IA PrimR: Zogby: Romney Holds Strong IA Lead; Huckabee in 2nd

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

New Poll: Iowa President by Zogby on 2007-11-07

Summary: Giuliani: 11%, McCain: 8%, Romney: 31%, Thompson, F: 10%, Other: 22%, Undecided: 16%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

[CultureKing]

wow, impressive showing by Huckabee

[Mr. Morden]

For those who don't want to click through for the details:

Huckabee: 15%

Also, FYI, this is the same poll that Tender Branson posted earlier, but erroneously entered as a NH poll.

[Mr. Morden]

Inks-

I think you may have mistyped the number for McCain.  When I go to Zogby's writeup, it says McCain got 8%, not 10%.  Apparently, this poll is cursed.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Inks-

I think you may have mistyped the number for McCain.  When I go to Zogby's writeup, it says McCain got 8%, not 10%.  Apparently, this poll is cursed.

Thank you, it's been fixed.

[Eraserhead]

The only question is really if Romney will even get a bounce from winning this.

[Mr. Morden]

The only question is really if Romney will even get a bounce from winning this.

NH frequently goes its own way, so I don't know if IA momentum would help Romney in NH.  However, I think the results of IA and NH will collectively matter for the primaries that follow.  If Romney wins both, the headlines will say that Romney's 2-0, while Giuliani's 0-2.  Whereas if Romney wins IA and Giuliani wins NH, Romney's loss in NH will be cushioned at least a little by the fact that he already has the one victory from IA.

[Inmate Trump]

The only question is really if Romney will even get a bounce from winning this.

NH frequently goes its own way, so I don't know if IA momentum would help Romney in NH.  However, I think the results of IA and NH will collectively matter for the primaries that follow.  If Romney wins both, the headlines will say that Romney's 2-0, while Giuliani's 0-2.  Whereas if Romney wins IA and Giuliani wins NH, Romney's loss in NH will be cushioned at least a little by the fact that he already has the one victory from IA.

It depends, I think, on who wins IA and/or NH on the Democratic side as to whether or not Romney gets a boost elsewhere.  If Obama wins IA, that will greatly overshadow Romney's win to the point where it really won't matter that he won it and could allow other candidates a chance.  Same thing if Romney wins NH and Obama does as well...it will overshadow Romney's win so much as to effect the other Republican candidates chances in a good way for them.

In other words, Romney's worst fear during this primary isn't one of the other Republican candidates; it's Barack Obama.

Now, if Obama wins IA and loses in NH, but Romney wins both, the win in NH for Romney will be what matters most in the other early states--that's the one he'll get his boost from.

[Mr. Morden]

Yeah, but conversely, if Clinton wins comfortably in Iowa, and it looks like she's cruising towards the nomination, the GOP will be more concerned about electability, because they feel a much stronger visceral Clinton hatred than Obama hatred, and the thought of Hillary Clinton becoming president terrifies them in a way that Obama doesn't.  If electability is a bigger factor, it helps Giuliani.

Also, if it looks like Clinton is running away with it, then some of those New Hampshire Independents might gravitate towards the GOP primary in NH, rather than bother with the non-competitive Dem. race.  I would think that Giuliani would be more likely to win some of those Independents than Romney.

[Inmate Trump]

Yeah, but conversely, if Clinton wins comfortably in Iowa, and it looks like she's cruising towards the nomination, the GOP will be more concerned about electability, because they feel a much stronger visceral Clinton hatred than Obama hatred, and the thought of Hillary Clinton becoming president terrifies them in a way that Obama doesn't.  If electability is a bigger factor, it helps Giuliani.

True.  But for that to happen, she's going to have to win, as you said, comfortably, and even though I think she'll win Iowa, I don't think it'll be by a large number of votes.  Winning in Iowa though, by however few votes, will impact her wins in NH and elsewhere.  So in that case, it could make the Republicans start to consider the electability issue a little more closely before it's too late, possibly resulting in a Giuliani or McCain win.

Even if they get the chance to think about electability, I don't think they'll do it very wisely.  This was my beef with the Democrats in 2004, when they nominated one of the candidates least likely to win the general.  And if the Republicans nominate someone like Romney, they'll be repeating the Democrats' 2004 mistake.

Also, if it looks like Clinton is running away with it, then some of those New Hampshire Independents might gravitate towards the GOP primary in NH, rather than bother with the non-competitive Dem. race.  I would think that Giuliani would be more likely to win some of those Independents than Romney.

That's true too.  I would hope this might help Giuliani win there, because he's going to need one or the other (IA or NH) to get the nomination.  Rudy doesn't deserve the White House, but he does deserve to be the Republican nominee, especially considering the alternatives (excluding my pick Ron Paul, because everybody knows he's not going to win anything). 

[Mr. Morden]

Even if they get the chance to think about electability, I don't think they'll do it very wisely.  This was my beef with the Democrats in 2004, when they nominated one of the candidates least likely to win the general.  And if the Republicans nominate someone like Romney, they'll be repeating the Democrats' 2004 mistake.

You definitely have a point there, and I've made a similar point in the past on this forum.  The voters aren't that smart when it comes to judging electability.  Simply winning primaries seems to give a candidate a boost in perceived electability.  People start to think of that person as a "winner", even though appealing to primary voters and appealing to GE voters are totally different things.

I predict that if Romney wins both IA and NH by a decent margin, not only will he get a boost in the national primary polls, but he'll get a short term boost in GE polls (because of the positive media coverage associated with winning those two states), and everyone will start to think "maybe Romney is electable".

[jokerman]

If Huckabee knocks off Romney in Iowa does New Hampshire swing to Giuliani (or, less likely, McCain)?

[Inmate Trump]

If Huckabee knocks off Romney in Iowa does New Hampshire swing to Giuliani (or, less likely, McCain)?

If Huckabee wins Iowa, I think Romney still will win NH.  Huckabee could pick up a few other early states though like NV or SC.....enough so that he'll matter.

[jokerman]

If Huckabee knocks off Romney in Iowa does New Hampshire swing to Giuliani (or, less likely, McCain)?

If Huckabee wins Iowa, I think Romney still will win NH.  Huckabee could pick up a few other early states though like NV or SC.....enough so that he'll matter.

Think about the media fallout, though.  Romney supporters aren't exactly the most dedicated supporters and New Hampshire voters are known as being especially volatile.

[Gustaf]

If Romney loses Iowa to Huckabee, I think it's over. Guliani probably takes New Hampshire under those circumstances and regardless I think Romney would be on his way out. Let's not forget that he's in single digits in pretty much every other state except the early ones. He needsa perfect string in order to have a chance on Super Tuesday.

[Inmate Trump]

If Romney loses Iowa to Huckabee, I think it's over. Guliani probably takes New Hampshire under those circumstances and regardless I think Romney would be on his way out. Let's not forget that he's in single digits in pretty much every other state except the early ones. He needsa perfect string in order to have a chance on Super Tuesday.

Actually, now that I stop and think about it more, you're probably right.  A Huckabee win in Iowa would help Giuliani a lot.

[Gustaf]

If Romney loses Iowa to Huckabee, I think it's over. Guliani probably takes New Hampshire under those circumstances and regardless I think Romney would be on his way out. Let's not forget that he's in single digits in pretty much every other state except the early ones. He needsa perfect string in order to have a chance on Super Tuesday.

Actually, now that I stop and think about it more, you're probably right.  A Huckabee win in Iowa would help Giuliani a lot.

Unless, of course, it propells Huckabee to the nomination but that, while not out of the question, seems unlikely given his poor standing in other states and especially lack of funds. But Huckabee probably has the best chance after Guliani and Romney at this point. He's also the only fresh face with a real potential for positive surprises in the race.

[M]

If Romney loses Iowa to Huckabee, I think it's over. Guliani probably takes New Hampshire under those circumstances and regardless I think Romney would be on his way out. Let's not forget that he's in single digits in pretty much every other state except the early ones. He needsa perfect string in order to have a chance on Super Tuesday.

Actually, now that I stop and think about it more, you're probably right.  A Huckabee win in Iowa would help Giuliani a lot.

Especially if Clinton does very well in Iowa and, say, Obama comes in 3rd. With the Democratic nomination appearing decided, many independents may vote in the NH GOP Primary, for (presumably) Giuliani and McCain.

[Mr. Morden]

Part of the difficulty in predicting the consequences of a Huckabee win in IA is that it's hard to guess whether the relevant expectations to compare against are those of the media establishment, or those of the average voters around the country, who aren't following this very closely at all, and have no idea that Romney is currently leading in IA and NH.  If Huckabee did pull off the upset in IA, and the order of finish was:

1) Huckabee
2) Romney
3) Giuliani

would the reaction by most voters be "Romney couldn't even hang on in IA where he was leading for so long.  Maybe I should think about shifting to Giuliani or Huckabee instead", or would it be "Giuliani is supposed to be the national frontrunner, but he couldn't even finish in the top two here.  What's going on?  He must be toast."

[Erc]

Part of the difficulty in predicting the consequences of a Huckabee win in IA is that it's hard to guess whether the relevant expectations to compare against are those of the media establishment, or those of the average voters around the country, who aren't following this very closely at all, and have no idea that Romney is currently leading in IA and NH.  If Huckabee did pull off the upset in IA, and the order of finish was:

1) Huckabee
2) Romney
3) Giuliani

would the reaction by most voters be "Romney couldn't even hang on in IA where he was leading for so long.  Maybe I should think about shifting to Giuliani or Huckabee instead", or would it be "Giuliani is supposed to be the national frontrunner, but he couldn't even finish in the top two here.  What's going on?  He must be toast."

The most immediate (and perhaps most important) impact is on NH's primary the next week--where Romney is considered a front-runner, and Giuliani has only the slightest of edges over McCain for second.  A Romney loss in IA most likely means that he's doomed in NH...which leaves open the question of "where does his support go?"  Huckabee doesn't have a chance of winning in NH, so any shift of support that direction serves only to hurt Romney slightly less than otherwise.  If Giuliani seems 'dented' from Iowa as well for the reason you suggest, McCain may get more support--and I should think that, despite his problems, McCain would benefit more from an influx of independent voters than Giuliani would.

As for SC...that is still a five-way race & God knows what will happen there.

[Mr. Morden]

I don't think Romney's doomed in NH if he loses IA.  People are overestimating the importance of IA momentum on NH.  The two states combined tend to provide a big momentum boost for the winners going into the states that follow, but NH frequently goes the opposite way from IA (2004 notwithstanding).  And to the extent that Romney takes a hit in NH for only finishing second in IA, Giuliani could take an equally big hit in for only finishing *third* in IA.

[Erc]

I don't think Romney's doomed in NH if he loses IA.  People are overestimating the importance of IA momentum on NH.  The two states combined tend to provide a big momentum boost for the winners going into the states that follow, but NH frequently goes the opposite way from IA (2004 notwithstanding).  And to the extent that Romney takes a hit in NH for only finishing second in IA, Giuliani could take an equally big hit in for only finishing *third* in IA.

Which leaves open the question of whether McCain takes an even larger hit for placing fifth in IA.

In the end, there are five realistic scenarios for IA/NH outcomes.  With Michigan getting pushed back, these results (& the likely Romney win in WY) are the only ones before NV/SC on the 19th.

I:  Romney wins both IA & NH.
     Romney gains a lot of momentum, likely goes onto win NV & SC.  Nomination is by no means guaranteed...Giuliani might still be in a position to win FL & do reasonably well on Super Tuesday...but Romney definitely favored.

II: Romney wins IA, but Giuliani wins NH.
      Probable slight boost to Romney overall nationally (despite the unexpected NH loss).  It probably won't be enough to give Romney the nomination though.  SC would still be very much in the air--especially if Huckabee places a reasonably close second in IA and gets a boost therefrom.  Giuliani most likely wins NV. The overall edge is Giuliani's by default--and he likely clinches the nomination if he wins SC.

III: Huckabee wins IA, but Romney wins NH.
     One of the stranger scenarios--Huckabee gets a huge boost, Romney a smaller one.  Should McCain finish third in NH, he's completely dead in the water.  Should he finish second, it doesn't help him much but severely cripples Giuliani (who has presumably placed third in both IA & NH).  Romney is slightly favored in SC, but only just.  After that...who knows.  The race is between two candidates who, between them, are polling no more than 25% of the vote nationwide.  Likely to be very unpredictable & exciting.

IV: Huckabee wins IA, but Giuliani wins NH.
      Romney is dead in the water, creating a Giuliani v. Huckabee race.  Giuliani has the obvious advantage, but SC could prove volatile.

V:  Huckabee wins IA, but McCain wins NH.
     Romney is crippled--very unlikely that he comes back to win SC or NV after this.  If he placed third in NH, he's completely dead.  Giuliani is still in the game due to his overall national levels of support--although those could crumble quite quickly.   Huckabee most likely has the edge in this one--but, yet again, this comes down to SC.

In III, IV, or V, should Huckabee not win the nomination, he's guaranteed the VP if he wants it.  He also makes himself the automatic frontrunner in 2012 (urgh).