Redstate

McCain won the registered Rs in NH which has known Romney for a long time. Most of the population is in the MA media market and yet McCain stole the state away. I can't think of another MA politician to run for President and lose NH (Dukakis, Kerry).

Then MI is practically home for Romney. If McCain hadn't won NH, no one would expect him to win MI over Romney. So I don't think it hurts him a lot.

What it does, is stop the front runner talk. He had been favored in MI, slightly favored in SC, and slightly favored in FL. If he made that run, he would be an obvious front runner.

Now it seems more likely that McCain takes NH, Romney takes MI, Huck takes IA and SC, and Rudy takes FL. That would favor Rudy's strategy very nicely.

But after the NH win, McCain has no reason to bail before 2/5. And although SC is not a friendly place for McCain, he still might take 2nd or 3rd. And FL has him very close to Rudy right now so he could take 1st or 2nd there.

A Romney win mainly keeps the field split and the possibility of a split 2/5 continues to be real. Furthermore, if 4 real candidates make it to 2/5, then the possibility of no majority delegate holder becomes much more likely than if 3 candidates make it to 2/5.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I'm not sold on NH being the upset your making it out to be. McCain dominated there in 2000 and is a house hold name, which helped him tremendously. I also think you are underestimating Michigan. McCain is barely clinging to front runner status as is, and that momentum can be seen in these latest polls. If he loses, kiss that goodbye. Without that win McCain is just another strong candidate, but one without a steady base. Independents and democrats can't be counted on forever. He had better win Michigan.

"Go ahead, make your jokes, Mr. Jokey... Joke-maker. But let me hit you with some knowledge. Quit now". -White Goodman

and other points of order.

Let's get a couple things a bit more accurate.

First, contrary to Adam C., McCain did not win Republicans in New Hampshire. It appears from exit polling that Romney and McCain ran even among registered Republicans, or that Romney may have had a very slight edge.

Second, it is something of an exaggeration, at best, to say as Adam C. does that Michigan is "practically home for Romney."

Romney has not lived in Michigan in over 40 years, and his father left the Governor's office 39 years ago. Yes, there are some older Republicans who still remember George Romney fondly, but you pretty much have to be 50 years old or more. Nor has the Romney name held any magic for Michigan voters since Governor Romney left office. Lenore Romney (George's wife) ran for U.S. Senate in 1970 and lost by a large margin. Ronna Romney, Mitt's sister-in-law, lost the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in 1994. In 1996, Ronna Romney won the GOP nomination but lost the general election to Carl Levin 58%-40%. Mitt's brother, Scott Romney, was defeated in the GOP primary in a race for Michigan Attorney General in 1998. Scott Romney did win an 8 year term to the Michigan State University Board of Trustees in 2000. Overall, the Romney name hasn't fared too well in Michigan politics.

Third, Turning to South Carolina, Adam C. says it's "not a friendly place for McCain." Hogwash. It may not McCain-friendly like New Hampshire and Michigan, but McCain was the early leader in the polls there (just as he was most everywhere), and the state has a large population of both veterans and active duty soldiers. In fact, so good did McCain feel about South Carolina when he officially launched his first campaign back in September of 1999 that, the Washington Post reported, "McCain made the decision this summer to ignore Iowa, whose caucuses come eight days before the Feb. 8 New Hampshire primary, in a calculated gamble that he can derail Bush's bandwagon here [New Hampshire], where independents play a significant role in the GOP primary, and in South Carolina with its large community of military veterans.... In South Carolina, where McCain will campaign Tuesday, local observers also rate him the main challenger to Bush." (Wash. Post, Sep. 28, 1999.) As another South Carolina correspondent noted at the time, "Mr. McCain has said South Carolina is crucial to his staying in the Republican race. He has focused resources here partly because of the large number of active and retired military personnel." (Southeastern Newspapers Corporation, Sep. 29, 1999.) He also has the support of the State's popular Senior Senator, Lindsey Graham, and more endorsements from the state legislature than any other candidate. Senator McCain ought to be able to win convincingly in both Michigan and South Carolina.

Romney will obviously be hurt if doesn't win in Michigan, but a Romney win stops McCain cold, and a Romney loss doesn't yet spell the end. A Romney defeat could quite likely still leave him as the overall delegate leader and, much more importantly, the cash on hand leader. He will have the cash to carry on, at least to Nevada on the 19th, where he will probably win the caucuses and increase his delegate lead. And that point, the race will be further scrambled by South Carolina results, and one can take stock of who has the cash, organization, and votes to carry on. A Romney win in Michigan, on the other hand, is a body blow to McCain and probably assures Romney a strong finish in South Carolina and a win in Nevada.

A McCain win in Michigan, meanwhile, will give him some added momentum, but quite likely not enough to carry him forward as future primaries become Republican affairs. Huckabee or Thompson could still knock him off in South Carolina, and he won't be competitive in the Nevada caucuses. A McCain defeat in Michigan will leave him short of cash and in serious trouble heading into South Carolina.

Originally, Romney was supposed to win only by winning Iowa and New Hampshire. But in fact, what we're seeing is that Romney is the only Republican running a truly national campaign and competing everywhere. McCain skips Iowa; Huckabee is a weak third in New Hampshire and probably again in Michigan. Giuliani is skipping everything so far. Thompson made no effort in New Hampshire or Michigan.

An interesting primary season, to be sure.

Brad Smith
Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
Capital University website
Center for Competitive Politics website

From your CNN link:

McCain 37
Romney 33

Sure it was close, but if those were flipped there would be incessant "McCain only won because of the Independents" diaries and stories. McCain won registered Rs in NH.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Vote by party ID in New Hampshire favored Romney, 35-34, per CNN.

Brad Smith
Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
Capital University website
Center for Competitive Politics website

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what is the difference between "Party Registration" and "Party ID?" I think I understand what party registration means (even though we don't have that in Texas). But what is party ID, since it's apparently different from party registration.

But that won't stop you from continually peddling this myth that McCain somehow has the ear of the conservative base, by suggesting he won registered R's. Who cares, he does not have the respect of the base, it is so patently obvious.

I'm just curious, if McCain loses, will you back Romney?

McCain beat out Romney among Republican voters in NH, 35% to 33%

McCain came in 2nd among conservatives 31% to Romney's 38%

McCain beat out Romney among people who described themselves as "somewhat conservative" which makes sense.

But even though Romney beat out all others in the "very conservative" category... if you look at McCain and Huckabee together they split the same amount of the "very conservative" vote that Romney got.

McCain would have lost without the strong Republican and conservative support he got. It made up the largest share of his support.