Well, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is now pretty much in the race for the Republican nomination. The Governor starts out with some strong advantages. First, he’s got a record in business that’ll be a good talking point in an election about the economy. Secondly, he’s run for President before, meaning amateur mistakes are less likely and slip-ups less damaging. Finally, he starts out as one of the two (or three or four) frontrunners and Republicans like to nominate their frontrunners. But, for all these advantages, there are several big hurdles that Romney has to overcome if he wants to accept the GOP nomination in Tampa. Some of these are pretty well known; Romneycare, perceived (or real) flip-flops, a lack of appeal in some of the GOP’s base states (the Solid South), and the danger of another candidate robbing his votes. However, Romney has one more big hurdle to overcome, one that could decide whether or not the Governor even gets to addressing most of these issues. This last hurdle comes with 2 Congressional Districts, is in New England, and is probably the most important pre-general election race in the country. I’m talking of course about the New Hampshire primary, which will be Mitt Romney’s most dangerous state in 2012.
But wait says you. “Romney is ahead by 50 points in New Hampshire. He’s crushing the entire field.”
That’s true says I. He’s leading everyone big at this point, which is where the danger comes in.
New Hampshire voters are notoriously ornery and flinty. In a state where the motto is “Live Free or Die” these folks don’t like to be told what to do or do what they’re “supposed” to do. New Hampshire is tailor-made for upsets, insurgents and surprises. Think of some of the folks who have done really well in New Hampshire in previous primaries, most specifically Pat Buchanan and John McCain. Both were mavericks in their own right; men who flouted party orthodoxy and instead appealed to a disaffected group of voters that propelled them to victory.
Romney does not flout party orthodoxy; in fact, he’s been spending the last few years trying to make himself the embodiment of everything Republican. Not saying this is good or bad just that it is what it is. New Hampshire and her voters don’t follow the conventional wisdom, they live (and vote) to upend it. If you’re the man who conventional wisdom says is going to win the New Hampshire primary, then you have my sympathies.
Now of course if the situation was reversed and my candidate, Mitch Daniels, was up by a lot in one of the most important primary states in the nation, I’d be pretty happy. Romney supporters are justifiably happy that their man is winning big in New Hampshire and it’s certainly better to be 50 points ahead than 50 behind. But, the real danger for Romney is if the expectations game says he should win by a huge margin. Remember Paul Tsongas? He won the New Hampshire primary but Bill Clinton became the Comeback Kid because of expectations. A Romney win that is deemed particularly unimpressive won’t help the Governor that much in later states.
The biggest danger from New Hampshire of course is if Romney loses the state. In 2008 he at least had an excuse; he was facing John McCain, “New Hampshire’s Third Senator”. It still hurt pretty badly when Romney lost the state, but it wasn’t fatal. This time he has no such cover. There is no John McCain to soften the blow of a New Hampshire defeat. Romney has to win New Hampshire or his campaign is finished. The former Governor of Massachusetts can’t dismiss a loss in such a critical primary state right on his backdoor.
The absolute necessity for Romney to win the New Hampshire Primary will probably shape his campaign. Iowa will take a backseat this time. So will Nevada and even Florida. In fact, everything will take a back seat to winning the New Hampshire Primary. Romney just can’t afford not to.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:44 am
The Main Event: Location: New Hampshire
Willard Mitt Romney vs. Timothy James Pawlenty
TPAW coming off a Iowa victory goes into the Granite State 15 pts down.
WOOOOSH….there goes Romeny’s lead as ROMNEYCARE becomes the Albatross that brings TPAW within 2pts the night before the votes are cast.
ELECTION NIGHT:
“Everybody but Romney” coalition brings TPAW a 1% victory in New Hampshire
New Hampshire is Romney’s most dangerous state…it’s the state where is bubble will burst.
The TPAW TORCHES will burn down Mitt’s Firewall.
Pawlenty/Rubio 2012!
April 12th, 2011 at 8:44 am
Daniels has to win NH, since he won’t do well in any other early state. Ditto Huntsman and probably Giuliani, if he runs. There’ll be a lot of moderates competing for the same voters this time around.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:50 am
As I see it right now:
(1) Huckabee wins Iowa, Romney wins New Hampshire. That means they are guaranteed SC and NV respectively. Field down to two.
(2) Huckabee loses Iowa, Romney wins New Hampshire. Game over. Romney Wins.
(3) Huckabee wins Iowa, Romney loses New Hampshire. Game over, Huckabee wins.
(4) Huckabee loses Iowa, Romney loses New Hampshire. Huckabee has to win in SC to stay relevant. Romney has to win in NV to stay relevant. If either of them loses their second state, they’re out. Any of them who wins their second state battles on against the winners of IA and NH.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:55 am
I sorta agree with the words of mark mckinnon about romney 2012:
He is an entirely conventional candidate in an entirely unconventional time. People don’t want the Cola. They want the Un-Cola. I think Romney’s fundamental strategy is to just outmuscle, out-organize and out-fundraise the field and, thereby, outlast ‘em. And it may work. It’s frankly probably his best—and only—strategy.
Of course, there are some unconventional things romney could do in the GOP primary…like naming a running mate say nov 6th, 2011 – one year to the day of the election
April 12th, 2011 at 8:57 am
mark,
Your replaying “08″ without McCain. This is “12″ not “08″.
Huck is not running, so Romney will be in a fight with TPAW who can win Iowa and challenge Mitt in NH. TPAW will play to blue collar voters and will unite the Conservatives against Romney unlike Huck could do in “08″.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:58 am
if huck loses iowa or romney loses new hamp both are out, don’t think they get a round two. Like i said, i think the two could just team up and form a ticket pre iowa and run away with the nomination.
April 12th, 2011 at 8:59 am
Smack,
I said, “right now”. A month from now, who knows?
April 12th, 2011 at 9:02 am
No question New Hampshire is very important to Romney. However, it would be less so if he wins Iowa. You say he can’t win Iowa? If we back track to 2008, Romney finishes 2nd to Huckabee who set records for turn out. Forward to 2012. Without a Huckabee, the Evangelicals will either have to back one candidate or risk losing a Romney.
If Huckabee does win, can anyone but Romney survive?
For all candidates except Romney, Iowa is a must win state.
In the end, all candidates have must win states, just not Romney.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:07 am
# Smack1968 Says:
Huck is not running, so Romney will be in a fight with TPAW who can win Iowa and challenge Mitt in NH. TPAW will play to blue collar voters and will unite the Conservatives against Romney unlike Huck could do in “08?.
========================================================================================
Y0ur problem is that Pawlenty is a Flip Floping RINO,
Gov. Pawlenty said the cap-and-trade market is a good way to reduce pollution.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/11/15/govsgreenhouse/
April 12th, 2011 at 9:14 am
marK,
Huckabee is not going to win, or even make a serious dent, in NH if he runs. Even if he wins Iowa. So Huckabee winning Iowa is actually among the best outcomes for Romney. Huckabee losing Iowa, assuming he runs and assuming he doesn’t lose it to Romney, is probably a disastrous outcome for Romney. Because beating Huck in Iowa would confer huge momentum and both of the candidates most likely to do that, Pawlenty and Bachmann, are better fits for NH than is Huck. Pawlenty, as a blue-state Governor has an obvious well to draw from in NH and, indeed, he’s doing better there than in Iowa in some accounts. And Bachmann has a libertarian streak, something that could potentially play well in the Live Free or Die state. And they’re both better fundraisers and organizers than Huckabee. It’s to see why Huckabee would be a formidable competitor but, in a way, he’s less suited to knocking Romney off balance simply because their strengths never intersect- neither has a very clear opportunity to break into the other’s territory. It becomes a matter of math with Romney snagging the blue states and the mountain west and Huck taking the South and the plains states.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:15 am
Jonathan,
There is another reason to suspect that Romney’s huge lead won’t hold, even if he ends up winning the state.
Of all the names polled, Romney is the only one who has already poured a lot of time and money into a prior campaign in the state. This, more than anything else, accounts for his huge lead, and makes this state pretty unique among all those polled. Romney and Huck have BOTH put in major Iowa efforts before. Same with South Carolina, more or less. Of the post-South Carolina states, the schedule came so fast and furious it was practically a national primary anyway, with maybe one or two stops in a state, or a weekend of campaigning.
But in New Hampshire (and Nevada), Romney has spent weeks and months already in people’s homes, VFW halls, and church potlucks. He’s spent huge advertising money there in ’08. These things aren’t true of anyone else polled (including Huck who was all in in Iowa).
So as other candidates fill up people’s homes, and VFW halls, and church potlucks, and spending boatloads of money on ads, that lead will shrink considerably. Nobody does so much better in NH than they do nationally, as Mitt’s current numbers would suggest.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:17 am
Thunder,
Romney used to be for Cap and Trade too.
So you might want to ease up on the “flip-flopping RINO” charge, especially on issues where Mitt has flipped.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:26 am
Which churches? Evangelical churches? I don’t think so.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:30 am
welby,
Don’t nitpick. The point is Mitt was at a bunch of those social events where people naturally gather. Let’s not have a holy war, okay?
April 12th, 2011 at 9:40 am
Jonathan,
Romney’s not ahead by 50 points in any New Hampshire poll. I think you mean “15″, perhaps.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:41 am
#15. MWS. agreed.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:43 am
#15:
It was literary hyperbole. I think I saw him up twenty points in the last poll.
April 12th, 2011 at 9:53 am
I’d zero percent chance romney wins the nomination if he loses in new hampshire…the same is true of huck losing in iowa
April 12th, 2011 at 10:09 am
MWS, you mention that others will gain ground on Romney once the campaign begins and others visit New Hampshire?
The problem with that is that few will candidates will spend as much time in New Hampshire as Romney will. Bachmann, Santorum, TPaw, Huck, Palin, all of them need Iowa to move on (except Trump). And as a result, I think Romney will have New Hampshire largely to himself much as McCain did in 2000 when he wrote off Iowa and ceded that to Bush. So I dont see anyone making enough of an investment of time and resources to beat Romney, though I expect it to be closer than 40%-12% as some polls suggested.
Trump is the only guy I think could go to New Hampshire and immediately challenge Romney in the polls *if he is really serious about running*.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:10 am
#15 MWS Romney is poised to spend more on ads in NH. No vacuum for an opponent to fill. This time there’s no McCain for NH voters to fall back on, and Iowa won’t be a disappointment because it will be discounted. Anyone who plays well in Iowa runs the risk of running poorly in NH because the kinds of things candidates tend to say in Iowa come back to bite them in the rear in NH. T-Paw has already started to crimp his NH chances by so enthusiastically chasing after Huck’s base in Iowa.
Romney can clip off just enough support to stay respectable in Iowa, and then devastate in NH, NV, and FL. He isn’t going to pull a Rudy in NH, and he isn’t going to pull a Fred either. If somebody beats him in NH it will be because he/she earned it the very hard way. And if that happens, they’ll deserve the success that will follow.
I’ve been watching the field. Unless Daniels comes in full-throttle and contests NH, I don’t see how Mitt’s odds in NH diminish much over the course of the campaign. T-Paw hasn’t looked all that smooth yet in his appeal to Iowans. And if Mitt takes NH and NV, it’s going to be awfully tough to challenge him in FL, and after FL, you’d better bring a large donor base to the party because it’s all about wholesale politics in multiple states after FL. Only T-Paw is making those kinds of preparations, and he’s looking pretty green out there at times. We shall see.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:12 am
husky,
“The problem with that is that few will candidates will spend as much time in New Hampshire as Romney will.”
Perhaps, but the relative gap will still shrink. If Mitt has spent 1000x more capital in NH than his nearest competitor now, it may be more like 2x more by next Jan. But I don’t think he’ll have the state all to himself. At least one or two candidates will decide to bail on Iowa and go all in for New Hampshire.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:15 am
Watch,
Can you think of anyone who has “devastated” a crowded field in New Hampshire? Has it ever happened? Has it every happened in such a wide open race, where nobody is consistently polling above 20% nationally?
April 12th, 2011 at 10:15 am
I also agree with Matthew Miller. If Huck wins Iowa and Romney wins New Hampshire, this will be a battle fought for months that becomes an issue of math. Huck will win the south and plains states, while Mitt will win the mountain west states and New England. The upper midwest and Florida will decide the party’s nominee and with that, I give Romney the edge. He is leading in Florida (and did much better than Huck there in 08), already won Minnesota and Michigan in 08, and should do well in Illinois, Hawaii, and Alaska too. Huck will do well in Ohio, Texas, and maybe PA. But in the end, the delegate numbers will favor Mitt. He will do well enough in the later states where it’s not winner take all.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:22 am
everybody wants to support a winner (except Cubs fans). I think “who can beat Obama” will be the paramount issue in Jan-Feb 2012 when this really heats up. I think this will trump (no pun intended) other issues people have toward a candidate (like RomneyCare, Hucks pardons, etc). Beating Obama will be the #1 issue of voters next year. With the dough Mitt can raise, his work ethic, his organization, and the states he makes competitive (NV, CO, FL, MI, and more) – that will help him more than anything else. That will help him overcome challenges by Huck, TPaw, and others.
Just my opinion…
April 12th, 2011 at 10:36 am
@4 blue: What is conventional about Mitt Romney? He isn’t a Washington insider. He isn’t a career politician. The only candidate less conventional than him is Sarah Palin, and we know how well that is going over.
April 12th, 2011 at 10:40 am
C’mon MWS! When have I ever been tethered by historical statisitcal comparisons?
I admit devastate was over the top. I backed off of annihilate, so you have to give me some credit.
Unless T-Paw can moderate his tone and approach in Iowa, he’ll be shooting himself in the NH foot, so to speak, and I think he’ll have great difficulty generating enthusiasm there as a result. If Daniels gets in and goes after Mitt in NH, I think that’s trouble. Other than those two, who else in the field is going to create real NH buzz? Santorum? Bachmann? Palin? Gingrich? If Mitt just holds 35% in NH he’ll have no one else in the 30′s, and that doesn’t look all that unlikely from where things stand now.
And if anything changes on that, I’ll cough up a good deal of pride and hyperbole and admit I was a miserable political prognosticator. I might even take up historical statistical analysis.
Good heavesn I hope I’m not wrong!
April 12th, 2011 at 11:04 am
The following statement form Nick Ayers is the reason why TPAW will be Romney’s nightmare in the Granite State.
“Tim Pawlenty’s health care record in Minnesota makes him the best Republican challenger to President Barack Obama on “the most important issue” facing the country, his new campaign manager Nick Ayers told POLITICO.
“We could not paint a clearer contrast between Governor Pawlenty and the President of the United States on the most important issue,” Ayers said.
Pawlenty’s aide wouldn’t comment on Mitt Romney — who’s being dogged by criticism that the health care plan he enacted in Massachusetts was the model for Obama’s plan — but Ayers predicted the issue will loom large in the 2012 presidential contest.
“Health care was an albatross,” he said. “The American people abhor the overreach of government in their personal lives.
“Matching health care in Minnesota to health care nationally, the two could not be more different,” he added.
Traveling around the country, Pawlenty has been touting the success of his home-grown reforms.
When he was governor, Minnesota launched a plan to pay health care providers one price for a “basket” of services, sending the message that they will profit from efficiency and quality — instead of racking up charges for various services.
Faced with Minnesota state employees’ skyrocketing health care costs, Pawlenty also created a system that allowed individuals choose any clinic in any health care network. But workers who picked the more expensive and less efficient clinics would be required to pay more out-of-pocket. As a result, Pawlenty says, consumers gravitated toward providers that delivered better quality at lower costs.
At the same time, Pawlenty barred his state from applying for millions of dollars in discretionary grants under the federal health care law and joined the lawsuit against Obama’s national overhaul.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:07 am
Mitt romney is like the ultimate conventional credential analytical establishment type…like the type who goldman sachs interviews. I’d guess the voters would prefer the apple dude vs the ibm company man. This was a good write up:
http://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-20-under-20-2011-4
the thing with elite school’s is they do create a nice network of connections and promotions, so the top few are worth it. The political angle is the general voters are pretty much disgusted with that network though and the grip it controls over the nyc-dc power axis.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:12 am
@28: If that is how you define conventional, I don’t buy it. The Republicans always nominate the conventional guy (with the possible exception of Reagan in 1980 … though I think he was far more conventional than people on the right want to remember him being). I don’t think this year is radically different from the past.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:19 am
Purposeful, methodical, deliberate, mature, substantive, focused, accomplished, disciplined, positive, even-tempered, well-prepared, energetic, determined, committed, broad scope of experience and interests, spiritually tuned, problem solver, well-schooled, model personal life . . . Romney has demonstrated all of these qualities in spades. Even his most severe detractors on this site would have to admit as much.
Potential opponents thus far:
Gingrich: wonkishly ADHD
Palin: aggressively partisan
Huckabee: folksy-witty
Barbour: wiley-charming
Pawlenty: new, fresh, fresh, new
Bachmann: shockingly self-assured
Santorum: grimly Socon
Roemer: obscure but irrelevant
Huntsman: Utah’s 2nd choice
Paul: feisty Ayn Rand worshipper
In those qualities that matter most in a President, I like how Romney compares with his rivals.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Is there independent evidence that Pawlenty’s cost saving measures actually saved money?
Since I applaud even timid efforts to improve coverage and cost of medical care, I add T-Paw to the short list of governor’s who got creative and made an effort.
One thing you would not accuse T-Paw of is overreach. No sir! Very cautious, very inoffensive, dubiously impactful effort at health care reform!
I’m not going to award him a Captain Courageous pin, but what the heck, a package deal instead of a lengthy list of charges for each little item may or may not save money, so let’s call it reform with a little teeny-tiny r, and talk about other issues.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Watchinitall
30#,
I notice the words you did not use to describe Mitt:
Conservative
Reagan Supporter
Fighter
Tax cutter
This is why you didn’t use those words.
The man threw Reagan under the bus.
Did not stand up for Bush’s tax cuts.
Does not defend and fight for Conservative Principles to all different makes of audiences.
Mitt is a good man, but will not be our Conservative Leader and president in 2012.
April 12th, 2011 at 11:43 am
Don’t underestimate the Iowa Caucus. Whoever wins the Hawkeye State will ride a wave of momentum into New Hampshire.
http://www.iowansforpawlenty.com
http://fayettecountyrepublicanpartyiowa.blogspot.com/
April 12th, 2011 at 11:58 am
I think everyone would agree that Romney must win NH. Not only would a NH loss hurt him in terms of the delegate count, but it would be indicative of an anemic campaign in general. Even if he won by a comparatively small margin it could be viewed as a loss — especially if the winner of IA (assuming its not Mitt) comes in a close second in NH.
April 12th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
You didn’t use the word Leader as well..and this is why..
PATHETIC!!!
April 12th
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney surprised donors this morning at the Harvard Club in New York with an ambivalent answer to the question of whether America is ready to seriously alter its large entitlement programs.
Romney, speaking to more than 100 donors and supporters at the private breakfast, responded to a question from his supporters on the issue.
“I don’t know,” he replied, according to a source in the room, before going on to warn that Social Security and Medicare are — in the source’s paraphrase — “basically the third rails in politics and he doesn’t know if we’re going to be able to actually make a dent in reforming them.”
“It was really soft rhetoric, definitely not the kind of tough talk that’s going to be necessary in a Republican primary,” the source said.
April 12th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
And you use the word “leader” for Pawlenty because of his dramatic overhaul of healthcare in Minnesota that resulted in . . . let’s see . . . welllllll, . . . .
“Pathetic” applies to people with weak arguments and a CAPS LOCK key on their computer.
April 12th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
I didn’t insult T-Paw. I like him, and he’s definitely my second choice at this point.
His healthcare reform was anemic at best, calculated to claim responsibility for action, but also non-offensive and nearly a wash in terms of actual results. Fine. he’s a politician. But I wouldn’t go emphasizing an anonymous source from a closed door meeting where timidity is accusation. Tim’s sort of susceptible to comparisons, and when it comes to healthcare reform, between the two of them, one was far bolder than the other, and it wasn’t Tim.
April 12th, 2011 at 2:01 pm
Franklin,
You need to backup some of your outlandish claims…
Rubes like you are exactly what is wrong with the Republican party (and why liberals think we are ALL nuts)
April 12th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Jonathan,
I didn’t read all of the comments, yet, but I wanted to say this before I forgot. I like the article. The only issue I might take issue with is that Granite Staters like to vote against the person who is “supposed” to win the NH Primary. I think, more accurately Granite Staters (where I was raised and casted my first 4 Presidential votes) like to vote against who is supposed to win the whole thing and even more so, like to vote against whoever wins IA. I won’t get in to anything to do with IA but Granite Staters aren’t their biggest fans.
Great article, though, and an excellent point. Gov. Romney has to win NH to have any chance – I think the same can be said for Daniels if he decides to jump in.
April 12th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Matt -
Granite Staters already know a lot about the potential candidates. They pay a lot more attention to the candidates as compared to the rest of the country. They have to actually investigate and vet their candidates since they don’t have someone in a room buying off their vote on election night. I think you would be surprised how much Granite Staters already know about the 2012 candidates. Also, Santorum has spent the last year in NH and was the first to hire staff (wish I had gotten that interview) and has gone nowhere. Just because someone spends a ton of time in a state doesn’t mean they are going to do even reasonably well.
April 12th, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Message to Pawlenty – Healthcare isn’t the single largest issue at stake. Job creation and the Economy, of which health care is a part, are the biggest themes. Did you not see the recent polls that asked what the largest issues facing America are, and health care was way down the list….
April 12th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
#4. Mitt was only in politics for 4 years, less Than the rest of them, how do you figure he is the “conventional candidate”??
April 12th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
See Kudlow tonight? There is no other serious candidate. So prepared. He also handily resolved the birther issue. Take notes Trump. Take notes Huckabee.
April 12th, 2011 at 7:55 pm
Romney will do a lot better in Iowa when they learn the flip-flops charges are false.
He lost a lot of support when Huckabee in 07 started saying false things about Romney’s record. He did it on the campaign trail and free media appearances, because he couldn’t afford a lot of ad dollars back in November and October. But the false message spread through the evangelical grapevine, sadly. A lot of those people are good, honest people and they won’t take too kindly to finding out they were lied to.
WhyRomney.com refutes the flip-flop charges. They are all smears, even many of the false claims about his change in abortion position.
Health Care will be up soon, too. There are a lot of misconceptions about it. People will be surprised to learn a few of the facts they haven’t heard.
I’d be particularly interested in hearing anyone’s response to the facts presented at whyromney.com
The one thihng that it needs is a more active forum. But that comes with time. It’s a process as they say.
July 21st, 2011 at 8:18 am
Yeah, that’s the tckeit, sir or ma’am
July 22nd, 2011 at 3:15 am
hICh21 kyvbkqlcqxbv