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.

Gingrich Wins South Carolina Primary

Newt Gingrich won the South Carolina Primary on Saturday. Gingrich won 40% of the vote; Mitt Romney came in second with 28%. Rick Santorum, who was contending with Gingrich for the title of chief Anti-Romney, placed a distant third. Though Gingrich's win in South Carolina was anticipated by Elephant Watcher, Gingrich's late momentum took the media by surprise, adding to its effect. Until midweek, most political observers assumed Romney would simply win everything and enjoy a coronation instead of a real contest. Just as the media overreacted to Romney's New Hampshire win and his favorable early polls in South Carolina, the media will also overreact to Gingrich's win in South Carolina. However, there were two important developments that can be seen in South Carolina's results:

South Carolina Primary (99% reporting)
Gingrich -- 40%
Romney -- 28%
Santorum -- 17%
Paul -- 13%

The most important result was that Gingrich soundly beat Santorum. Given that Gingrich has already been ahead of Santorum in the Florida polls, Gingrich will credibly claim the mantle of the chief Anti-Romney. Santorum's support will melt away. Santorum's tie for first in Iowa (where he won a handful more votes than Romney in the recount) is irrelevant; Santorum really needed a big win there and what he did get wasn't enough to build momentum.

In consequence, the primary becomes a two-man race between Romney and Gingrich. But the odds are far from even: For Gingrich to get any further, he needs to make up a lot of ground and either win or place a very close second in Florida. Unlike South Carolina and New Hampshire, Florida is seen as neutral territory. With the Anti-Romney vote united behind one candidate, Gingrich has no excuse for losing Florida. If Romney beats him there, Romney is expected to also win Nevada, Michigan, and perhaps Arizona, which are the next major contests. The media narrative will turn just as quickly against Gingrich as it did in its favor here, and all will declare that "Gingrich only wins in the South."

The other important development in South Carolina is how much Romney improved on his 2008 performance in the state, when he placed fourth with only 15% of the vote. Romney probably won't get much credit for this, since only a week ago the media were expecting Romney to win South Carolina.

But the vital comparison going forward is not how Romney finished compared to early South Carolina polls. The reason why the 2008 comparison is more useful is that Romney came so close to winning the nomination that year: Romney came in second in Iowa, second in New Hampshire (by 5 points), won Nevada, and placed second in Florida (by 5 points). Improving by a half-dozen points--he improved by twice that in South Carolina--would mean victory.

If Gingrich is to become the frontrunner in this race, he must not merely beat Romney in one of Romney's weakest states; Gingrich needs to prove he can beat Romney in the rest of the country. Florida may be his last opportunity.

South Carolina Primary Tomorrow

The South Carolina Primary will be held tomorrow, and its results are likely to get a lot of attention. For some time now, the media narrative has been that if Mitt Romney wins in South Carolina, the primary will be over. A less-pronounced narrative is that if Newt Gingrich wins South Carolina, the entire race will be transformed dramatically, and that it will become a long, grinding test of wills between the two candidates.

Initially, Romney's strong poll numbers in South Carolina gave many the impression that he was very likely to win there. Even the investors on Intrade for the South Carolina Primary market gave Romney more than a 90% chance to win there at one point.

Elephant Watcher was not convinced. Last week, we examined the probable scenarios for the South Carolina Primary. It was time for a reality check, as a favorable scenario for Gingrich was plainly visible: If Gingrich held a strong lead in the polls over Rick Santorum, the Anti-Romney vote would coalesce, stripping Santorum and Rick Perry of their support in the final week and giving Gingrich the edge.

That is precisely what has happened. Although Gingrich got good marks for his debate performance on Monday, the effect of the debate was overrated. Gingrich's upward movement was already taking place, and was largely due to the strategic shift of Perry/Santorum support over to Gingrich. Voting takes place tomorrow, and here is where we stand:

South Carolina Primary
01/19 PPP (D) -- Gingrich 36, Romney 30, Santorum 16, Paul 15
01/19 WeAskAmerica -- Gingrich 32, Romney 28, Paul 13, Santorum 9
01/18 Reuters -- Romney 35, Gingrich 23, Santorum 15, Paul 13
01/18 ARG -- Gingrich 33, Romney 32, Paul 19, Santorum 9
01/18 Rasmussen -- Gingrich 33, Romney 31, Paul 15, Santorum 11
01/18 PPP (D) -- Gingrich 34, Romney 28, Paul 15, Santorum 14
01/18 Insider Adv -- Gingrich 32, Romney 29, Paul 15, Santorum 11
01/18 Tarrance (R) -- Romney 37, Gingrich 30, Paul 11, Santorum 10

In most of the polls, Gingrich holds a narrow lead over Romney. He also has the momentum. What's more, Santorum is still holding onto a chunk of the voters. That means Gingrich's numbers can rise even further at Santorum's expense. As we observed in the review of last night's debate, Santorum gave a strong performance, but it's too late to reverse the process; he can only hope to stop the bleeding.

That would be enough to guarantee Gingrich victory, but an early "October surprise" adds some doubt: On Thursday, ABC aired a highly-publicized interview with Gingrich's second ex-wife, who made incendiary claims about Gingrich (most prominently, that Gingrich asked her to tolerate an open marriage).

Unfortunately, there is no time for any polling that will take this scandal into account. Thus, it's difficult to determine what impact it will have on the voting in South Carolina. With Herman Cain's scandals, we saw that its effect was not immediate; it caused a slow erosion of Cain's support. Cain lost support from women earlier, as they were more willing to take the scandals to heart, but in this case the effect would need to be almost overnight.

Our best guess is that adding Gingrich's momentum, the possibility of further Santorum defection, and Gingrich's preexisting lead should be enough to hand him South Carolina. However, it ought to be somewhat close. It will be closer if the Gingrich scandal has any impact.

A win by Gingrich in South Carolina will put a quick halt to Romney's aura of inevitability. As we explained earlier this week, however, Florida is the real test. That's because it will be the first opportunity for a single Anti-Romney to fight against Romney. The narrative thus far has been that Romney has won due to the split in his rivals' vote. If the Anti-Romney vote coalesces behind Gingrich and Romney still wins, that proves Romney is the clear favorite.

Romney will get bad press if he loses South Carolina, but it's easy to exaggerate the state's importance. South Carolina is one of Romney's worst states. In 2008, Romney got about twice the share of the vote in Florida as he did in South Carolina. If Romney is able to get 30% of the vote in an unfavorable state like South Carolina, that means he is greatly over-performing compared to his last run, and he should be very optimistic about his chances of winning the nomination.

Who Won the Republican Debate on January 19th?

Tonight's debate was unlike any of the previous ones. As the night wore on, it increasingly resembled kind of a political version of a war crimes tribunal: Rick Santorum was the chief prosecutor, and the other three candidates were in the dock. Santorum repeatedly challenged the conservative credentials of his foes, particularly Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. They then defended themselves, but they didn't bother to counter-attack Santorum on his own credentials. As a result, Santorum was always on the offensive, which is a good thing in a debate, because the burden remains on the defender. At best, the defenders didn't get scored against; at worst, they lost points.

Clearly, Santorum was in the spotlight, and had opportunities to display his confidence and rhetorical skill. On some issues, Gingrich and Romney defended themselves well: Romney was particularly effective in defending his pro-life record as governor. On other issues, Santorum may have scored points. Romney vigorously defended himself against the attacks on Romneycare--this time one of his opponents had done research on it--but he may have lost points. Gingrich did not defend his own support of the individual mandate very well.

But the central issue facing Santorum is that his numbers have been in free fall. Voters seeking an alternative to Romney have seen Gingrich well ahead of Santorum in the polls, and they have been defecting from Santorum in large numbers. Can a strong debate performance by Santorum reverse that? It's too late. The only question is to what extent Santorum can staunch the bleeding. He may be aided by the Gingrich ex-wife scandal, but its effect cannot yet be measured.

In fact, the debate moderator decided to open the debate by asking Gingrich about the allegations made by his second ex-wife that Gingrich had asked her for an open marriage. Gingrich was in top form as he denounced CNN for opening a presidential debate in such a way. The crowd rose to its feet and gave him a standing ovation as he vented long-felt frustrations that conservatives have about the liberal media. Gingrich has frequently criticized moderators in past debates, and this one served as a perfect target.

...On the other hand, one can't help but remember how the debate audience also cheered Herman Cain when he denied his own sex scandal during a debate. They applauded Cain, and a few weeks later they completely abandoned him.

Otherwise, Gingrich was fairly unremarkable. Aside from his standout moment at the beginning of the debate, it was probably one of his weaker performances.

Romney's performance was mixed. Frequently, Romney was strong, and he served red meat to the base in defending capitalism and free enterprise. He easily waved aside questions about Bain Capital, and his opponents saw fit to the let the matter rest. Romney was weaker when asked about releasing his tax returns. At first, it seemed that Romney would get a pass: Of the four candidates on stage, only Gingrich had released his returns. Ron Paul and Santorum expressed no plans to release theirs, and Romney said he would release his in April. But when the moderator asked Romney if he would follow in his father's footsteps by releasing many years' worth of returns, Romney was taken by surprise, answering, "Maybe." He was evasive, and the moment may ruin an otherwise solid night for him, as it presents an interesting sound-bite for the media to replay.

Rick Perry Quits, Endorses Gingrich

Perry

Rick Perry announced that he was quitting the race today during a press conference in which he also endorsed Newt Gingrich. Perry was expected to quit the race after the South Carolina Primary this Saturday, in which he would have finished poorly. Perry's decision to quit early was likely based on his desire to avoid the embarrassment of taking last place in Saturday's contest. Now, Perry can at least make the claim that he was acting selflessly to help the conservative vote coalesce behind someone other than Mitt Romney.

How will this change the race? For some time now, Perry has had no chance of winning the nomination. His departure is beneficial to Gingrich, though not as much as one might expect: Perry was already polling in the mid-to-low single-digits. His remaining support would have eroded before voting day in each contest anyway, with most going to Gingrich. This occurred in New Hampshire, where Perry's few points of support went down to 1% on voting day; Jon Huntsman experienced the same effect in Iowa, where his few points went down to 1% on the day of the Iowa Caucus.

Gingrich at least benefits from the fact that someone other than Romney has now been endorsed by a departing candidate. Also, Gingrich no longer has to worry about Perry switching tactics to attack him, though Perry can no longer attack Romney, either. The downside for Gingrich is that Perry's departure raises expectations: Gingrich can't claim he's being handicapped by the conservative vote splitting among multiple candidates. He is only competing against Rick Santorum.

Perry's candidacy was a high-profile failure. Expectations for Perry were high. He was the first candidate to experience a surge and bust, having taken a big lead in all the polls (except in New Hampshire) during late August and early September. At that time, Perry was considered the frontrunner. But Elephant Watcher never gave Perry more than a 21% chance of winning the Republican nomination. Even so, Perry was considered competitive with Romney until the debates in September. As time went on, Perry grew worse in the debates and was decisively defeated by Romney after the third debate. Perry's support declined and was cannibalized by a series of other Anti-Romneys, including Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum. Perry completely collapsed after his extraordinary "oops" gaffe during the debate on November 9th. He did not, and could not, recover after that.

Perry is likely to be remembered as one of the worst debaters in American political history. He enjoyed many advantages in the race: Plenty of executive experience, institutional support, money, ease with "retail poliics," and a strong conservative record. But nothing could overcome his poor debate performances. In the future, candidates will recognize the vital importance of the debates, and will hopefully take greater care to prepare for them.

The Campaign Status page has been updated to reflect Perry's departure. Judging by the tenacity of the remaining candidates, this could be the final time the Campaign Status page changes until a candidate secures victory.

Final Pre-South Carolina Debate Tomorrow

CNN will host the latest Republican primary debate tomorrow at 8:00pm Eastern. It will be the candidates' last chance to debate before voting takes place in South Carolina on Saturday. The dynamics of the debate will be similar to the debate on Monday: Mitt Romney is a big favorite to win the nomination and enjoys a comfortable lead in South Carolina polls, and it's up to the other candidates to take him down. The media narrative continues to suggest that if Romney wins in South Carolina, it's all over.

But there is a twist: Newt Gingrich got positive reviews for his debate performance on Monday, and the polls show Gingrich with a substantial lead over Rick Santorum in both South Carolina and Florida. This week, Gingrich said publicly that he would like Santorum and Rick Perry to drop out of the race and endorse him so that the Anti-Romney vote can unite. Santorum and Perry may now be more aware of the fact that it's not enough to take down Romney--they must stop Gingrich, as well. Though Perry knows his own situation is hopeless, Santorum may come to realize that the biggest threat to Santorum is Gingrich, not Romney. If Santorum trails Gingrich by too much, his candidacy will lose all support. But he can survive if he's close enough to Gingrich, even if they both lose to Romney.

It will therefore be important for Santorum to go on the attack against Gingrich. Santorum needs to prove that Gingrich is not the only candidate who can put in a strong debate performance. So far, Gingrich has done well in answering questions, but tends to be a bit weaker when confronted by other candidates in a back-and-forth exchange. Still, as we have seen in previous debates, just because a strategy is optimal doesn't mean a candidate will actually follow it. Santorum may very well continue to attack Romney.

As for Romney, he will once again need to play the role of the gracious frontrunner who is undisturbed by the attacks against him. On Monday, he skillfully parried the attacks against Bain Capital and his history of flip-flopping. He was more hesitant when asked about his tax returns. Since that got some attention, his rivals will surely focus on the tax return issue in tomorrow's debate. Chris Christie, who endorsed Romney and has campaigned for him, has said publicly that he thinks Romney should release the returns. Will Romney be able to effectively answer whether he'll release his tax returns? Romney is undoubtedly preparing for this line of questioning. If Romney has decided that he won't release them, it will be difficult for him to explain why not, without leading voters to worry that he has something to hide.

Finally, Romney must decide whether he should attack Gingrich. Romney has usually preferred to remain positive during the debates, in the belief that as frontrunner the status quo is beneficial. However, Romney may feel threatened enough by Gingrich that if Gingrich attacks him first, he will unleash a counterattack.

Gingrich Leads Santorum: Is It Enough?

Last week, we discussed a scenario in which Newt Gingrich could win South Carolina. For Gingrich to prevail, he needs to have polls showing him develop a substantial lead over Rick Santorum, so that the strategically-minded Anti-Romney vote coalesces behind Gingrich. Along with strong debate performances, a dramatic coalescing of the Anti-Romney vote could put Gingrich over the top. Let's look at the most recent South Carolina polls and see if that scenario is developing:

South Carolina Primary
01/15 Monmouth -- Romney 33, Gingrich 22, Santorum 14, Paul 12
01/15 WeAskAmerica -- Romney 31, Gingrich 18, Paul 12, Santorum 9
01/15 Insider Adv-- Romney 32, Gingrich 21, Paul 14, Santorum 13
01/13 Reuters -- Romney 37, Santorum 16, Paul 16, Gingrich 12
01/13 PPP (D) -- Romney 29, Gingrich 24, Paul 15, Santorum 14
01/12 ARG -- Romney 29, Gingrich 25, Paul 20, Perry 9
01/12 Rasmussen -- Romney 28, Gingrich 21, Santorum 16, Paul 16

Each poll shows Gingrich well behind Mitt Romney. However, Gingrich has a significant lead over Santorum in all but one of the polls (the Reuters poll on January 13th is the sole outlier). Notice also that Rick Perry fails to make the top four in all but one of the polls. If the Anti-Romney voters wish to be strategic, and if Gingrich motivates them enough in the week's two debates, they could rally behind Gingrich.

There are two holes in the scenario right now. First, there has been little or no media attention to the growing gap between Gingrich and Santorum. Recall that in the days before the Iowa Caucus, a lot of media attention was devoted to Santorum's sudden rise in the polls, as the media anticipated Santorum's long-awaited surge. Instead, the media have focused on the fact that Romney enjoys a lead over everyone else. There is still some time: If polls released in the next few days show Santorum dying off, the media will report it and lead to an even greater decline in Santorum's numbers.

The second hole is that Romney is doing quite well. He is not merely edging out Gingrich; he is leading by a significant margin. In some polls, Romney is dangerously close to being ahead by so much that even a significant defection of Santorum votes to Gingrich wouldn't be enough. A significant defection of Perry votes would help close the gap.

Now let's look at the Florida polls:

Florida Primary
01/16 PPP (D) -- Romney 41, Gingrich 26, Santorum 11, Paul 10
01/15 ARG -- Romney 42, Gingrich 25, Santorum 9, Paul 8
01/14 Sunshine/VSS -- Romney 46, Gingrich 20, Santorum 12, Paul 9
01/11 Rasmussen -- Romney 41, Gingrich 19, Santorum 15, Paul 9

Romney has a big lead, but Gingrich has an even bigger lead over Santorum here. Should Gingrich win South Carolina, or take second place there with a big lead over Santorum, he can become the chief Anti-Romney.

Most commentators say that if Romney wins South Carolina, it's all over. But if the Anti-Romney vote remains split in South Carolina, the final test will actually take place in Florida. Unless Gingrich and Santorum are close in South Carolina, Gingrich should be able to get the Anti-Romney vote behind him by Florida. That would be the first time Romney is forced to compete against one rival. If the Anti-Romney vote is united and Romney still wins, it's over, because what more can they do? In Florida, Romney is even closer to the point at which combining the Anti-Romney vote behind one opponent would still result in a Romney victory. Romney's margin would be reduced by a Gingrich win in South Carolina, so it could get interesting.

Who Won the Republican Debate on January 16th?

Tonight, each of the candidates did well in the debate. Newt Gingrich, in particular, got a lot of applause--but so did his opponents. Mitt Romney stands to benefit the most from this, as he would like to see his competition continue to block each other. It's unlikely, for example, that Gingrich's main competitor for the Anti-Romney vote--Rick Santorum--will lose as a result of this debate. Even Rick Perry, who has fared poorly in the debates, did well. Tonight was probably Perry's strongest performance thus far. Since Perry will not win South Carolina, that only serves to take votes from Romney's competition.

In the opening round, the debate moderators went immediately to the issue of the attacks against Bain. Gingrich did not backpedal, but he came close. Instead of pressing Romney on Bain, Gingrich said that he had merely been "asking questions." Romney took the opportunity to put the Bain issue to rest (at least in this debate). That wiped out the main line of attack that had been made against Romney.

In general, the candidates did not really attack Romney. At one point, Santorum threw his weight around by challenging Romney--but it was on the issue of allowing felons to vote. Romney, who was taken by surprise at the question, was against allowing felons to vote, while Santorum was in favor. Santorum wanted to know why Romney didn't change the law in Massachusetts to prevent felons from voting. Santorum looked confident, but it was on a completely tangential matter.

Though many candidates got applause, the problem faced by Romney's competitors is that they needed to either destroy Romney or destroy Romney's competition and become the chief Anti-Romney. In this debate, they failed to do either.

Debate on Fox News Tomorrow

Fox News will host the next primary debate, which takes place tomorrow at 9:00pm Eastern. Tomorrow's debate will be one of two to be held prior to the South Carolina Primary. The second debate will be on Thursday, and the voting will take place in South Carolina on Saturday. It's an important week: By the end of it, we should have a better sense of whether a single opponent can coalesce the Anti-Romney vote, or if Mitt Romney will cruise to victory.

Obviously the two debates represent a final opportunity to derail Romney's candidacy before the South Carolina Primary. Romney will be facing numerous attacks from his opponents. Given the amount of attention focused on Bain over the last week, Romney will be given ample opportunity to defend his tenure at the private equity firm. And Romney's opponents--Newt Gingrich in particular--will be given ample opportunity to criticize what Romney did at Bain.

Romney's best strategy is to focus on the reasons why his experience at Bain makes him an expert at creating jobs. He should avoid being put on the defensive, quickly returning to a specific list of companies Bain helped start and the tens of thousands of jobs created by them. Finally, he should cap his explanation by drawing a contrast between capitalism (represented by Bain) and big-government socialism (represented by those who think capitalism should not involve the risk of failure). If questioned about inaccuracy in attack ads against him, Romney should be able to specifically enumerate the falsehoods.

Gingrich has no choice but to stand by his attacks against Bain. The attacks against Bain may have been ill-considered, since Romney has plenty of vulnerabilities and criticizing those instead wouldn't have backfired. But Gingrich has put too much time and money into the anti-Bain line. If he attempts to change horses midstream and runs away from the anti-Bain narrative, Gingrich will look like he's completely surrendering.

Gingrich must take great care in his attacks against Bain. If he appears to be criticizing capitalism, or appears in any way to be making his attacks from a leftist perspective, it could doom his chances. Remember, Gingrich is attempting to appeal to those voters who think Romney is too far to the left. The debates, particularly tomorrow's debate, will be a crucial test: When Gingrich attacks Bain, will the audience end up booing him? If so, he is in deep trouble.

Though the debate will focus on Romney and Bain, there is another (arguably more important) undercurrent, the battle between Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Each man wants the other to be out of the race so that he can coalesce the Anti-Romney vote. Some recent polling suggested Gingrich pulling ahead of Santorum in South Carolina, which would enable him to take sole possession the Anti-Romney mantle. But there was also a poll (a gross outlier) muddying the waters by showing Santorum ahead of Gingrich. Meanwhile, a group of influential social conservative leaders decided on Saturday that they would be supporting Santorum.

Once again, Romney benefits from that ambiguity. The polls over the next few days will be decisive. Gingrich needs the numbers to show him with a comfortable lead over Santorum. Santorum needs the numbers to show a very quick shift in the opposite direction, so that he can get a comfortable lead over Gingrich in time to get Gingrich's supporters to switch. Otherwise, the vote will end up as it did in New Hampshire, with the two men splitting the Anti-Romney vote and giving Romney a victory. If the polls don't cooperate, it's vital that one or the other demonstrate a clear superiority in the debates. Tomorrow's debate is arguably the more important, because a very strong contrast on Monday could move the poll numbers by the end of the week, while Thursday is too late (polling would take place on Friday and wouldn't be reported practically until the voting begins).

Why Are Early States Allowed to Choose the Nominee?

One of the most common complaints voters have about the primary system is the disproportionate influence that the early states have on the process. Particularly when a voter's favored candidate does poorly, a voter wants to know why a state like Iowa or New Hampshire has such power. This year, for example, many pundits observed that if Mitt Romney wins South Carolina, he wins the nomination. Voters in later states are sometimes upset by things like this, and they wonder why just a few states get to have input.

It's true that the results of the early contests have an influence on the later states. People like a winner, and they don't like a loser. Wins in the early states propel a candidate, and very poor finishes can doom a candidate. But the early states do not exercise as much power as it may appear. The reason is that collectively, early states vote pretty much the same way that later states would collectively vote if given the opportunity. The results of early contests don't simply influence the rest of the country, they also reveal how the country in general will vote.

The early states represent different regions of the country: The Midwest (Iowa), Northeast (New Hampshire), South (South Carolina), and West (Nevada). Aside from South Carolina, they are swing states. Aside from Florida, they are small enough states for most candidates to be able to compete in without needing a lot of money. If one were to switch out Iowa for another Midwestern state, or South Carolina for another Southern state, the results might be a little different, but not that much different.

To factor out any peculiarities in an early state, voters weigh results differently. Where a state is really uniquely favorable to a candidate (e.g., if a former governor of Iowa wins Iowa, or if a black candidate wins South Carolina), people give the state's result less weight. Similarly, they take results more seriously if a candidate wins on unfavorable turf. In the present primary year, South Carolina is one of the most inhospitable states in the country for Romney. That's part of the reason political observers say it's the last chance for Romney to lose: If he can win in an anti-Romney state, he's likely to sweep most of the country.

One more thought about the way early contests reveal how the later states would vote anyway, if given the chance: Imagine a deck of playing cards divided into four stacks of thirteen cards each. The "spades" stack contains mostly spades and a few clubs; the "clubs" stack is mostly clubs and a few spades; the "hearts" stack is mostly hearts and a few diamonds; the "diamonds" stack is mostly diamonds and a few hearts. One of the four stacks is selected at random and represents the winner of the contest. The first two cards of that winning stack are flipped over, revealing two diamonds. At this point, even though only two of the 13 cards have been shown, we can immediately see that "spades" and "clubs" are not going to be the winner. This is analogous to the way the early contests winnow out a few obvious losers. We can also guess that it's very likely that "diamonds" is going to be the winner, though we can't be 100% sure yet.

If the third card is flipped and also shows a diamond, it's almost guaranteed that we are dealing with the "diamonds" stack. We don't need to go down the line and turn over the 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th cards. By the time we're just a few cards in, we know what the later cards will reveal anyway. The only situation in which we would need to see every last card in the stack is if the stack were split almost evenly, with the final card breaking the tie. For our analogy, that would be like a presidential primary where two candidates are extremely close. (For reasons beyond the scope of this post, such a situation is extremely rare. Even in 2008, where Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama fought to the end, Obama was essentially guaranteed to win months before Clinton dropped out.)

Although politically-minded individuals in the later states may wish they got to participate earlier in the primary, they can rest assured that if the order of the states was shuffled, the final outcome would be no different.

South Carolina Scenarios

In the wake of a first place win (or tie) in Iowa, Mitt Romney vaulted to the top of the polls in South Carolina. It was the first time South Carolina had been polled since December 19th, when Newt Gingrich was still falling from his mid-December highs in the polls. The South Carolina polls had shown big leads for Gingrich for about a month, beginning in late November. Prior to that, Herman Cain was the leader in most South Carolina polls, benefiting from Rick Perry's decline in September. Romney only enjoyed a lead in South Carolina during the summer months, after Mike Huckabee announced he was out of the race, and before Perry announced he was in.

Romney's early-January leads in South Carolina polls contribute to the impression that he is an unstoppable frontrunner. The Intrade market even had Romney as a big favorite to win the South Carolina Primary. But is this realistic? What might unfold in the coming days?

Let's consider the range of possibilities. Romney's preferred scenario, naturally, would be to win South Carolina. He would also like Gingrich and Rick Santorum to finish very close together, as they did in New Hampshire. Maintaining a split between his two main rivals would continue to be very useful in Florida. If Romney were to win South Carolina and Florida by anything approaching convincing margins, the competition would essentially be over.

Polling in South Carolina suggests this could happen:

South Carolina Primary
01/11 Insider Adv -- Romney 23, Gingrich 21, Santorum 14, Paul 13
01/09 WeAskAmerica -- Romney 26, Gingrich 21, Santorum 13, Paul 8
01/07 PPP (D) -- Romney 30, Gingrich 23, Santorum 19, Paul 9
01/05 CNN/Time -- Romney 37, Santorum 19, Gingrich 18, Paul 12
01/05 ARG -- Romney 31, Santorum 24, Gingrich 24, Paul 9
01/05 Rasmussen -- Romney 27, Santorum 24, Gingrich 18, Paul 11

The numbers are good for Romney. The earlier polls in this group even show Gingrich and Santorum running close together. And Romney has broken through his mythical 25% ceiling. (Just days ago, it was still popular for pundits to believe in the ceiling; see the Elephant Watcher post from two months ago debunking the myth of Romney's 25-point ceiling.)

All that aside, a reality check is in order. Of the early primary states, South Carolina is the most inhospitable territory for Romney. In 2008, Romney got 25% in Iowa, about 30% in New Hampshire, 30% in Florida...and just 15% in South Carolina, a fourth-place finish. Granted, Romney had devoted fewer resources in South Carolina. Granted also that in 2008, Romney had just lost in Iowa and New Hampshire, as opposed to winning those two states this time around. But in 2008, Romney got twice his South Carolina vote share in Florida, and that was after three losses.

What this means is that if Romney does win, it is likely to be close. Under the circumstances, that would be a big accomplishment. However, the alternative scenario South Carolina presents is also a likely one, and it would unfold something like this:

Romney's worst-case scenario is that by the middle of next week, new polling makes it clear that Gingrich and Santorum are no longer close in South Carolina. Instead, Gingrich--though he may still have trouble out-polling Romney--is definitely out-polling Santorum. In response, in the days just before voting begins, South Carolina's Anti-Romney voters shift from Rick Perry and Santorum over to Gingrich, whom they are now convinced is the most likely candidate to beat Romney in that state. (The two debates next week may facilitate this.) The Anti-Romney voting having coalesced, Gingrich beats Romney and declares himself "the comeback kid" (or Gingrich's preferred version, "the comeback grandparent"). Pundits give Gingrich credit, and say variations of "the voters don't want this thing to be over yet, they're not sold on Romney," etc. Santorum's numbers slip, and Gingrich goes into Florida with a more convincing argument that he is the sole Anti-Romney. Indeed, it's arguably worse for Romney to come in second place than in third, because then Gingrich has even more clearly beaten Santorum.

Everything is up to the polling. For that scenario to occur, Gingrich must get a substantial lead over Santorum in South Carolina polls over the next several days.

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.

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.

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.

Who Will Win the South Carolina Primary?

About five months ago, during the July doldrums of the primary season, we considered different scenarios to answer the question who will win the South Carolina primary. Since then, the race changed with the departure of Chris Christie and Tim Pawlenty. The absence of these candidates eliminates the "united party" scenario and the "electable Tea Partier" scenario. More recently, the collapse of Rick Perry and Herman Cain (and the collapse of Michele Bachmann in Iowa) also make the "unelectable Anti-Romney" scenario much less likely.

This leaves two scenarios, reflecting the two-man race we now see in the polls: Either Mitt Romney secures his frontrunner status with wins in Iowa and New Hampshire and goes on to win South Carolina, or a "moderately electable" Newt Gingrich wins Iowa and goes to South Carolina to break the tie (after Romney wins New Hampshire).

The following is the race as it stands in the most recent South Carolina polls:

South Carolina Primary
12/04 Winthrop -- Gingrich 38, Romney 22, Perry 9, Cain 7
11/28 ARG -- Gingrich 33, Romney 22, Cain 10, Paul 8
11/28 Insider Adv -- Gingrich 38, Romney 15, Cain 13, Paul 7
11/21 Polling Co. (R) -- Gingrich 31, Cain 17, Romney 16

Unfortunately, unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, there has been little polling in South Carolina. Even more unfortunately, there have been no polls taken there since Cain dropped out of the race. We can assume that Gingrich will get a chunk of the departing Cain votes, but it's also possible that a Tea Partier could pick up some of the votes.

None of the pollsters listed above has a sterling reputation. But it's clear that Gingrich enjoys a substantial starting advantage over Romney. Gingrich is--for now--perceived as more conservative than Romney, and Gingrich hails from the South. More importantly, South Carolina is influenced by the winners of Iowa and New Hampshire. For the moment, Gingrich is doing better than Romney in Iowa. For Romney to win South Carolina, there must either be a tremendous crash in Gingrich's campaign, or Romney must win Iowa.

Gingrich's campaign is untested, and it could crash. One should never assume such a crash unless the candidate is perceived as highly unelectable (like Cain or Bachmann). Unless or until the race changes dramatically, it's likely that Gingrich will prevail in South Carolina.

Intrade Odds: Mitt Romney Dominates the Competition

Now that Chris Christie and Sarah Palin have finally departed, it's time for another look at the Intrade odds. It has been just over two weeks since the Republican primary debate on September 22nd, after which Rick Perry suffered a tremendous loss in support. There has been ample time for that development to sink in for the Intrade market on the 2012 Republican nomination.

Mitt Romney's lead has grown, especially since Christie's odds vaporized. Romney has climbed to 61.5%. That's more than double what he had prior to the September debates, and actually much higher than any candidate--including Romney himself--posted earlier this year. Before now, frontrunners tended to top out at about 40%.

Intrade investors have experienced no second thoughts about Perry's decline. In fact, Perry's support has eroded several more points since last time we checked: Perry is down to 19.1%. Thus, Romney has more than triple the odds of his nearest competitor. Interestingly, the Intrade odds on the nomination are beginning to look much more like Elephant Watcher's assessment of the odds of each candidate winning the Republican primary.

In third place, Herman Cain has 7.0%, and everyone else is under 5%. Cain has benefited from some good polling recently, but Intrade investors are clearly skeptical about his chances. They still perceive Perry to be in second place. Michele Bachmann is far behind at 1.4%. The investors have little faith in Rick Santorum's ability to break out of the pack: He's at 0.5%. This reflects the Intrade markets' emphasis on polling data. Santorum may have gotten some attention at recent debates, but his poll numbers have gone nowhere--yet.

Finally, a shift has occurred for the first time in the Intrade markets on the individual state contests. In the Iowa Intrade market, Perry's advantage has shrunk to 41% over Romney's 27%. Bachmann, who once dominated the Iowa polls, is down to 18%. Cain has only an 11% chance, which clearly reflects some error in the Intrade market. If Cain has a 7% chance of winning the nomination, surely he should have greater than an 11% chance of winning Iowa, which would be crucial for him?

The New Hampshire Intrade market has Romney dominating with nearly an 80% chance to win. No one else is even in double-digits there.

The news is much better for Perry in the South Carolina Intrade market, where he is given 71% to Romney's 30%. There's also evidence of market inefficiency here, as Cain is given only 12.5%. (The total figures don't always add up to 100% due to the difference between buy and sell orders on low-volume markets.)

The Florida Intrade market is interesting. It has Perry and Romney tied at about 40% each. Florida often serves as a tie-breaker, and surely if Romney had as great a chance at winning the nomination as Intrade believes, Romney ought to be the favorite in Florida. The latest Florida primary polls also show Romney ahead. The Intrade market may reflect an assumption that Perry has an advantage in a Southern state, and perhaps that Romney would prevail in a drawn-out contest, even if Perry wins the tie-breaker.

Intrade Odds: Mitt Romney Retakes the Lead

After Rick Perry entered the race and jumped to a big lead in all the national primary polls, Intrade odds put Rick Perry in first. But in the wake of Perry's first debate appearance, the Intrade market on the 2012 Republican nomination has shifted considerably.

At Perry's height, he was at roughly 39%, with Romney down to 30%, and everyone else in single-digits. As is usually the case, the Intrade market reflected the latest national primary polls, and the conventional wisdom that the primary was a two-man race with Perry in front. Since the debate, Mitt Romney has retaken the lead. It is interesting to see how the market has changed, even though no new polls have been conducted to show Romney in the lead (yet). Instead, Intrade's reaction was based entirely upon its verdict of who won the debate.

Intrade has Romney in the lead--albeit a very small lead--at 37.7%. Perry is on his heels at 36.4%. It's essentially a coin-flip between the two men. Elephant Watcher is now curious to see how Intrade will react to the next primary debate, to be held in a few days.

All of the other candidates are still in single-digits: Jon Huntsman, despite his poor poll numbers, is at 6.1%. Sarah Palin, not in the race, has teased her way to 5.4%. The biggest change is Michele Bachmann, who had been something of a third wheel by virtue of her strong poll numbers in Iowa. Bachmann has collapsed completely, down to 2.9%. Perry's candidacy, perhaps combined with Bachmann's irrelevance in the September 7th debate, has mortally wounded Bachmann in Intrade's eyes.

Do the Intrade markets on the early primaries reflect these changes? Yes. Before, Bachmann and Perry were approximately tied in the Iowa Caucus market. Now Perry dominates her, 52.0% to 20.0%. And without Iowa, Bachmann is nothing. Intrade's South Carolina market has Perry at 65.0% and Bachmann at merely 4.0%.

That explains Bachmann's fall, but what about Romney's tie with Perry in the odds of winning the nomination? The New Hampshire market has Romney with a huge lead, 60.0% to Perry's 24.5%. Thus, Intrade investors expect Perry to win Iowa and South Carolina, Romney to win New Hampshire, and a completely hazy future following those contests.

The State of the States

A few days ago we did a round-up of the latest national 2012 Republican primary polls. The primary will actually take place in a series of state-by-state contests, with each state's results influencing subsequent contests. This means it is more important to look at the state of the race in each state. If history is any indication, the results of the first four contests will shape the rest of the primary--if not decide the winner completely.

Today, we will examine the latest polls in each of the four early primaries. Polls which were conducted after Rick Perry's entry on August 13th will be in bold, as they are the ones which should be taken most seriously.

As always, all of the early state primary polls can be found on the Primaries page.

Iowa Caucus
08/23 Magellan (R) -- Perry 24, Bachmann 22, Romney 19, Paul 9
08/22 WPA (R-Perry) -- Perry 23, Bachmann 20, Romney 16, Paul 9
08/21 PPP (D) -- Perry 21, Romney 18, Bachmann 15, Paul 12
08/04 Rasmussen -- Bachmann 22, Romney 21, Paul 16, Perry 12
07/12 Magellan (R) -- Bachmann 29, Romney 16, Pawlenty 8, Cain 8
07/11 ARG -- Bachmann 21, Romney 18, Paul 14, Palin 11
07/07 Mason-Dixon -- Bachmann 32, Romney 29, Pawlenty 7, Santorum 6

In Iowa, Perry holds onto a small lead over Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney. What's most clear is that Bachmann has fallen as Perry gained, and that both Bachmann and Romney are within striking distance of first place.

Time favors electable candidates, as voters make strategic decisions toward the end of the race. That's good for Romney and bad for Perry and (especially) Bachmann. The good news for Perry is that voters also tend to leave low-polling candidates at the very end. If Perry is able to get a substantial lead over Bachmann, her support will fall away at the last moment and rally around Perry.

Assuming Chris Christie doesn't jump into the race, either Perry or Romney could win Iowa. For the moment, the odds favor Perry, but not overwhelmingly.

New Hampshire Primary
08/16 Magellan (R) -- Romney 36, Perry 18, Paul 14, Bachmann 10
07/13 ARG -- Romney 29, Bachmann 12, Giuliani 9, Palin 8
07/05 PPP (D) -- Romney 25, Bachmann 18, Palin 11, Paul 9
07/01 UNH/WMUR -- Romney 35, Bachmann 12, Paul 7, Giuliani 7

Thus far, Romney has always managed to hold a giant lead in New Hampshire. Were he to win Iowa, his lead would grow further, and he would likely win the Republican nomination with ease. If Perry wins Iowa, Perry's numbers in New Hampshire will likely increase; Bachmann's defeat to Perry in Iowa would also result in Bachmann's numbers (such as they are) in New Hampshire to decrease. Thus, a Perry win in Iowa would make the contest in New Hampshire closer.

At this time, no one expects a winner in New Hampshire other than Romney. Instead, pundits will focus on the size of his win. If Perry comes close in New Hampshire, Romney will be seen as losing to an extent.

Nevada Caucus
07/31 PPP (D) -- Romney 31, Perry 18, Bachmann 10, Palin 10

Almost no polling has been conducted in Nevada (and none after Perry's entry), which reflects the lesser importance that Nevada is usually given, despite its place in the schedule. In 2008, Romney easily carried Nevada, thanks to overwhelming support from the Mormon vote. As with New Hampshire, pundits--to the extent that they consider the results in Nevada much at all--will be looking at the size of Romney's win.

South Carolina Primary
08/23 Magellan (R) -- Perry 31, Romney 20, Bachmann 14, Cain 9
07/17 ARG -- Romney 25, Palin 16, Bachmann 13, Cain 10

Very little polling has been done in South Carolina. Its polling does not seem to be a twin of Iowa's, mainly owing to Bachmann's lesser strength here than Iowa, the state of her birth. If Bachmann loses to Perry in Iowa, Perry's lead over her in South Carolina will balloon. Bachmann's candidacy could be crushed here, removing her as a threat to Perry. (That doesn't necessarily mean she will quit the race, however.)

Perry, as the Southerner in the race, is expected to win in South Carolina. In some ways, South Carolina is the reverse of New Hampshire; people will scrutinize the size of Perry's win. If Romney gets close, it will be a loss of sorts for Perry.