Ruffini's Insightful Analysis
The Money Myth and The Huckabee/Romney Myth
By Adam C Posted in 2008 — Comments (29) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Patrick Ruffini may be a budding Michael Barone and his analysis is often detailed and strong. He has two articles worth your attention. First, he works on debunking the Money Myth that it would take $100M to compete in the primary. McCain has spent about $40M and even if he implodes, he has been competitive.
And second, the Huck/Romney Myth that analyzes the FL returns to understand why Huckabee's voters are more likely to support McCain than Romney.
Excerpts below:
Money Myth:
In Romney’s case, all the money he pumped in probably dried up low-dollar fundraising. Why part with $50 or $100 or your hard earned money when the candidate is doing it all for you?...
While this has been a good problem for Romney to have, it leaves him in the position he is now: with no grassroots base of financial support as he grapples with an uphill February 5th battle. A similar predicament left Rudy even more grievously wounded.
The irony is that Romney could easily have turned his self-funding into an asset. All they had to was launch an e-mail campaign with the tried-and-true donor match technique: "... for every dollar you contribute, I will personally match it with two of my own. That’s right — you can triple your impact. Your $50 will become $150. Your $300 will become $900.” That would have vested people in the campaign, and let them know that despite Romney’s massive personal contributions, their support still mattered. The snowball effect this would have started could have kept them going at full steam into Super Tuesday.
Because Rudy was unusually dependent on finger-in-the-wind high-dollar fundraising, his collapse was quick and stunning. It was this lack of resources that backed them into the Florida strategy.
Fred Thompson offers an interesting counterpoint. Between Iowa and South Carolina, Thompson raised $1.2 million on the Internet through the red truck on his homepage. John Edwards raised $3 million online in the month of January. This was at a point when these candidates were walking dead. A candidate who relies on traditional fundraising will see it all dry up under similar circumstances....
How did Fred do it? Remember when I made a big deal about his announcing online? I knew it would pay dividends down the road, expanding their ability to reach diehards who would give no matter what. The announcement video attracted tens of thousands of new online supporters. At $10 an address, they’d be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars — and that’s a conservative estimate....
Overall, this has also been the year that low-dollar, primarily online fundraising officially eclipsed high-dollar fundraising. Obama beat Hillary in the money chase because of online. Ron Paul beat everyone in Q4 because of online. Online enables lower-tier candidates like Huckabee to be competitive and was the only reason Fred Thompson had any ads up in Iowa and South Carolina at all. Leveraging this opportunity demands a certain type of candidate and a certain type of campaign. One that patiently works to nurture an active online community without initially asking for money. One that dials up candidate energy to get online energy, and is, to borrow a phrase, “fired up and ready to go.”
I hope that future candidates and political operatives learn the right lessons from this. Knowing that McCain was able to (probably) win the nomination on half the money they said it would take, let’s keep those 2011 Q1 (or 2010 Q4?) numbers in perspective, won’t we?
Emphasis Added.
Huck/Romney Myth:
The problem with this analysis [suggesting Huck voters will go with Romney] is that I’ve seen no evidence that Huckabee voters would go to Romney. On a county level, the Romney and Huckabee votes are negatively correlated, with Romney representing the conservative side of the Chamber of Commerce/Rotary Club vote and not really showing outsized strength with Evangelicals.
Moreover, the Florida exit poll asked about second choices. Though the poll as reported doesn’t specifically break down the result by first choice vote, I’ve thrown the question into Excel to get some estimates (see it here). The poll outright defied the conventional wisdom of Giuliani voters breaking cleanly for McCain or Huckabee voters for Romney.
Giuliani voters actually split their second choice between McCain and Romney about 40-40. But Huckabee voters went for McCain as their second choice about 44 to 33%. That’s not surprising if you look at the returns. McCain won most pro-Huckabee counties, but not because Huckabee split the vote, but because McCain held his own (usually with between 30-40% of the vote) and Romney did poorly in these areas.
If you look at county returns, you’ll see that McCain is the Coca-Cola of GOP candidates, always performing at a consistent 30-40%, except in Miami-Dade (where he was higher thanks to Cubans) and any county that is both suburban and very conservative (which Romney’s cornered the market on — a good omen for Orange County). McCain does well in swing counties and liberal-leaning metro areas, but surprisingly, he doesn’t tank in rural, Evangelical areas. But Romney does. McCain seems to have a slightly greater affinity with Huckabee’s base than Romney does.
There is a message in these returns to conservatives busy soldering together the coalition below decks: do not assume that just because they’re all pro-life, that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham speak for the social conservatives Romney needs next Tuesday. They don’t. Being pro-life and pro-marriage is not enough. To understand what Huckabee voters want, you need to actually appreciate what Mike Huckabee brings to the table, which is an emphasis on faith, undiluted. Many conservatives, particularly those around here, do not. While many of us agree on the social issues, the conservative establishment resented how he injected his religion into the campaign. Never have I seen conservatives so readily repeat the Barry Lynn/ACLU line on the “wall” between church and state.
Emphasis Added. I disagree with his final points. I think he overestimates the religious aspect itself and underestimates Huckabee's authenticity. But the overall point is an important one. Almost all evidence, including polls and exit polls show Huckabee voters would break towards McCain. Put otherwise, if Huckabee were to drop out before Tuesday, McCain could likely break 50% in most of the states. Romney supporters should be glad he is still in the race.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | McCain vs Romney Open Thread — Comments (302) »
Ruffini's Insightful Analysis 29 Comments (0 topical, 29 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
None of the candidates are conservatives, unless you believe Romney's conversion. So the question is, which moderate do you want to go with?
I think they are probably accurate for FL (they were from the FL exit poll). But nationally, both pre-FL and post-FL, every time Rudy's numbers dipped, McCain's rose. I don't think they all go to McCain, but I think a much larger portion go to McCain. This may have been true of the pre-FL Rudy supporters even more. The hold-outs might end up being more split between McCain and Romney.
I would have liked to see a breakdown of Rudy voters before he slid into a distant third.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
I've thought that Rudy voters would be more inclined to McCain as well, but for several reasons having nothing to do with "moderate" philosophies. Yes, there were moderates going with Rudy - and maybe they are more inclined to McCain.
But Rudy's appeal seemed to stem from 2 things: 1. National security and the 9/11 thing; and 2. He was supposed to be the "electable" one. Given the remaining candidates, and the most recent head-to-head polling with Democrats, McCain would seem to be the choice for both of those groups of people - I don't think any of us doubt McCain's credentials in military affairs and commitment to our efforts against terror groups and states. And the polls showing McCain even with or ahead of either Democrat would be powerful with people who are looking for a winner.
I've always thought Rudy voters more likely to go Romney than McCain for various reasons. Rudy is not so much the national security candidate as the "tough guy" candidate. McCain loses their support on the torture issue. Romney, like Rudy with no real foreign policy experience, talks tough (double Guantanamo). Even more than foreign policy, I think Giuliani was the fiscal conservative candidate--the guy who turned around NYC and will cut taxes. These voters should gravitate to Romney with his business experience and competence in turning around the SLC games and executive experience. McCain lacks any real executive experience and was opposed to the Bush tax cuts, so they're against him for this. Finally, although a shallow reason, Giuliani and Romney are both northeasterners culturally.
Wasn't it obvious? I mean, it's nice to see it backed up with some data, but it was fairly obvious to me from the beginning. It was a matter of political logic, not numbers at that point.
I went into these primaries thinking McCain's weak point was religious social conservatives. That is Huck's base (and practically only supporters). So I expected Huck voters would go to Fred or Romney or someone running as Mr. Social Conservative.
I expected Fred supporters and Rudy supporters to break toward McCain. I think there is small but not significant data to back that up.
I was surprised the first time I saw McCain as the second choice of Huckabee voters. Over time, I've gotten used to it.
But I still see a lot of diaries and comments around here that argue that Huck is taking away Romney votes and keeping him from winning. That is bad analysis if the Huck/Romney myth is just a myth.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
who actually think SoCons will believe the hype that he is/has been a social conservative all along.
Trust me, there is a difference.
Go ahead, make your jokes, Mr. Jokey... Joke-maker. But let me hit you with some knowledge. Quit now.
-White Goodman
kept Huckabee voters from supporting him. If Romney were Catholic or Protestant, then there would be no doubt as to whom Huckabee voters will pick as the second choice.
------------
Daniel 2:20 And he [God] changeth the times and seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding.
I've always suspected Huckabee supporters would break for McCain. the key thing to know about them is that they are socons and they did not have Romney as their first choice. For whatever reason, even though Romney had the money, the momentum, and the backing of the party establishment, these voters went looking for another candidate and ended up with Huckabee. Most likely, it's the fact Romney is a Mormon and/or his recent, politically convenient, and some would say highly questionable, conversion to socon positions and emphasis. I also suspect some of it is cultural--Huckabee is a good ole boy while Romney is the Northeastern, rich, country club guy. Heck, his name is Mitt! These voters are much more likely to favor a straight talking Arizonan, war hero.
One thing that Huckabee and McCain supporters have in common is that they are immune to talk radio's best efforts to portray their candidates as dangerous liberals. Possibly some of Huckabee's voters felt solidarity with McCain in facing the daily barrage, and were put off by the advocacy for Romney. I suspect there are other explanations as well, but this might be a factor.
Part of Huck's appeal is his authenticity. Romney's appeal is that he's a problem solver. As candidates, they are polar opposites. Therefore, it shouldn't be at all surprising that they appeal to different cross sections of voters. However, part of McCain's appeal is authenticity as well. Therefore, it would make sense that Huck supporters would go to McCain if Huck dropped out. Just my opinion, though.
Hello all. Longtime lurker, first time poster.
Most folks in my church, myself included, would easily interchange votes on McCain & Huckabee and failing those 2, very few would go to Romney and some may even vote for Obama to stop Hilary. We look at the person's character traits (as best as we can tell) before we listen to most of what they have to say. Like Gov. Crist said..its like a gut thing. I think part of it was validated by how Romeny responded to the rise of Huckabee in IA and to McCain in NH and even tried to co-opt Obama post-IA. It just seemed Clintonian..ugh! And the fact that he recently became pro-life and such just in time for '08 was just too suspect. The Mormonism is there but not as much since we consider ourselves "educated" evangelicals.
I don't listen to talk radio but I do listen to Xtian radio which so far seems comfortable with McCain. I'm not a single issue voter but I put a lot of emphasis on personality traits. McCain's service has VERY strong appeal to me as is the fact that he is from a middle class family. He is from a non-liberal state like AZ which while not as religious as Dixie is far from California, NY or Mass. Finally, the fact that he has accomplished things with members of the other party at least show that he is willing to listen and work with others to get results...not my way or the highway types, even Bush in 2000 spoke of his ability to work with Dems (except when it came to the Washington crowd but that is another matter entirely).
Most folks in my church (which voted about 85% Bush in 04 and probably 60% Bush in 00) have barely heard of Rush Limbaugh...his influence is zip!
I am just curious how it is that you would know that most folks have barely heard of Rush Limbaugh.
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
I always question when people presume to speak for others -- what other people know, what other people think.
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
Your anecdotal data is really insightful and helpful. I think there are more people in your situation than a lot of RSers think.
I'm not a big fan of GOV Huckabee, but I can see how his personal appeal is similar to McCain's.
I do find it interesting that Christian radio and religious voters in general seem to be happy with McCain. He's probably not their ideal candidate, but he's not seen as anti-religious like Rudy might have been.
Thanks for commenting.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
you said it just like I meant it. I'm sure Romney is a fine man and father but there's just something that isn't there for me. I thought it was his religion but that isn't it because its not like he wears it on his sleeve (even Cheney is not particulariliy religious).
It's just that McCain seems like the rebelious american kid that everyone on the block knows who one day went to fight for his country, came back home with medals and the scars to prove it. Still rebellious but now respected and trusted and matured.
Huckabee is like the really well mannered kid we all like but seems to have difficulty fixing something when it needs to be done.
You're obviously not alone in your feelings about Romney. Many have described him as a BMW car salesman--really smooth, polished, competent but not quite trustworthy or authentic.
not here to start a ruckus. Just going by talking to folks at MY CHURCH which I think is a good barometer of many evangelical churches across the south & west. I'm not saying there is no rush limbaugh but that many evangelicals in my church know little about him (I asked cos I was curious) and hardly listen to conservative talk radio. But we talk politics sometimes and nearly always its "we like Huckabee, McCain is OK...he's a veteran, maverick, pro life etc..no to Guiliani and no to Romney, the seem like slick east coasters" etc.
You may like or listen to Rush and co, but I'm just saying folks in my church don't get their information from him cos they don't listen to him. Period!
He's new. I know we've had a lot of problems with this, but everyone deserves a warning before getting too upset.
Indy in Dixie, there is a button on the bottom of each comment "Reply to This." When you are referring to a comment, click on that before writing your comment. Otherwise (if you type in the big "Reply" box at the bottom of the thread), it will think you are responding to the original diary.
Just be conscious of it.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
what is REALLY fun is when an old-timer does it -- usually takes grief for it ;-)
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
I've long thought that Huckabee voters actually would lean towards McCain. They are primarily social conservatives - not economic conservatives - and there is no question that McCain is the better social conservative (campaign finance reform riles up social conservative groups, but ordinary voters don't know or care about it). Plus, McCain is better known, with a great bio, and Romney is a Mormon.
I am surprised that Rudy people were so evenly divided. The common perception was that Rudy people were moderates who would go towards the other "moderate" candidate, McCain, rather than the "conservative" Romney. Plus, Rudy hates Romney, based on how nasty Romney was towards him.