10
G -09 12/18 Insider Adv -- Paul 24, Romney 18, Perry 16, Gingrich 13

South Carolina
G +17 12/19 Clemson -- Gingrich 38, Romney 21, Paul 10, Bachmann 5
G +12 12/18 Insider Adv -- Gingrich 31, Romney 19, Bachmann 8, Paul 7

The polls reveal a dramatic shift. Even in the national polls, which shouldn't be moved too much by attack ads in Iowa, have Gingrich down. He isn't behind, but he only has a lead in 2 of 5 polls. Putting aside the PPP outlier, Gingrich has only the slightest edge, rather than a 10-15 point lead. There are only two South Carolina polls, and while Gingrich is strong there, he is down a bit from his 20-point lead.

The biggest difference, of course, is in Iowa. Gingrich had enjoyed a 10-15 point lead in Iowa. Now, in the six most recent polls, he is leading in none of them. He's in third place or worse in 5 of 6. In half of them, he's down by more than 5 points. Worst of all, Romney is beating him in 5 of 6.

It's not all due to attack ads. As Elephant Watcher correctly predicted back in October, Gingrich became the next flavor of the month after Herman Cain fell, but was doomed once the Tea Party discovered he wasn't as conservative as they assumed. In addition, Romney has enjoyed an avalanche of endorsements from Republican officeholders, while virtually everyone who ever worked for Gingrich has been against Gingrich.

Given the up-and-down pattern of the primary season, it would be tempting to write off Gingrich now that he's past his peak. But Gingrich, unlike previous flavors of the month, has intelligence and rhetorical skill. He remains strong in South Carolina. Even supposing Romney wins in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Gingrich could pull out a win in South Carolina and play the role of the Anti-Romney for awhile. The odds would be against his winning the nomination, however.

What If Ron Paul Wins the Iowa Caucus?

Paul

For nearly the entire primary season, Ron Paul has hovered around 10% in most national primary polls and early state polls. In the last few days, Paul has moved up to first place in some Iowa Caucus polls. The shift is sudden and dramatic, as Paul has not been a contender anywhere until now. From the beginning, Elephant Watcher has rated Paul to be the weakest of the Republican field. Ron Paul's odds of winning the nomination have never risen above 0%. Why are Paul's numbers rising in Iowa now, and what happens if Paul wins there?

Paul, like Mitt Romney, ran for president in 2008. Paul was largely ignored then, and he failed to win even a single state. Paul was considered a "kook" and was savagely attacked for blaming the 9/11 attacks on American foreign policy. However, Paul managed to raise a lot of money thanks to his enthusiastic libertarian base. Paul's views on American foreign policy also likely made him attractive to foreign contributors, though accepting such contributions would be illegal under U.S. law.

This time around, Paul's foreign policy views have not hurt him as much. Many Republican voters view the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as either concluded, irrelevant, or unwise. Not only do they consider the economy to be more important, they are more receptive to candidates who wish to avoid future wars. A sizable contingent would rather take a pass on the issue of Iranian nukes.

As for Paul's rise in Iowa, it follows a familiar pattern. Paul is another Anti-Romney, has not been vetted, and is one of only three candidates to be able to spend a lot of money in the state (Romney and Rick Perry being the other two). One might object to the characterization of Paul as an "unvetted" candidate given the fact that he already ran in 2008 and has been used as a punching bag in both primary seasons. However, Paul is unique in that he has only been attacked on his foreign policy views. Paul's long history of unconventional, racist, and bizarre statements and beliefs has been entirely unexplored by the media and the other candidates, because no one thought he could win anything.

If Paul were to win Iowa, the beneficiary would be Mitt Romney. The Republican primary voters would panic, fearing the strange and unelectable Paul would guarantee Barack Obama's reelection. They would rally behind Romney in New Hampshire. Newt Gingrich and the other Iowa candidates would be crushed by losing both Iowa and New Hampshire, but one of them might still win South Carolina, where Paul remains weak. The Anti-Romney would not be in nearly as strong a position as he would have been, had he won in both Iowa and South Carolina.

The biggest loser would the Iowa Caucus. The Republican establishment was already perturbed by Michele Bachmann's strong numbers in the state during the summer. The establishment has suggested that Iowa may lose its privileged status as the first voting state if Iowa allows a fringe candidate to win. In reality, the perception of Iowa as an unruly state is unfair: As we saw in our review of the past winners of the Iowa Caucus, fringe candidates have not won there. Since the modern primary system began in 1980, the winners of Iowa have been Bush 41, Bob Dole (twice), Bush 43, and Mike Huckabee.

Paul's inherent weaknesses make a Paul win in Iowa unlikely, regardless of the current poll numbers. Should Paul manage to win in Iowa, however, it would be a black mark from which the state's reputation would not easily recover.

Newt Gingrich's Intrade Odds Crash

Only a few days ago, we are able to report that Newt Gingrich had nearly tied Mitt Romney on the Intrade market on the 2012 Republican nomination. At that time, Gingrich was less than eight points behind. Gingrich's Intrade odds have now crashed, and he is currently 50 points behind Romney, a staggering reversal. Romney leads Gingrich 62.7% to 12.6%. That's the biggest lead Romney has held over Gingrich since Gingrich's rise in mid-November.

Why such a huge shift, and why was it so sudden? It was not the result of Gingrich's performance at the December 15th primary debate; most reviews of Gingrich's performance were positive. The majority of the crash actually took place a day or two before the debate. Nor was it the result of a steep drop in the polls: Gingrich is still leading in every recent national poll, every South Carolina poll, every Florida poll, and virtually every Iowa poll.

However, the extent of Gingrich's average lead in the polls has declined. Intrade investors are skittish, having seen Rick Perry and Herman Cain rapidly rise and fall in the polls. Perhaps the investors understand that Gingrich's poll numbers are built on a flawed candidate, and they were looking for signs that the Gingrich bubble was past its peak.

Was there ample evidence that Gingrich is past his prime? Intrade investors apparently placed a lot of faith in just two Iowa polls. An Iowa poll from Public Policy Polling (D) this week had Gingrich only one point ahead of Ron Paul. The next day, a Rasmussen poll of Iowa had Romney in the lead over Gingrich, 23-20. Drudge Report prominently displayed the results of both polls, and the Intrade market had a big reaction. If subsequent polling doesn't reinforce those two (which are currently outliers; the rest of the recent Iowa polls have Gingrich ahead by 10-15 points), the market may shift back to a lesser degree.

Among the minor candidates, only Paul and Jon Huntsman post numbers above 5%: They are at 7.8% and 7.1%, respectively. It seems that Paul and Huntsman's numbers are unaffected by the sudden increase in Romney's chance to win; the markets apparently serve as places for fans of Paul and Huntsman to lose some money.

The Iowa intrade market shifted accordingly. Romney leads at 33%, with Paul at 31.2% and Gingrich at 20.1%. The near tie for Romney and Paul reflects investors' lack of certainty over whether the PPP or Rasmussen poll was more accurate. Either way, they clearly discount the rest of the Iowa polls.

In New Hampshire, Romney is still at 75%. In South Carolina, where Gingrich was a big favorite just days ago, Romney leads 38% to 30%. This is interesting because polling has Gingrich an average of twenty(!) points ahead of Romney, though the polls are not as recent. Presumably Intrade investors think Romney has a good chance of sewing up the nomination with wins in Iowa and New Hampshire.

In the Florida market, Romney leads Gingrich 50% to 30%. As with South Carolina, polls have Gingrich ahead an average of about 18 points, but the polls are about two weeks old. Overall, it's plain to see that the effect of establishment attacks and TV ads against Gingrich have had a big impact on the way people view the race, most polls notwithstanding.

Romney and Gingrich Almost Tied on Intrade

In the wake of the December 10th Republican primary debate, Newt Gingrich has almost tied Mitt Romney on the Intrade market on the 2012 Republican nomination. Gingrich has been slowly but steadily gaining, all at the expense of Romney, who has been just as slowly shedding points.

The current Intrade odds have Romney leading Gingrich by 43.5% to 36.0%. That 7.5% gap is only half as big as Romney's lead was the last time we checked, just over a week ago. About two weeks ago, Romney was leading by 36 points. Clearly, Intrade investors are becoming more willing to believe Gingrich's poll numbers are real (unlike Herman Cain's). The most recent drop also reflects the media narrative of the December 10th debate: Romney made a memorable gaffe with his $10,000 bet and Gingrich emerged unscathed. The narrative was essentially what Elephant Watcher predicted in the debate recap.

Nevertheless, despite all of the polls, Romney remains in the lead on Intrade. If Romney is unable to do any damage to Gingrich during the final pre-Iowa debate this week, we can expect that to change--Gingrich would likely tie Romney or surpass him if he does well.

Meanwhile, only two minor candidates register 3% or higher on the Intrade market: Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul. Huntsman, who was not invited to the December debates and who is inexplicably favored by Intrade investors (perhaps reflecting the establishment bias often found on Intrade), is still at 6.0%. Ron Paul, whose enthusiastic internet fans are willing to put down money for the cause, is at 7.6%.

In the Iowa Caucus Intrade market, Gingrich is well ahead of Romney, 55% to 11%. Paul has been climbing there as well, up to 24.8%. This is interesting because Paul's recent poll numbers in Iowa, though improved from his usual 10%, are equal or lesser to Romney's. Why such a difference in their Intrade odds, then? It's likely a result of the prevailing wisdom that the Iowa Caucus rewards candidates with enthusiasm on their side.

In New Hampshire, Romney remains a big favorite at 70%. Gingrich is similarly favored in South Carolina, at 70%. In the Florida market, Gingrich's edge has shrunk to 49% over Romney's 35%. The investors may believe that by the time Florida rolls around, something could arise that derails Gingrich's campaign.

Intrade Odds: Newt Gingrich Up, Rick Perry Down

We last examined the Intrade market on the 2012 Republican nomination shortly before the two mid-November debates. In today's update, we'll see how the debates have altered the Intrade market's perception of the race.

As far as the frontrunner is concerned, the debates had no impact. Mitt Romney dominated the field before, and his numbers are unchanged. Romney stands atop the field at 69.6%. By contrast, the lesser candidates have been shuffled. The big change is that Rick Perry, who has been on a decline since he first participated in a debate in September, has finally been ground into dust. Before the debates, he stood at 40%. After the September debates, he dropped to 20%. He slid down to 10% as it became clear he would not recover in October. Now, after Perry's gaffe at the November 9th debate, he has lost nearly all of his support. Perry is currently trading at 3.7%.

Newt Gingrich rose at Perry's expense. He now stands at 14.3%. Just a month ago, he was in the low single-digits; now he's in second place, albeit a very distant second. Herman Cain has slid to 4.0%. That's not much of a drop considering the sexual harassment scandal, but Intrade has always been very skeptical of unconventional candidates like Cain. Still, it's interesting to see that Perry is now behind both Gingrich and Cain. Also in the mire of the three percent range are Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, at 3.2% and 3.1%. Michele Bachmann has long since been pronounced dead, and she trades at 1.0%. Rick Santorum--who may be okay on paper--is nowhere in the polls, so he is at 0.4%.

The Iowa Caucus market has changed more dramatically. While Romney is still at about 40%, Gingrich is now in second at 21%. Cain has fallen to 15.2%, and Perry is at 7.5%. This reflects the fact that the Intrade market believes someone has to have a chance of beating Romney in Iowa. If it's not Cain or Perry anymore, and if it's not Bachmann or Santorum, that leaves Gingrich. This is despite the fact that Gingrich has not done well in Iowa polls (aside from an outlier or two).

The New Hampshire market still says Romney has it in the bag. South Carolina has behaved like Iowa, with Gingrich picking up Cain and Perry's slack. The Florida Intrade market is still traded too little to be efficient, but Romney has catapulted to 65% there. The Nevada market looks like the New Hampshire one, with Romney dominating.

Intrade Odds: Newt Gingrich Rising, Slightly

Since our last look at the Intrade market on the 2012 Republican nomination nearly a month ago, Mitt Romney has maintained his dominant position. Romney is currently trading at 69.4%, and the man in second place--Rick Perry--is at 9.9%. The two leading candidates are at the same place they were last time, but that's to Romney's advantage: It's less than two months until the voting begins. If you're not in first place, less time means fewer opportunities to change things. Romney is happy to see the clock run out.

Only one other candidate is above 5% now. Newt Gingrich has risen to 8%. Previously, Gingrich had tended to trade at 1-3%. Gingrich's modest rise in the national primary polls is responsible for the change. Gingrich is actually now beating Herman Cain in the Intrade odds. This is interesting because Cain is doing much, much better in the polls than Gingrich or Perry. Indeed, Cain is ahead of Romney in many polls. It's apparent that Intrade investors are willing to look far beyond today's poll numbers--at least where Cain is concerned. As Elephant Watcher has repeated over the months, Intrade investors tend to view politics from an establishment perspective. Cain is an outsider to say the least, so Intrade investors put little stock in him. But Cain was trading a bit higher before the sexual harassment scandal hit the headlines. Cain fell to 4.7% by this morning, and after news broke of another accuser against Cain, he quickly fell to 2.4%.

Meanwhile, Intrade investors are fairly bullish about Romney's chance to win the Iowa Caucus. They give him a 40% chance of doing so, while Cain registers 17.5% and Perry is at 12.5%. Once again, the investors are looking beyond the poll numbers to give Romney such an advantage over Cain. Naturally, if they believe Romney has a 40% chance of winning Iowa, he dominates in the overall odds of winning the nomination.

In the market on the New Hampshire Primary, Intrade investors rate Romney at about 90% to win. That's a fairly straightforward reading of the New Hampshire Primary polls, all of which have Romney in the lead by a comfortable margin. Meanwhile, the markets for the South Carolina and Florida primaries have Romney in first at 50% each. Romney should be weaker in South Carolina than in Florida, especially given Romney's odds of winning the overall nomination, so that points to some market inefficiency in the Florida market.

In summary, Intrade investors are dismissive of Cain's good poll numbers and are very skeptical about his candidacy. They essentially mirror Elephant Watcher's calculation of Romney and Cain's odds of winning the Republican 2012 nomination. The race isn't over, but the end is near.

Who Will Win the New Hampshire Primary in 2012?

Today we continue our series on the early primary states. A few days ago, we took an updated look at who will win the Iowa Caucus. The next state is New Hampshire, which recently confirmed it will hold its primary on January 10, 2012.

There are far fewer candidates who are competitive in New Hampshire than in Iowa. Back in July, when we first considered who will win the New Hampshire primary, there were more options. But Chris Christie declined to run and Tim Pawlenty dropped out. Either of those men, had they won Iowa, would have then become very competitive (or favored) to win New Hampshire. Jon Huntsman, while still probably enjoying a good reputation in New Hampshire, has completely failed to get out of Mitt Romney's shadow. At the same time, Romney has proven to be a more formidable candidate than he first appeared. The only scenario remaining is that Romney holds his lead and wins New Hampshire.

The latest New Hampshire polls reinforce the impression:

New Hampshire Primary
10/25 Rasmussen -- Romney 41, Cain 17, Paul 11, Gingrich 8
10/25 CNN/Time -- Romney 40, Cain 13, Paul 12, Huntsman 6
10/16 Insider Adv -- Romney 39, Cain 24, Paul 11, Huntsman 5
10/13 Magellan (R) -- Romney 41, Cain 20, Paul 10, Huntsman 6

With remarkable consistency, all of the pollsters have Romney at about 40%. In a race with so many participants, a candidate polling at 40% is guaranteed victory. These aren't the first good polls for Romney, either: Every single New Hampshire poll taken this year has shown Romney in the lead. After 22 polls, Romney has to be feeling pretty comfortable. His margin over second place has also been consistently large: Romney has been in the mid-30s to upper 40s in each poll, and no other candidate has reached 30%. Herman Cain has barely broken into the 20s (later falling into the 10s), and that is as high any other candidate has gotten.

If Romney wins Iowa, he will sweep to victory. What if someone else wins Iowa? The only other candidates who could win Iowa have issues with poor perceived electability. The Iowa winner will get a bump in New Hampshire, but Romney will get a bump from people concerned about nominating a winner. For example, if Cain won Iowa, the anti-Romney vote would coalesce around Cain. But the anti-Cain vote would coalesce around Romney.

Thus, Romney has a bit of a failsafe: If someone else wins Iowa, the "strategic panic" voters feel would give Romney a bump to counteract the bump that the Iowa winner gets. Romney is therefore guaranteed to win New Hampshire, and the only question is his margin of victory. Romney will be under pressure to have a pretty big win. He will still be putting resources into New Hampshire to make sure the margin is convincing, but he will be increasingly tempted to go for a win in Iowa and settle the matter early.

2012 Republican Primary in Review: October 2011

Each month, Elephant Watcher recaps the activity that occurred in the Republican primary during the previous month. Follow these links to read earlier recaps: May, June, July, August, September.

Some very important developments took place at the very beginning of October. First, the field became completely settled as the remaining potential candidates announced they would not run: Chris Christie on October 4th and Sarah Palin on the 5th. Second, the Republican Party in Florida broke the national Republican Party's rules by pushing its primary up to January 31st. This caused all of the early primary states to push their dates forward as well. The result was that an entire month of the pre-Iowa primary season was eliminated. Instead of October opening with four months until Iowa, it was down to three.

The most important development that took place at the beginning of the month was that Christie officially declared he would not run. This shifted the entire balance of the race. Christie was the candidate most likely to win, since he had the unique ability to attract both establishment Republicans and Tea Partiers. Rather than entering the race and filling the vacuum, Christie's refusal to run made the void permanent: Republicans would never be satisfied with the field for 2012. Instead, they would search for the "least bad option."

But Christie was also the final obstacle in Mitt Romney's path to win the nomination. Mike Huckabee promised a populist, Southern, Evangelical alternative to Romney, but he did not run. Mitch Daniels and Tim Pawlenty both had the ability to serve as conservative "consensus candidates" who could satisfy (if not excite) both wings of the Republican Party. Daniels didn't run, and Pawlenty left the race prematurely. With Christie out, there were no longer any highly electable candidates in the race besides Romney (and Jon Huntsman, perpetually left in Romney's shadow).

With Romney a lock to win New Hampshire and the establishment wing of the Party, and with the rest of the field either unelectable or lacking conservative credentials of their own, Romney was set to win by default. On October 5th, Elephant Watcher was able to project that Mitt Romney would win the Republican 2012 presidential nomination.

The rest of October was marked by the continued slide of Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, and the rise of Herman Cain. Perry, who had led the polls just a month earlier, sunk to fourth, fifth, and even sixth place in Iowa polls. Bachmann, who led during the summer, was essentially tied with Perry in single-digits in the state. But Cain rose to the top of both the Iowa polls and national primary polls.

Perry and Bachmann's crash also created an opening for Romney, who led or tied with Cain in later Iowa polls. Before October, Romney placed all of his resources in New Hampshire. Now, Romney's 2008 dream of a knocking out his competitors with a one-two punch in Iowa and New Hampshire looks like a realistic possibility--perhaps even a probability.

The two debates in October cemented Bachmann and Perry's status as second-tier candidates. Cain and Romney were resilient. But by the end of October, Cain was beginning to show signs of weakness. Unlike Romney and the previously-crashed candidates, Cain had never been challenged or vetted in any way. Under heavier scrutiny, Cain made a series of low-impact gaffes. His "9-9-9" tax plan became less popular the more people looked into it, prompting Cain to rethink the idea. And as October came to a close, a sexual harassment scandal from Cain's past came to light, with inconclusive results. Anti-Romney voters already cast about once more for alternatives, like Newt Gingrich, who was rising but still low in the polls.

In summary, October was the month in which Romney--lucky so far--saw his path to the nomination open completely. Since voters will become even more focused on electability as Iowa approaches, and since there are no conservative alternatives who are highly electable, Romney has likely triumphed. The nomination is his to lose. Elephant Watcher calculates that Romney's odds of winning the Republican nomination are currently 65%.

Who Will Win the Iowa Caucus in 2012?

Back in June, we considered the question of who will win the Iowa Caucus in 2012 by taking a look at the different scenarios that could take place. Much has changed in the last four months. Chris Christie's decision not to run means the "united party" scenario cannot play out: No candidate remains who can unite both wings of the Republican Party. Likewise, the "consensus candidate" scenario cannot occur, since Tim Pawlenty dropped out of the race: There is no establishment candidate who is inoffensive to the Tea Party. The removal of these two scenarios from the political chessboard has greatly enhanced the likelihood that Mitt Romney will win the nomination, since those were the scenarios he feared the most.

Meanwhile, the "moderately electable Tea Partier" scenario is less likely to occur, since Rick Perry's campaign has crashed. The future may allow Rick Santorum to step up and fill Perry's shoes, but he is currently nowhere in the polls. The two remaining scenarios are that Romney wins Iowa, or that an unelectable Tea Partier wins Iowa. In either case, Romney is the favorite to win the nomination.

Here is where the candidates currently stand in Iowa:

Iowa Caucus
10/26 Des Moines Reg -- Cain 23, Romney 22, Paul 12, Bachmann 8
10/25 CNN/Time -- Romney 24, Cain 21, Paul 12, Gingrich 10
10/19 Hawkeye/UIowa --Cain 37, Romney 27, Paul 11, Gingrich 8
10/19 Rasmussen -- Cain 28, Romney 21, Paul 10, Gingrich 9
10/16 Insider Adv -- Cain 26, Romney 18, Gingrich 12, Bachmann 11

Additional Iowa polling in the future may help us determine whether Herman Cain's lead over Romney has indeed disappeared, as the two most recent polls suggest. Until then, we may assume the following basic facts, which are present in each poll: Cain and Romney are leading in Iowa. Between the two of them, it's a close race. They are far ahead of the rest of the candidates, who are polling about 10% or less. Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich are probably at the front of the second-tier, with Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry not far behind.

Cain is the current Anti-Romney-in-Chief, but there are factors holding him back. The Tea Party vote is split. Romney remains within striking distance of winning Iowa. History suggests that voters will move in Romney's direction as voting day approaches, since primary voters--including those in Iowa--prefer to vote for electable candidates. If the past debates are any indication, Romney will benefit from additional debates in November and December.

In conclusion, Romney should probably be considered the favorite to win Iowa at the moment. He is a weak frontrunner, but Cain is a very weak alternative. The Anti-Romney vote may coalesce around someone, but Romney has advantages of his own. Romney should be happy with the situation in Iowa at the moment. A resurgent Perry or an ascendant Santorum would be the biggest threats to his winning the nomination, and neither is polling well.