Campaign Notes: Remember Kerry

By John Barron

Two months out from the Iowa caucuses — the first vote in the eleven month electoral process to elect the President of the United States one year from now — it’s time to size up the field.

For campaign watchers, the improbable rise of businessman Herman Cain to Republican presidential frontrunner-or-close-to-it status affords us the chance to ponder freely upon all sorts of previous and current improbabilities for nomination.

If history is our guide, any long-shot, especially a conservative long-shot seeking the GOP's nomination, needs to do well in first-to-vote Iowa, whose state party has confirmed they will caucus on January 3rd — a week before the first primary in New Hampshire and a month earlier than the RNC originally scheduled.

Iowans of both political stripes seem to have a soft spot for insurgencies; George McGovern, Jimmy Carter, George Bush Sr., Pat Buchanan, Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama all surprised better-funded establishment candidates in Iowa.

As a rule, caucus-goers don't like to be told who the nominee is before they vote, but as Democrats who turned off Howard Dean and on to John Kerry in late 2003 and early 2004 proved, Iowans also like to back a winner. They have been-known to fall in behind a candidate they see as more electable.

But does winning Iowa even matter?

Sometimes it matters a lot, but usually not that much.

It was crucial in 2008 to Barack Obama’s victory over Hillary Clinton. Coming second to "Uncommitted" in 1976 helped propel Jimmy Carter to the nomination over a field that included Scoop Jackson, Mo Udall, and Birch Bayh.

But along with Texas Governor George W. Bush in 2000, Obama and Carter are the only three Iowa caucus winners in contested years to win the White House. Significantly, eleven others failed to go all the way.

Yet "winning" Iowa shouldn't really be seen as simply being about whether you come first or not. It's as much about where you were expected to finish by media pundits and whether you exceeded those expectations. For frontrunner Ed Muskie in 1972, narrowly winning Iowa was effectively a loss to the strong, second-placed George McGovern.

Iowa is really about winnowing the field. The old saying goes, “There are three tickets out of Iowa: first, second, and coach”.

So, who will "win" in Iowa in 2012?

On the Democratic side that’s easy: Barack Obama will be effectively uncontested.

As for the GOP, the Real Clear Politics average of Iowa polls has Herman Cain well in front, although the latest Des Moines Register poll has his lead shrinking to just one per cent over Mitt Romney.

Romney has been playing down expectations in the state after his failed $25 million Iowa strategy was undone by Mike Huckabee in 2008. For him, a solid second in Iowa will be a "win" leading into New Hampshire a week later, where he is expected to — and must — really win.

If Romney can overcome the questions surrounding his conservatism and Mormon faith and come first in Iowa he could have himself a one-two knockout of Cain, Perry or anyone else still in the contest.

At this point in 2003, when it was the Democrats seeking to find a candidate to unseat an incumbent, the eventual winner in Iowa, and of the nomination, Senator John Kerry, was at just nine per cent. Here’s where the speculation can come in!

Who of all of those in single-digits in Iowa could be the bolter?

One recent Iowa poll had former House Speaker Newt Gingrich suddenly overtaking [PDF] Ron Paul and moving into third behind Cain and Romney. On average, he's now fourth, but seems to be gaining among disaffected Bachmann and Perry supporters.

Gingrich has the potential to be the surprise-packet in Iowa next January if he gets a clear run among a pack of fading conservatives. (I outlined my basis for assuming Herman Cain will probably fall back in a recent post, and that was before “Cigarette-Gate”.) 

For all his personal and political baggage and Tiffany's expense accounts, Newt Gingrich has managed to seem more mature and intelligent that some of his rivals — sort of “Cranky Professor” rather than Presidential, but substantial nonetheless.

For many Iowan caucus-goers he could be the perfect candidate: an establishment-insurgent. Prepare for Newt-vember!

It’s not impossible to imagine a scenario whereby, if Gingrich beats Romney or Cain to second place in Iowa — or even manages a Kerry-esque December Surge to win — the momentum could further lift his support in the states that follow. A Mason-Dixon poll now has Newt third in New Hampshire, and he's up to fourth in the Real Clear Politics average in South Carolina.

Could a Republican electorate still not sold on Romney, and flirting with various fly-by-nighters like Bachmann, Perry, and Cain, finally settle on Newt Gingrich, the one candidate who has been saying pretty much the same stuff for more than 20 years?

Stranger things have happened... but not too often.

Who else could break from the pack between now and January 3rd?

Senator Rick Santorum is exactly the kind of ultra–social conservative who tends to out-perform expectations in Iowa — not just Huckabee in ’08 but the likes of former Reagan advisor Gary Bauer, who in 1999-2000 earned a serious second-look in the Hawkeye state.

Santorum is way back at 5 per cent — bettering only Jon Huntsman right now — but that could change. Unlike Herman Cain, Santorum has actually done a lot of retail politicking in Iowa this year, and that could pay dividends. Iowans like to be courted and many think Herman has been phoning it in.

Michele Bachmann last week made one of the canniest Iowa politicos, Eric Woolson, her campaign manager in the state, clearly hoping he can craft a win for her just as he did for George W. Bush in 2000 and Mike Huckabee in 2008 (and was unable to do for his first client this year Tim Pawlenty). But it remains to be seen whether Bachmann can recapture the support that peaked after her straw poll win in Ames in early August.

Then there’s Ron Paul. He’s consistently top three because of his ideological purity, but always flaky enough on foreign policy to plateau below the top tier.

Jon Huntsman knew from the outset that as both a moderate Republican and a Mormon there would never be any leftovers from Romney’s support base unless the Mitt-bot blew a fuse.

So that just leaves Rick Perry — becalmed at 7 per cent, according to the Register. He’s being written off.

But remember John Kerry...

31 October 2011