Well the much anticipated Iowa Caucus (first in the nation) is now history. So what does it all mean?
Let me preface my comments with this statement: I have always made it my practice to stay out of primaries, and focus my attention on supporting the Republican nominee (whether at the local level or at the Presidential level) in the general election.
I am a believer in Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican candidate.” Compliance with this commandment was in short supply in Iowa. Millions and millions of dollars which could have been used to critique the flaws in President Obama’s policies on the economy, spending, taxes, jobs, health care, trade, and foreign policy, were instead spent to tear down fellow Republican candidates – particularly Newt Gingrich.
There’s an argument to be made that such negative advertising toughens the ultimate Republican nominee and better prepares him (or her) for the billion dollar negative campaign coming down the pike courtesy of the Obama campaign.
I don’t buy it. I think it’s more likely the Republican candidate comes out of the primary process wounded and bleeding, and Obama remains unscathed. I hope I’m wrong. I do believe however, that President Obama’s policies have been so flawed in so many ways that he is vulnerable, no matter who the Republican nominee is.
Now let’s get to the results. Mitt Romney squeaked to a victory over Rick Santorum by just eight votes (30,015 to 30,007). Ron Paul came in third with 21% (to Romney and Santorum’s 25%.) Newt came in fourth with 13%. Perry got 10%, Bachmann 5%, and John Huntsman 1% (he didn’t campaign in Iowa, preferring to begin his campaign in the more favorable-for-him New Hampshire.)
In my view, the two big winners are Romney and Santorum. Romney because, even though close, it’s a win, and in a state he really hadn’t campaigned hard in until the last six weeks or so. And Santorum because he will now likely be perceived as the conservative alternative to Romney, assuming that the other candidates will continue to fade and their votes shift to Santorum rather than to Romney.
Over the last two or three months or so, when people would ask me who I thought would be the Republican nominee, I’d often (mostly kiddingly) say probably Rick Santorum because (other than Huntsman), he’s the only candidate who’d not been in the lead so far. And this has been one of the more interesting phenomena this campaign cycle. Over the last year (besides Mitt Romney who most political pundits consider the presumptive frontrunner), we’ve seen Sarah Palin, then Donald Trump at the top of the national polls (neither of whom even got into the race.) Then Michele Bachmann was on top, until she won the Iowa Straw Poll in August; Rick Perry got in and shot to the top – until he got into the debates. Herman Cain then pushed Perry aside, had his troubles, and dropped out of the race altogether. Newt moved into the lead, until Romney, the Republican establishment, and the press unloaded on him.
Now it’s Rick Santorum’s turn. To his credit, without a lot of money, name recognition, or seemingly hope, Santorum essentially camped out in Iowa for the last year, and worked the state – hard. He personally campaigned in all 99 counties in Iowa. We saw the results last night when he came within eight votes of beating the presumptive frontrunner Mitt Romney.
With the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary only a week away (Iowa was a caucus) what are the things to watch for? Without picking a winner (sorry) here’s the way I see it. Newt is ticked – at Romney. Newt believed that Romney, and especially Romney’s super PACs, were primarily responsible for his demise. Millions and millions of dollars in negative ads were targeted at Newt, and they were effective, although Newt feels strongly that they were inaccurate, unfair, and below-the-belt. Newt’s wrath will especially be in evidence in the upcoming debates.
My guess is Santorum, who hasn’t really been anyone’s target up to this point, will be on the receiving end of the pro-Romney forces now. Although Santorum served two terms (twelve years) in the Senate, he’s not all that well known to most voters. Having served in a swing, relatively moderate state, Pennsylvania, I would expect his support for “earmarks” to be a principal point of attack.
And finally, John Huntsman. Even though he only got 1% of the vote last night in Iowa, like Santorum did in Iowa, John Huntsman camped out in New Hampshire. He hopes to do well enough there to put himself on the map, and propel himself as a credible alternative to Mitt Romney in the upcoming primaries and caucuses. I doubt whether this will ultimately be successful, but hey, he didn’t ask me.
In conclusion, although Iowa last night was close and exciting, and New Hampshire and the upcoming contests could be quite a spectacle, I really cringe at all the negative ads, sniping, and bad blood between the Republican candidates. I’d much prefer seeing a thoughtful discussion among the Republican presidential candidates as to how they can best promote an alternative strategy to the failed policies of the Obama Administration. How they can best get the economy moving again, and get Americans back to work.
Maybe I’m asking too much, but I don’t think so.