Post-Ames Analysis

While most were projecting a Romney victory at the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa (including myself), I’m not sure that anyone expected such a large victory. Personally, I was thinking a modest mid-twenties showing would show Mitt’s organizational strength, but 31.5% is practically a landslide!

Obviously, Giuliani and McCain were punished for their failure to show up. I’d stop short of predicting that the primary will reflect these results because I still think many Iowans will support Giuliani. McCain made the biggest strategic mistake in not going to Ames. With his failing numbers and money nationwide, you might as well take him off the ballot in January. He needed something like Ames to keep his campaign alive. His failure to show up at the straw poll has perpetuated his downward trend into a political oblivion.

Some are saying that Romney’s victory is vastly overrated, but on the same coin, they prop up Huckabee and Brownback for coming in second and third by roughly 2000 votes less! But the way I see it is that if Romney garnered nearly double what his closest opponents did, wouldn’t that in turn make them irrelevant also? So basically, if you lose to a “loser,” didn’t you still lose? Correct me if I’m wrong…

Tancredo did fair in Ames, but who really cares? He’s almost as irrelevant as say….

Tommy Thompson? I’m glad he’s gone. Sometimes you’ve just got to cut the fat, I guess.

Duncan Hunter should quit immediately. If Tommy Thompson can quit with over 1000 votes, Hunter should follow suit due to his paltry showing.

Who is this John Cox and what was he doing on the ballot?

Then there’s that Ron Paul fellow. It appears that his grassroots cult of a following couldn’t carry him to a victory over Tancredo. However, this is one of the few respectable polls in which he managed to defeat Giuliani, McCain, and Fred Thompson. He should savor this moment.

It’s interesting that Fred Thompson was on the ballot, but his lack of campaigning and his failure to enter the race made him slightly more relevant than Duncan Hunter and the absent Giuliani and McCain. If Fred’s going to run, he’d better enter as soon as possible. The American public are tiring of his “non-official” status. If he avoids the debating process altogether, he’s nothing short of a coward.

I enjoy seeing the field thin out. If we get down to a Giuliani-McCain-Romney-F. Thompson-Huckabee-Brownback-Paul field, things will be much more interesting.

The only thing I think we can take from this is that Romney will prevail in Iowa in January. The fact that he earned virtually double his nearest opponents and the fact that his other major opponents nationwide failed to even show up simply shows that Romney is the frontrunner in the state of Iowa.

Advertisements

8 Responses to Post-Ames Analysis

  1. Hi Braden…i like you, but your judgement is clouded bad on this one. He spent more per vote than any other candidate, and came away with less than 1 out of 3 with the three main competitors abstaining. Huckabee had a big win…paul had a convincing place…and Mitt bought a decent show.

    I’m not knocking him…if it comes down to who can buy what, Mitt obviously has this thing in the bag. 250 million buys a lot of votes, and i don’t care which party you’re in.

  2. rich says:

    In terms of money spent per vote, as well as time spent campaigning in Iowa,
    Huckabee and Paul did the best. ron paul spent less than a week there, and only opened his Iowa campaign office on the 9th.
    I don’t follow the Huckabee campaign so i do not know if he spent the 1+ month there that romney did, but Im sure he did not spend nearly as much money.

  3. Braden says:

    Well the way I see it is that money does not automatically buy votes. It certainly helps, there’s no denying that. But this win, coupled with his frontrunner status in statewide polls in Iowa, shows that Mitt is winning there. The only thing I can see that would take away from his victory in Ames is the fact that Giuliani, McCain, and Fred weren’t there. But even then, I think Romney would have won and Huckabee and Brownback would be even further down in the end result.

  4. Sharily Hartwell says:

    It would serve you well if you were to google RON PAUL … his voting record backs the fact that he is FOR SAVING OUR FREEDOMS, THE CONSTITUTION, AND THIS COUNTRY … I RESENT YOUR NAME CALLING … WE ARE NOT A ARMY CULT … WE ARE PATRIOTIC CITIZENS OF THIS REPUBLIC WHO WANT TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK FROM THE ELITIST NEO CONS! AS WE WILL NOT EVER SURRENDER TO THEIR PLAN FOR A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT! AND FORCED SLAVERY! You need to WAKE UP … start EDUCATING YOURSELF instead of wasting valuable time with your driveling!

  5. Braden says:

    I know about Ron Paul, ma’am. I know about his record. I did a blog on it called “The Dirt on Ron Paul.” I pointed out how he has voted against unborn children legislation, AMBER alerts, the Gay Marriage Amendment, etc.

    And it’s not an army cult, it’s a grassroots “shadow army” cult. It was a joke on the fact that many Ron Paul supporters believe in conspiracy theories like the idea of a “shadow army.” I am NOT questioning your patriotism, nor Ron Paul’s. Don’t be upset about Ron Paul not winning this race. The real danger is a Democrat in the White House.

  6. Braden says:

    In hopes of eliminating confusion by people with no sense of humor, I’ve eliminated the term “shadow army” from my description of Ron Paul’s fanbase.

  7. This meme that Romney “bought” the straw poll is bunk. Bush also vastly outspent everyone in ’99 to win. That’s exactly what a staw poll is! You test how well you can raise money, then spend it orchestrating a voter-turnout machine. I’m tired of hearing 2nd tier candidates whine about not being able to put as much money as Romney did into the poll. That’s politics, folks. If you don’t find people who like you to donate money, you don’t do well in straw polls, and you loose the election. That’s how things work. Whose fault is it that Brownback, Huckabee, and the rest have no money?

    Also, while Mitt did spend a lot to get people to the straw poll and get them fed, he couldn’t pay them to pull the lever (or whatever it is) for him. The people walk in, close the drapes, and the vote is anonymous. Does the better-funded candidate always win? No – and there are pretty examples of that. However, in this case, the better-funded candidate did win.

    I guess in every election, there are those losers who whine that they lost becasue they didn’t have as much money as the winner. As if the American people are dumb enough to vote for whoever gives them a free hot dog. Quit making excuses.

  8. Michael says:

    I love the reaction of the libertarian cultist here!

    Ron Paul’s group of nuts did well, but not as well as one would have thought, given the huge throng of people he brought in from other states. I imagine if out-of-staters could have voted, he would have come in second. But this is about strength in IOWA, and not from libertarians and left-wing democrats who can sway a GOP straw poll meant for Iowa citizens. His support is all online.

    Oh, and John Cox is a bored millionare who bought his way into the poll. We are done seeing him now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: