Election Night HQ

By the Publisher of ElectionNightHQ.com

How the race has changed, given the results in Iowa:

It’s all about the Expectations Game.  The conventional wisdom, heading into Iowa, was that Huck might have peaked too soon, particularly after the episode with the press conference and the negative ad.  The feeling was that Huck vs. Mitt was too close to call, that Fred and McCain were battling for third, with the possibility of a surprise third for Paul.  Giuliani had abandoned the state and wasn’t expected to do well. 

Well, Huck not only beat Mitt, but destroyed him.  Huck ended up capturing 34% of the vote (over 1/3 of the total in a seven-way contest) and defeating him by 9%.  Fred and McCain ended up with a de facto tie - Fred nosed out McCain, as of this writing, by about 300 votes (about one-quarter of 1%).  Both finished ahead of Paul (10%) and Rudy (6%), w/ Hunter ending up with 1%.The shared bronze medal between Fred and McCain, was considerably more important to Fred.  There had been rampant speculation that if Fred didn’t at least come in third, he would drop out and endorse his old friend McCain (Fred was McCain’s national co-chair in 2000 and was one of only four of McCain’s Senate colleagues to endorse him.)  Unlike McCain, Fred had campaigned heavily in Iowa leading up to the caucus, and it was far more favorable terrain for Fred than NH (where he has virtually no support at all.)

As for McCain’s 13% and de facto tie - back in the fall, anyone in the campaign would have been thrilled to hear that in Iowa, McCain would come in a virtual tie for third w/ Fred at 13%, not to mention the value of the Romney loss.  Best of all, McCain was able to walk the delicate tightrope.  He had to maintain enough of a presence in the state to try to come in third (which although he didn’t quite make it, it was largely reported as a tie), while at the same time, give the appearance of writing off the state.

So what’s changed for everyone, now that the caucus is over?

Huck - Any lingering doubt that Huck is a serious candidate, is now gone.  Huck is not likely to do well in NH, since the influence of evangelicals is far less than in Iowa, and thus there is not much of a natural constituency for him.  Even if there were, Huck has virtually no organization in the state and did not campaign there much.  (He couldn’t; he could barely afford to campaign in Iowa.)  Financially, Huck has now been raising a lot of money, but with the tight window between Iowa and NH, he won’t have time to put it to good use in the Granite State.  An analogy might be that of an army being so succesful in capturing territory, that it has outrun its own supply lines.  Just because Huck now has money, it doesn’t mean he can assemble an organization overnight, when McCain and Mitt have been building it for years (in McCain’s case, since his 2000 run).

Fortunately for Huck, he has friendlier turf in SC and Florida.  So whatever he gets in NH will just be a bonus.

Mitt -  Obviously, the Iowa results were an unmitigated disaster for Mitt.   Mitt outspent Huck by a 15-1 margin, spent vastly more time campaigning in person within the state, and was nevertheless handed a devastating loss by that hopelessly overmatched opponent.  The entire strategy of Mitt’s campaign was to exploit the one advantage he did have - his personal wealth - in order to buy leads in the early-voting states.  He bought a lead for nearly a year in Iowa, and saw it crumble as soon as a candidate who excited the Iowa GOP caucusgoers emerge. Worst of all, he now has what many commentators accurately described as a two-front war on his hands - Huck in Iowa and McCain in NH.  Most problematically, it’s difficult to appeal to both GOP electorates at the same time.  In Iowa, Mitt had to campaign as someone who was in tune with the socially conservative GOP base there; in NH, he has to campaign among the independent-minded, largely secular, libertarian New Hampshire electorate, in a state in which not only Republicans but independents may vote in the GOP primary.  That requires a tough balancing act.  Moreover, Mitt is a candidate dogged by charges that he will simply mold himself into whatever seems politically expedient, so attempts to please both states’ voters might result in the repulsion of one, or possibly both.  He’s already been turned away in Iowa.  He has to fervently hope that he isn’t shut out in NH as well.

Ironically, the best news for Mitt came on the Democratic side of the caucus.  Obama’s big win over Hillary means that independents in NH are more likely to pick up Democratic ballots to vote for Obama and thus less likely to pick up GOP ballots to vote for McCain.  Had Hillary won, it might have sent Obama into a downward spiral, and independents might have felt that their ballot was better used on the Republican side.

However, do not overestimate this effect.  Former Giuliani e-campaign director Patrick Ruffini - one of the finest political analysts on the Web - has noted that one of the great myths of campaign history is that McCain allegedly defeated Bush in 2000, solely because of independents in New Hampshire.  While independents did break heavily for McCain and widen his margin of victory (19%) considerably, McCain would have won, even if only Republicans had been permitted to vote.  Among self-identified Republicans, McCain won by nearly 10%.

In summary - is Mitt better off because Obama won big?  Absolutely.  If Hillary had won, Mitt would be in even worse shape.  But Obama’s victory is only going to be one factor, and it’s probably not going to be enough - in and of itself - to save Romney in NH.

McCain - It would have been great for McCain to have surpassed Fred and taken third place outright.  Granted, if McCain had taken third by less than 300 votes, it likely would have been reported in the same way - tie between Fred and McCain for third.  If it had been a strong third, it would have been so much better.  But as noted above, anyone in the campaign would have taken a tie at 13% for third place in a heartbeat. 

Perhaps most significant for McCain is what did not happen - finishing significantly behind Fred and/or Ron Paul.  Had he done so, it might have been significant news and could have stopped his momentum in NH.  And McCain is fortunate, that it didn’t.  But the campaign must be given credit for doing the balancing act between playing in Iowa while simultaneously not playing there - and got a decent outcome out of it.  Basically, the goal in Iowa was to avoid a disaster.  And a disaster was avoided.

Fred - Fred did enough to keep playing, as noted above.  He is going to have a very, very, very dismal finish in NH - far behind McCain and Mitt, well behind Huck and Giuliani, and maybe even behind Paul.  The only benefit to Fred is that given those poll numbers, media expectations for him in NH are already at rock bottom, so he won’t suffer too much after he comes in fifth or sixth, in the low single digits.  He’s going to bide his time and put all of his chips on South Carolina, where the electorate is more in tune with his persona. 

Fred’s lack of support in NH comes from the lack of retail campaigning and groundwork in the state, a hopeless impediment to a strong finish in a state which requires candidates to do in-person campaigning throughout the year preceding the primary.

Rudy - Rudy’s very poor finish in Iowa was not unexpected, although some eyebrows were probably raised, when he finished 4% behind Paul.  He didn’t campaign actively in the state, and he still has a lot of money.  However, the campaign may be regretting its decision to not send Rudy to do the retail campaigining necessary in NH.  His New York persona and lack of accessibility never really took off, in a state that expects to see the candidates in their living room.  Tactically, he pulled his NH ads down in December and opted to wait for Florida on Jan; 29 and the delegates available on Super Duper Tuesday on Feb 5.   

Time will tell if this was a good decision.  But here’s why right now, it looks like a bad one:

Rudy is getting no free media right now, period.  He was barely mentioned after Iowa (and when he was mentioned, it was only to note how poorly he did).  He might be able to finish third in NH - but that’s far from certain.  Huck had caught him and pulled into a tie for third in NH, even before his big triumph in Iowa.  Rudy might even finish behind Ron Paul.   (After all, Ron Paul finished well ahead of him in Iowa, and Paul’s message plays well in NH).  The only significant candidate Rudy is certain to finish above Fred, who is retreating to the friendlier climes of the South. Accordingly, Rudy is certain not to finish higher than third and could sink as low as fifth.  Either way, it would be a repeat of Iowa - no free media, and what attention he gets will be negative.

Of course, Rudy can afford to ride out the storm - he’s raised a lot of money and the national press corps won’t be expecting him to do well in NH, either.  The Huck victory in Iowa benefitted him as much as it did McCain: it was in both Rudy and McCain’s best interests for Mitt to be taken down in Iowa.  It’s also in Rudy’s best interest to see his friend McCain defeat Mitt in NH (in fact, Team Rudy would like to see McCain crush Mitt.)  They view Mitt - due to his ability to self-fund the campaign - as their most significant long-term threat and they feel - with some justification - that Mitt might not be able to survive being blown out in Iowa and defeated (let alone blown out) in New Hampshire as well.  The perfect scenario for them involved a split decision between Iowa and NH - it’s just that nobody would have imagined three months ago that the split decision wouldn’t have included Mitt, as one of the victors. So what needs to happen in the debate?

McCain has a unique advantage in this debate (or any debate) - he is virtually unscripted, every single day, on the campaign trail.  So being put in an unscripted situation doesn’t rattle him in the slightest.  He’s not going to panic, at any question, or due to a shot from an opponent.  Taking questions from all comers, all the time, means that nothing ever comes as a surprise.

Mitt is at an enormous disadvantage, for a couple of reasons.  One is that he is now trailing or tied in NH, and has no choice but to attack McCain.  However, negativity is never a plus, and he’s already facing some backlash from the barrage against Huck in Iowa.  The other is that it’s in the best interests of every other candidate (except Mitt, of course) to see Mitt toppled in NH.  Mitt is the biggest threat to everyone because his money permits him to stay in the race indefinitely, even if he doesn’t win.  Expect a lot of attacks from Mitt on McCain, and a chorus of condemnations from other candidates about “negative campaigning” and “taking the high road”.  Everyone would prefer that McCain take out Mitt in NH, hoping that the dual blows from Iowa and New Hampshire might finish Mitt off, his deep pockets notwithstanding.

The other is that Mitt is now in a predicament similar to Al Gore - the national media are now on - in a memorable phrase used by one pundit for Gore - “full embellishment alert”.  Everything he says in the debate is going to be instantly scrutinized (even if it isn’t important).  That just amps the pressure up more, at a time when he’s already being besieged by the most dangerous of campaign enemies - “high expectations”.

Huck and Fred will rely on their wit and one-liners, but they will be secondary players compared to the big showdown between Mitt and McCain.

You can contact Election Night HQ at publisher@electionnighthq.com.