Redstate

....I love it when people qualify Romney's polling numbers with something. It's a very crowded, competitive field on the Republican side, and Huckabee is a good communicator. He has basically lived in Iowa since January.

Nobody expects anyone to run away with these primaries, but you can't deny that Mitt is best positioned as things stand today. He's got the support, the money, and the best organization.

Mitt has been attacked and scrutinized since day 1 of this process. Huck has received nothing but fawning and glowing media coverage until now. We'll see how he holds up against the microscope.

Hey, may the best man win!

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

Nor do I deny he is in the best position. I just wonder where exactly all that money and all that "great reaction" is going.

Romney's been up and down for the last few months. It's not really a "surge" - that implies that his support has markedly increased. His lead has grown - but that seems as much to do with the other candidates dropping back some than to Romney collecting all kinds of new voters.

Thompson, household name, and got lots of free press when he came late to the party. Was pronounced the great conservative hope.

McCain. Also has been getting great press for eight years, and even heavily campaigned there in 2000.

Rudy, also has had lots of great press including being Mayor of NY.

Huckabee, got lots of free press after his second place finish in the straw poll. Has been the darling of the MSM. Mostly with hopes that he would derail Romney.

So as you can see, all Romney money does is allowing him to have a even playing field.

Is that a joke? Polls have shown Thompson is far from a household name. And the "free press" is virtually gone as he gets shut out.

Rudy had great press - 6 years ago - Romney has been running ads in Iowa constantly for the last year. And yey he has been stuck at the same numbers for several months.

I agree, Romney's early money (meaning the stuff he did in January and into the spring) levelled the field to get his name out. Now his name is out there but he's settled in between 25 and 30% with no noticeable growth in support for months. Yet he's still pouring money into the state at a time when Giuliani has basically conceded the state and McCain is just starting to get anybody to notice him after a summer and fall that saw him virtually written off.

So, it seems Romney is not getting a particularly good return on his current investments. And if McCain does regain any traction he could see even a negative return.

And after millions of dollars worth of free press since he has come in second in the summer straw poll, he has a ceiling of between 16 and 18 percent.

a ceiling at 2-3 %

then a ceiling at 6%

then a ceiling at 13%

Now a ceiling at 16-18%..

So interesting Romney's folk would bring that up when Romney peaked at 15% Nationally months ago.

Maybe if he could spend $10+ million in each state he would break 20%?

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

The point was on Huckabee hitting "a ceiling"

If you want, we can discuss the same in Iowa, NH, SC or elsewhere: Huckabee's numbers continue to rise even with the continued disingenuous attacks from Romney and Thompson.

Mitt on the other hand can't break 30% in Iowa for the life of him, and he's been there since day 1, spending well over $10 million (compared to <$500,000 for Huckabee)

1. If the point was about a ceiling, then you replied to the wrong comment.
2. You are the one who brought-up Romney's national poll numbers - which are less than useless at this point.
3. Keep whining about disingenuous attacks - who knows, maybe someday someone will write a "The Trouble with Mike Huckabee" series. (As an aside, you've been here plenty long enough to see Romney get the snot beaten out of him daily on this site, in no small part from some hard-core SoCons - so, how's it feeling now that the shoe's on the other foot?)
4. And yes - please do keep bringing-up how much money Romney is spending. That will go a good long way toward convincing FisCons that your guy really isn't a pro-life John Edwards.

Adios.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

reldim brought it up at top. Missed that. Withdrawn.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

It does appear that Romney has hit a ceiling of about 30% for the time being. Thing is though, in a 5-or-so way race, you don't need much more than 30% to win. To wit:

JMac and Fred: 10% each
Rudy: 15%
RP and others: 8%

That's 43% of the electorate spoken-for without taking into account the two front-runners. When you factor-in the roughly 9% who is "undecided" at the moment, that's more than half the electorate right there.

If you peg Romney at his "ceiling" of 30%, that means Huckabee (my presumptive #2 in Iowa) maxes-out at 27% if he sweeps every single undecided voter into his column and doesn't lose any in the process. In other words, unless Huck starts taking voters away from the other candidates, there simply are not enough voters left for him to overtake Romney even at his seemingly low ceiling of 30%.

I'm sure that's not nearly as comfortable as the Romney people would like it at this point, but I still have to think they're pretty happy with how their Grand Strategy™ appears to be working.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

So your point, I assume, is that Romney just needs to sit on the lead on run the clock out?

You'd think he'd want to do everything possible to increase his share of the vote. A win is nice, but a bigger win would be better.

The expectations game matters. If Romney wins but falls short of what was expected, how much coverage is that going to get? You don't want every story to have the natural deflator that is "but it wasn't as good as expected." Just look at what happens when economic indicators are released that show job growth, but less growth than the analysts expected.

Still too much time on the clock. I'd want, as a candidate, to see indications that support is growing. That I was gaining some of the other guys' voters. Not just avoiding losing any.

....he isn't taking anything for granted, and he is monitoring each and every little development and strategizing his next move. Believe me, this is a meticulous strategist, consultant, and executive. He's not going to get complacent here.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

At some point, with 5+ people in the race, you reach a "magic number" level of support well below a majority where you simply cannot win any more votes because you're bumping up against they other folks' "true believers" - but you still tie up enough of your own that others could never catch you.

And in this race, I happen to think 29% or there-about is that "magic number".

That's all I'm saying.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Trying to tear down Romney for a 30% ceiling in a five-way race is like trying to tear down a candidate for a 65%-70% ceiling in a two-way race. It's meaningless. 30% support in a five-way race is a winning position, given fairly regular underlying preference orderings.

That doesn't mean Romney should be complacent, and as others have pointed out, he isn't. Romney's holding his position despite Huckabee (Iowa's darling) getting a big momentum boost and free media, and the anonymous attacks being conducted against Romney in Iowa right now.

There are Rasmussen Reports polls, and then there are the rest. You can pretty much bank on Rasmussen while the rest are more or less amusing.

American Research Group is a terrible, terrible polling firm. SUSA polls better in some states than others. They poll Maryland real well for some reason. I don't really know much about Research 2000.

Rasmussen Reports, however, is the gold standard in political polling.

that would be..."you can't just say that he is (losing) steam!" Thanks

Statistics are based on number of people contacted not how many days. Second, the poll that shows Huckabee within 2 points was taken partially over the weekend, which is notorious for be inaccurate.

So let's see, ARG conducts a telephone poll of 600 likely caucus goers over a 4-day period and gets one result - a result that is a clear outlier from all other polling to date.

Rassmussen conducts a telephone poll 825 Likely Republican Caucus Participants (a 37.5% larger sample, by the way) over a 1-day period and gets a result that is, more or less, in line with everyone other than ARG.

And there you have it.

Oh, and FWIW, ARG sucks.

YMMV.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Just like you can continue to deny Huckabee's got a real shot at winning.

It's still a bit of a stretch to say that Huckabee's not in a very close 2nd to Romney in Iowa, after spending more than twenty times less money.

So how much money is Romney willing to spend on his campaign again?

....Huck and his supporters are flat out jealous that Romney has vast personal resources. Who cares how much he spends? Are you saying that if Huckabee had unlimited millions he WOULDN'T spend them? Yeah right, Huck would be spending money like mad if he could raise it.

True to form like the class warrior he is, Huck is flat-out unabashadly playing the victim card and the class warfare card by calling Mitt out for spending money. Huckabee would spend that money and then some if he could. Don't even try to say he wouldn't.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

You can call it an outlier all you want

Gee, thanks bud. That it happens to be notwithstanding, of course.

Just like you can continue to deny Huckabee's got a real shot at winning.

And I've done this where?

It's still a bit of a stretch to say that Huckabee's not in a very close 2nd to Romney in Iowa

1) I've not said this
2) Define "close"

...after spending more than twenty times less money. So how much money is Romney willing to spend on his campaign again?

Yeah! More class warfare rhetoric! Let's complain about the rich guy spending money - yep, that's gonna to win me over.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

It's easy to deny that Huckabee's got a real shot at winning simply because....
He doesn't have a shot at winning!

You can whine all you want about Romney spending money, but the thing is that the money he's spending is working! Don't be jealous just because Huck can't raise the cash. The only reason Huckabee is still in the race is to gain enough street cred to be considered as a runningmate.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
-Winston Churchill

It is easy to be a critic. So, What are we doing to make a difference? I hope we are doing more than pointing fingers and being critical!

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

There aren't any ballots at our caucuses, but I don't live in Iowa. We just use blank pieces of paper. If there are printed ballots they might be different at every location.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

Might make a difference in NH.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

The Orange Bowl. If it's a good match-up, don't be surprised if women dominate the caucuses. I'll let someone else enlighten me as to what that would do to the polls, but my guess is it'd help Romney.

www.republicansenate.org

...to win. :-)

...to win. :-)

Work the plan.

Rudy doesn't give a hoot about Iowa. He will finish in top 3 without spending a dime or any time there.

So how much has Romney spent in Iowa so far? LOL

The day after Iowa Rudy will win or place 2nd in Michigan...also essentially without spending a dime.

Then two weeks later....Florida. Your boy Mitt will be wishing he was back in Iowa by then.

Then the final coup de grace. Tsunami Tuesday.
California
Illinois
New York
New Jersey

So, in closing, I highly encourage you to enjoy the Great Romney Iowa Campaign of 2008 while the wheels are still on the wagon. Because Iowa will prove to be the nadir of Romney run for the WH.

:)

HTML Help for Red Staters

if you'll confess that Romney is buying Iowa.

Neither truth will matter much in the end.
Rudy is going to beat the striped pants off Romney.
Cheers.
Sy

..."buying" Iowa meaning running TV ads, hiring the best and brightest staff, opening offices all over the state, spending money on travel and campaign events? In other words, doing the things that it takes to win. Money doesn't equal victory, either. Think Steve Forbes, think Phil Gramm. The candidate and the message are what leads to support - money just helps get that message out and introduce the candidate to as many people as possible.

It's funny that this money issue is always brought up, as if the other candidates had it they wouldn't spend it too. Other candidates are just flat-out jealous that Romney is rich and can spend millions of dollars of his own money when they can't.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

Or did I miss the memo that eliminated Jan. 4th through 14th?

Iowa Caucuses - Jan. 3rd.
Michigan Primary - Jan. 15th (?) - earliest, assuming favorable action by court or legislature, otherwise Jan. 26th (convention).

My calendar says the day after Jan. 3rd is the 4th, and based on what I know, nobody will be winning Michigan on Jan. 4th.

And you seem to forget that there are 3 other states (well 4) between IA and "Tsunami Tuesday" - Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina (the 4th is Wyoming but it's convention system is almost impossible to predict). Right now Romney is leading in NH, Rudy's got NV, and SC is a toss-up.