Does it make sense for Christie to skip Iowa and focus on NH?

[retromike22]

Congratulations, you've lost a drunken bet and have now been hired as Chris Christie's campaign manager!

Based on an assessment of polls and the political characteristics of each state, do you:

A: Skip Iowa (or have a very minor presence there, like McCain in 2008) and focus on NH.
B: Actively compete in Iowa and attempt to gain as high a precentage as possible.

[IceSpear]

It depends. If Jeb implodes, Christie could try to worm himself into the role of establishment favorite (not that it would necessarily be successful, but he'd try), and in that case skipping Iowa in a very crowded field would be foolish. On the other hand, if things stay more or less the same as they are now, I'd definitely skip Iowa and focus on NH.

[Suburbia]

No. Christie should compete for Iowa, because if he comes third place there and wins the nomination later, he'll want the Hawkeye State's 6 electoral votes in the GE.

[VPH]

Christie has a much better chance at wooing the NH moderates. However, if he wants to gain any traction west of the East Coast, he needs to work hard in places like Iowa to gain support not only in that contest, but in the subsequent midwestern ones.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Doesn't matter what Christie does, but it would make sense for Jeb to do this.

[morgieb]

At this stage? Yes.

[TDAS04]

Maybe.

[Likely Voter]

Christie should mostly skip Iowa, but not entirely. While there have been some nominees who didn't win Iowa, they have all got into the double digits with the worst showings 88 Bush Sr in 3rd with 18% and McCain 13% in 08 (tying for 3rd). If Christie gets Giuliani type of 4% (6th place), he may not be able to rebound from that.

[chrisras]

The only thing that makes sense for Christie is to stay out of the race. 

[Xing]

I'm sure that would work as well for him as focusing on Florida worked for Giuliani in 2008. Even if he doesn't think he has a realistic chance of winning Iowa, the momentum will not be in his favor if he doesn't at least put up a bit of effort in the state.

[retromike22]

Bumping this in light of his announcement.

[Mehmentum]

I'm not completely sure.

Because the field is so divided, Christie only needs to get 10 - 15% in either state to be in the top of the pack.

Doing surprisingly well in Iowa could give him a huge boost, especially if Bush focuses on NH and under-performs in Iowa.

[Likely Voter]

The trick is to compete just a bit in Iowa but still set expectations low. In a field that may still have a dozen or more by Iowa, you can't afford to be close to last place. People say McCain didn't compete in Iowa in 2008 but he did a bit and he still came in a respectable 4th place with 13% as opposed to Rudy Giuliani who was 6th with 3%. I would say the guys hoping for a win in NH (Bush, Christie, Kasich) need to still get in to the top 5 in IA

[Torie]

I'm not completely sure.

Because the field is so divided, Christie only needs to get 10 - 15% in either state to be in the top of the pack.

Doing surprisingly well in Iowa could give him a huge boost, especially if Bush focuses on NH and under-performs in Iowa.

Voters, particularly caucus voters,  open to supporting Christie in Iowa I suspect will be quite sophisticated and informed voters, and a substantial portion of them are probably monitoring Christie's doings. So if I were him, I would see if his announcement and early campaigning gets him a 5% slice or so of Iowa caucus voters. If so, then he might have a shot of pushing that up to 10%-15% with some campaigning, which if he can get that (particularly that 15% figure), might well help rather than hurt in NH.

[Cory]

He should basically copy & paste the John McCain strategy from 2008. "Compete" in Iowa as a formality but really bet everything on New Hampshire.

[RogueBeaver]

He should basically copy & paste the John McCain strategy from 2008. "Compete" in Iowa as a formality but really bet everything on New Hampshire.

[Ebsy]

I hope Chris Christie wins New Hampshire. God, that would be so fantastic.

[Horsemask]

He should basically copy & paste the John McCain strategy from 2008. "Compete" in Iowa as a formality but really bet everything on New Hampshire.

[Mister Mets]

At the moment, the race is so crowded, that he has as good a chance of getting a top showing in Iowa.

Plus, there is also the possibility that someone who has appeal in New Hampshire might do well in Iowa, so it's to his benefit to split the vote there.

[Publius]

Christie should mostly skip Iowa, but not entirely. While there have been some nominees who didn't win Iowa, they have all got into the double digits with the worst showings 88 Bush Sr in 3rd with 18% and McCain 13% in 08 (tying for 3rd). If Christie gets Giuliani type of 4% (6th place), he may not be able to rebound from that.

Agreed 100%. The Iowa field will be so crowded that a whole bunch of names will be globbed together after the winner. No one but the winner will get a sizable bump from it. Christie can only hope to be in the glob. If he wins New Hampshire, however, his bump would be as huge as his waistline. He'd be thrust into the top tier and, because this year's Iowa winner probably won't play well in New Hampshire, Christie will have even more momentum than that candidate.