I admire your perpetual ability to spin anything in Rudy’s favor.
Unfortunately, he’s cratering in the polls, cratering on Intrade(!), and I’ve heard from two different sources that his campaign is quickly running out of money.
I also find it interesting how smugly confident the Rombots are, when Mitt would be absolutely dead after losing IA and NH.
He’s behind in IA and McCain is shooting up in NH. The avg of the last 3 NH polls is only +3.7 for Mitt, and rumor is that internal polling is showing JMac takes NH. Independents will put him way over the top.
How can you be smugly confident when your candidate is facing the strong possibility of certain death?
The high point for Giuliani was when he lectured Ron Paul about 9-11. Since then Giuliani hasn’t said or done anything to leave a lasting impression.
Giuliani has a lot of problem but one of them is that he’ll be struggling to get attention when voters are choosing which front runner to pick. After IA and NH, a lot of casual voters will leave Rudy for a more viable candidate.
Actually, I just read an article that claimed that between Nov 10 and just recently, Rudy was spending the most on ads in the New Hampshire area of all the candidates. Even in Q3 he was spending more than he was raising, and that was before the heat really turned up.
Regarding the money situation, that’s just what I’m hearing from people who would be in a position to know such things. Richelieu is hearing the same thing, fwiw.
But even still, what’s Rudy’s path to the nomination now? If McCain beats Romney in NH, he effectively secures the spot that Rudy was hoping to occupy come February 5th. There’s no way that Rudy wins Florida now unless he can win win an earlier state. But his poll numbers have even plummeted in the momentum proof states of NY/NJ/CT/DE/CA.
McCain has never been the establishment’s candidate, and he has paid for it dearly on several occasions. He’s not the only one; look at Huckabee. MSNBCs Scarborough called the Fox News attacks on Huckabee “asinine” and I agree.
Metro I don’t know if you love Rudy more or hate Mitt more. MWS, LJ, and Josiah (All Huck, McCain, and Paul supporters respectively) are the only people who commented before you went ranting on about “Rombots”
Cratering?! Implosion? May I suggest having some perspective and an easing up on the absurd hyperbole. The only “implosion” to which Patrick referred was McCain’s in July.
Giuliani, at this very moment, still leads the GOP field in national polling and on Intrade, where his current trading price (28.2) is double that of McCain’s (14.1). Giuliani also maintains, depending on the poll, between a four and seven point lead in his original firewall state of Florida.
murphy, I’ve read several accounts of NH spending, and Rudy was not the top spender in any account. Rudy spent slightly more than he raised in Q3 while Romney spent double what he raised.
People at this site believe Huck and McCain are in better positions than Rudy, yet neither of them has much money to speak of, and the big states are just weeks away.
McCain is better positioned than Rudy for one reason: he has some control over his destiny. Rudy has no control. His strategy gave up control in the summer when it bagged out of Iowa and decided to forgo any early state campaigning. He now totally relies on the mercy of events out of his contro;, whereas McCain, Romney, Huckabee and to some extent Thompson each can work hard and a have reasonable shot.
Rudy can exceed expectations in pre-FL states. He can campaign hard and win FL and Mega Tuesday states, and has laid the groundwork to do so. McCain of 8 years ago shows how you can have big wins in friendly states after losing the momentum. Reagan of 1976 shows how you can lose the first 6 contests and then turn around the momentum.
Metro, not much in #7 to respond to. You set up a false presumption (that Romney’s absolutely dead if he doesn’t get #1 in either IA/NH), based on little supporting data (two polls in NH, I think?), and expect that to somehow affect Rudy’s oncoming implosion (circling the drain, sorry Aron) that’s little more than a month away.
murphy, I referenced the last 3 polls in NH. Most everyone agrees Mitt is dead if he loses IA+NH. Care to explain how he comes back from that? Bearing in mind there is effectively no Dem contest in Michigan and independents will be voting in the GOP race?
E Dogg, internal polling is the polling done by the campaigns themselves. (Not to be confused with “internals” which are the secondary/internal questions within the polls.)
They differ because they poll all the states all the time, and there is a whole lot more money behind them. They catch trends much faster than the public polls. We need multiple public polls to see a trend. The campaigns’ internal polling spots them days before we do. Thus you see them make decisions that seem to predict the public polls.
Look at Rudy’s RCP numbers. He went from 29.9% a month ago to 20.9% today. That’s a much steeper drop then even McCain had during the summer. Intrade is even worse, he was at 47% a month ago and is at 28.2% right now. His support in the early states has been halved or worse, he’s dropped 15 or so points in Florida.
1. Mitt can’t survive getting #2 in both IA (to Huckabee) and NH (to McCain), despite being several times better funded than the two of them put togethor.
2. Rudy can survive getting #3 or #4 (or worse) in ALL the early primary states, and then make a stunning dash from behind while having strained resources.
Not sure this discussion is going to productive, buddy. As usual.
No republican has money other than Romney and Ron Paul. Who else can afford internal polls, or is it Romney’s own internal polls that show him losing to McCain in NH?
But Mitt’s STORYLINE is that early wins will catapault him. Storyline = expectations. If you REALLY study primary history, you’ll find that it’s the expectations game that mattered most, most of the time. Heard of the Comeback Kid? That was a 2nd place showing.
Also, Mitt has done relatively little to put organizations in place on the Mega Tuesday states, and Rudy’s got massive GOTV operations running from CA to ND. Yes, ND. Rudy’s got 201 momentum-proof delegates on that day. Mitt has UT.
But really it’s about the storyline/expectations. That’s why most agree Mitt is dead if he loses IA+NH.
Neither Mitt nor Rudy can survive early state losses without a win. Their support will drop to mid to low single digits.
E Dogg,
I’ve heard that Romney’s internals have him behind McCain in NH. That explains why he has decided to shift his schedule and spend a few more days campaigning in NH. Also, the only candidate that doesn’t have many to conduct internal polling is Mike Huckabee. But he’ll have enough money by early next week. McCain is just conducting internals in NH as of right now. But his fundraising his had a substantial uptick in the past few days, so that will probably change.
murphy wrote: “Mitt can’t survive getting #2 in both IA (to Huckabee) and NH (to McCain)”
That is correct.
Based on your denial-driven response in #30, I presume then that you also disagree with Pat Buchanan who said: “Two losses by Romney in states where he has invested millions would put his campaign on life support.�
murphy/Rombots, did you note in #35 that McCain’s internal polling is showing him winning NH? I think Romney’s and Rudy’s are showing the same thing……….
It’s more than a bit premature to use the term “implosion” when Giuliani remains the frontrunner in national polling, albeit by a small margin, and is still perceived by those who put their money where their mouth is as the Republican candidate most likely to win the GOP nomination.
You guys seem to be misunderstanding me. I’m not saying #2 in both IA and NH wouldn’t be bad news. I’m saying that it wouldn’t write Romney out of the race conclusively, as both of the men slanted to beat him in those scenarios have some serious problems of their own.
And Rudy’s already suffering nationally due to a few weeks of low level primary chatter. The idea that he can survive a month of intense primary state losses is just nutty. Especially when paired with the assertion that Mitt and $20 million can’t survive two second place showings.
Especially when you’ve got skeletons and don’t want to attract negative ads. Especially when the other candidates are going to beat one another up before you’re expected to show a win. Especially when you’ve got strong areas of support in later states (see McCain in 2000, Reagan in 1976).
E Dogg, it means LJ knows someone (or knows someone who knows someone) at Team McCain who’s been instructed to leak info, or who’s in danger of being fired.
You are starting to sound as crazy as the Ronulans. I’m glad that you are an optimist but I, and those on intrade, don’t think Rudy is TRYING to lower his expectations. Maybe, just maybe, that is a natural side effect of his recent precipitous decline.
Of course Rudy is TRYING to lower expectations! Why do you think they put out virtually nothing for 2-3 weeks? Why do you think he has a whole chapter on this strategy in his book?
Yes, it is elementary. You will spin and contort yourself any which way you can to make everything Rudy’s doing look like it’s all part of the plan. It’s quite breathtaking.
Did I miss the leaked memo in early 2007 where team Rudy decided it could best win the nomination by torpedoing its #1 or #2 lead in every early state, and destroying its national polling lead? Maybe he could lower expectations even further by pulling a Perot and dropping out of the race, only to jump back in and surprise everyone!
murphy wrote: “You guys seem to be misunderstanding me. I’m not saying #2 in both IA and NH wouldn’t be bad news. I’m saying that it wouldn’t write Romney out of the race conclusively”
There is no misunderstanding. I do appreciate your ‘glass half-full’ optimism and enthusiasm for your candidate, but to assert that losses in both Iowa and New Hampshire “wouldn’t write Romney out of the race conclusively” is merely wishful thinking on your part, and has no basis in political reality.
“Mcon, have you noticed Rudy is still leading on Intrade, even after a major fall?”
By less than one point. I don’t think you can hardly call that a lead, more like a tie.
MR “Yes, Rudy’s got awful expectations right now. You don’t see that is a GOOD thing, entering a string of primaries?”
This is true, but only in so far as the candidate can exceed their expectations enough to get a significant positive part of the pursuant narrative.
This is why it is a blessing that Romney has moved into second in Iowa already, and not next week for the first time.
If McCain is to move into first in NH, it’s best that he do it very soon AFA Romney is concerned. Of course, it would probably be better if Romney held a large lead and never lost it, just as it would have been better for Rudy to hold a lead and to have never lost it.
Put another way, given that your numbers are going to go down, the worst thing for your post-primary narrative is for your expectations not to have followed the numbers before the actual primary happened. In a sense, though, this is cold comfort.
LJ, As a McCain supporter I’m sure you were a little upset how the press prematurly wrote off McCain’s campaign last summer. You sure you aren’t making the same mistake only on Rudy?
A big question is where do we Pro-Choice Republicans go if Rudy exists the stage?
None of the other candidates are acceptable to us. Romney and Thompson somewhat. But they need to reach out to Rudy supporters and moderate their positions on abortion, to really gain our trust.
Gallup found back in May that fully 35% of all GOPers were Pro-Choice. Obviously, that number is much higher in states like Florida, Oregon, Washington, and California.
At some point, the Republican frontrunners are going to have to focus in on those three states and other Pro-Choice Republican bastions. It will be interested to see how they handle that if Rudy is no longer in the race.
But something tells me he will still be in the race. Cause the Pro-Choice wing of the GOP is stronger than some believe it to be.
Rudy’s “scandals” have already been aired in the public. He’s weathered to massive liberal media blitz against him. He is without doubt the candidate the Dems and the liberal media least want to face in the Fall. But despite the onslaught all last month, he’s still standing. Down a bit, but not much.
McCain’s scandals are just beginning. We haven’t seen polls yet post-Lobbyist scandal that Drudge reported on. Plus, McCain has a growing scandal in Texas that’s festering like a sore, with a campaigner who was arrested twice, once for credit card fraud.
Watch McCain’s numbers start to level off once these two scandals start to sink in a bit with the GOP electorate.
I, for one, do not think 2nd place finishes in Iowa and NH will kill Mitt, not even close. Mitt will still win Nevada, Michigan, and Wyoming, and no worse than 2nd in SC. I know its possible he loses Michigan but intrade has him with better than twice the chance as McCain. It’s a very interesting race for sure!
Eric, think of it this way: Romney and Thompson are fine with you guys other than the abortion issue, right? When you think of it both houses of Congress are Democrat, and when and if a Supreme Court vacancy appears, its going to be very, very difficult for us to get a Roberts/Scalia type through them. They will fight very, very hard to prevent it and they may not even clear them through committee. Assuming, somehow, that we got a strict constructionist Jurist through Congress, then, and only then would there be a situation in which Roe vs. Wade could possibly be overturned, and then only if the right case were to come before them. In that case, its still not obvious that it would be overturned, but it probably would be. In that case, it goes to the states to make their own decisions as to how to handle the abortion issue. Many states would keep it legal, and those making it illegal would vary greatly from one state to another as to how they would handle the issue. Even though I would like to see a Constitutional Amendment making it illegal, that’s not going to happen. We’re not even close to having the kind of plurality to make that change. I’m just saying, when and if Rudy fails, we Romney guys would love to have you on board, even though we don’t see perfectly eye to eye on that one issue.
You say you have pro-choice views on abortion and don’t know where to go if Rudy drops out. You worked for Ron Paul, who says he has never seen an abortion that was medically neccesary. Why would you have worked for and supported ron Paul, if you are not willing to support a pro-life candidate now? Is this a new position?
I don’t generally have anything to add in horserace discussions or projections, but if we look at nothing more than known financial capability, Romney can self-finance enough to run all the way to the convention if he wants to. (Wave bye-bye to your inheritance, boys!) The other with plenty of money would appear to be Ron Paul. He, too, could fight for quite a while on the funds he’s raised — and he seems not to toss cash around like the others.
Personally, I think either of those two would be something of a death sentence for the GOP if they get the nomination. Unless some donors start donating to GOP candidates soon, the money race could become the deciding factor.
MarkG - Romney is trying to hold on to the same coalition as Reagan, how could that be a death sentence? Huckabee is a death sentence because it alienates (kicks in the teeth actually) fiscal conservatives, and Rudy does the same to the social conservatives. They are the two of the remaining four viable candidates that destroy the party.
McCain was never dead. It was just a narrative written by the media. Fred will drop out after Iowa and then back McCain. Mitt will lose Iowa and NH and will have to fold up or risk more of his millions in a losing cause. Huck is a one trick pony.
McCain will win the nomination and beat Hillary in the General. Heck, after Feb 5th Rudy will side with him too.
Finally, Eric Dondero in post #61 is spreading lies. There is no growing scandal in Texas. The person you referred to WAS NEVER A MCCAIN CAMPAIGN STAFFER. Get your facts straight instead of just posting lies.
For MetroRepublican and all those others who are attempting to spin Rudy’s falling numbers by comparing his possibilities after losing the first 6 contests to Reagan in 1976, could you remind me how well Reagan did as the Republican nominee for President vs Carter that year?
IG: I’ve confessed many a time here which candidates I dislike most, so take my comments as you wish. Guess I was running my worst-case-scenario.
But it could well be that some observers are noticing a counterintuitive trend, suggesting that the rump of the so-called Reagan-to-Dubya coalition may be lumbering off to the elephants’ graveyard.
Otherwise, I don’t pretend to be capable of guessing who will win the GOP side. On the Dem side, it’s really Billary’s to lose. The Dem candidate will definitely have moolah galore in the general.
Metro, I had no idea I was expected to answer number 7. If you want me to answer something then the best tactic is for you to address it to me.
Besides, I have made it point now for the last six months not to answer anything from you that you try to force the conversation on. THe point of this post is how Rudy is tanking like a lead balloon and you are trying to turn into a thread about how Romney can’t win.
You’re a sore looser, which leaves alot of fun of watching how badly you spin the egg on your face right now.
66 “(Wave bye-bye to your inheritance, boys!)” - are you serious? Do we need to have a discussion about compound interest? Whether Romney wins or not, all the money he contributes to his run will be earned many times over within a few short years. He’s just changing his allocation schedule for a short while.
Wealth creation minded people invest
Poor minded people hoard
Rudy may or may not win the nomination, but I believe he will, and most of you will be eating a lot of crow for lunch. When this primary campaign is over, there is one thing I will be looking forward to:
Not having to read the persistantly OBNOXIOUS and ARROGANT and PREJUDICIAL comments by people like:
Econ Grad Stud
Irish Right
dskinner…
just to name a few.
Okay. I feel I need to speak up as a committed, but realistic Mitt supporter. If Mitt loses both IA and NH then I think his chances of capturing the nomination are next to nil. I would put his chances at about .1% if he loses both IA and NH - and yes, second is still losing. He has put in so much time and money into these 2 states that he has to win at least 1 and show very strongly in the other. His expectations are EXTREMELY high and if he doesn’t match or exceed (he can now exceed expectations thanks to Huck’s rise in IA) then he will be written off by the media and that folks is history.
I still think he has a legit chance of pulling off a major surprise in IA and I think, in the end, he will win NH, but maybe not by double digits. SO MUCH depends on the Dem results in IA. If the Dem race becomes interesting then all the legit indies and left-leaning indies jump to the Dem primary in NH and McCain loses his support - amazing that a GOP candidate needs LEFTIST support to win a GOP primary - says a lot about McCain, who is far from a conservative.
I don’t know what I think about Rudy yet and his falling numbers. I’m not quite smart enough to discern between lowering expectations and plummeting numbers. Guess, we’ll have to wait and see what sort of coverage he gets from the media after the first few primaries.
75: Ray, I also wonder how much coverage the fourth quarter fund-raising game will get near the end of ‘07, fist days of ‘08. Headline stories about Mitt “lending” his campaign a lot of money could proliferate if that’s what turns out to be the case. A story of Mitt reaching into his deep bank accounts would magnify anything perceived of as a poor showing for Romney.
I would agree w/ the point made above that Mitt has the personal wealth to continue to slog through to the Twin Cities, if he wants to. I don’t think he would be willing to do it if there was no chance of victory, but short of that, he has more staying power than anyone else.
As for Rudy running out of money - the bloggers cited here undoubtedly have access to info that I don’t have, so I’ll defer to whatever they hear. My own opinion - if you exclude Mitt’s own wealth (which we should), Rudy has raised more money than anyone else on the GOP side. He has now famously not competed in Iowa. He is now famously withdrawing from NH after running saturation ads for one month. Based on that info, it would seem unlikely that he’s running out of $$$… But I could be wrong.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:02 am
Nobody can deny Team Rudy’s post-Thanksgiving “quiet period” has superbly lowered expectations!
December 21st, 2007 at 2:07 am
Metro,
You’re being a remarkably good sport about this, especially given your passion for Rudy.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:09 am
Metro,
I admire your perpetual ability to spin anything in Rudy’s favor.
Unfortunately, he’s cratering in the polls, cratering on Intrade(!), and I’ve heard from two different sources that his campaign is quickly running out of money.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:11 am
Blogger tip: RP is out with new tv ad - http://youtube.com/watch?v=4AmY-fW3gdc
December 21st, 2007 at 2:12 am
LJ, how could Rudy be running out of money when he’s run so few ads, had the largest cash on hand, and has been saving up for FL and Mega Tuesday?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:13 am
LJ, you may remember a few days ago, I predicted Rudy would hit the 20s on Intrade.
He’s still leading there, while most people here have written him off. Quite interesting.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:15 am
I also find it interesting how smugly confident the Rombots are, when Mitt would be absolutely dead after losing IA and NH.
He’s behind in IA and McCain is shooting up in NH. The avg of the last 3 NH polls is only +3.7 for Mitt, and rumor is that internal polling is showing JMac takes NH. Independents will put him way over the top.
How can you be smugly confident when your candidate is facing the strong possibility of certain death?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:19 am
The high point for Giuliani was when he lectured Ron Paul about 9-11. Since then Giuliani hasn’t said or done anything to leave a lasting impression.
Giuliani has a lot of problem but one of them is that he’ll be struggling to get attention when voters are choosing which front runner to pick. After IA and NH, a lot of casual voters will leave Rudy for a more viable candidate.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:20 am
econ grad stud, you forgot about the MoveOn/NYT/Hillary thing?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:22 am
Metro,
Actually, I just read an article that claimed that between Nov 10 and just recently, Rudy was spending the most on ads in the New Hampshire area of all the candidates. Even in Q3 he was spending more than he was raising, and that was before the heat really turned up.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:23 am
Besides Rudy can easily run out of money if he just stops raising it.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:23 am
Metro,
Regarding the money situation, that’s just what I’m hearing from people who would be in a position to know such things. Richelieu is hearing the same thing, fwiw.
But even still, what’s Rudy’s path to the nomination now? If McCain beats Romney in NH, he effectively secures the spot that Rudy was hoping to occupy come February 5th. There’s no way that Rudy wins Florida now unless he can win win an earlier state. But his poll numbers have even plummeted in the momentum proof states of NY/NJ/CT/DE/CA.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:24 am
McCain has never been the establishment’s candidate, and he has paid for it dearly on several occasions. He’s not the only one; look at Huckabee. MSNBCs Scarborough called the Fox News attacks on Huckabee “asinine” and I agree.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:25 am
Metro I don’t know if you love Rudy more or hate Mitt more. MWS, LJ, and Josiah (All Huck, McCain, and Paul supporters respectively) are the only people who commented before you went ranting on about “Rombots”
Just stick to supporting posts about Rudy.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:26 am
LJ,
Cratering?! Implosion? May I suggest having some perspective and an easing up on the absurd hyperbole. The only “implosion” to which Patrick referred was McCain’s in July.
Giuliani, at this very moment, still leads the GOP field in national polling and on Intrade, where his current trading price (28.2) is double that of McCain’s (14.1). Giuliani also maintains, depending on the poll, between a four and seven point lead in his original firewall state of Florida.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:27 am
murphy, I’ve read several accounts of NH spending, and Rudy was not the top spender in any account. Rudy spent slightly more than he raised in Q3 while Romney spent double what he raised.
People at this site believe Huck and McCain are in better positions than Rudy, yet neither of them has much money to speak of, and the big states are just weeks away.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:30 am
It’s a very odd thing for a McCain supporter to allege Rudy’s broke and that McCain is in a better position.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:32 am
Metro, within reason, it doesn’t matter what Romney spends…he’s always got more if he needs it. Rudy’s got a hard limit, and it’s hurting him.
Aron, perhaps you would prefer a softer term for Rudy’s campaign…“circling the drain”?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:33 am
murphy, just gonna ignore #7?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:34 am
Metro,
McCain is better positioned than Rudy for one reason: he has some control over his destiny. Rudy has no control. His strategy gave up control in the summer when it bagged out of Iowa and decided to forgo any early state campaigning. He now totally relies on the mercy of events out of his contro;, whereas McCain, Romney, Huckabee and to some extent Thompson each can work hard and a have reasonable shot.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:38 am
Jason, just gonna ignore #7?
Rudy can exceed expectations in pre-FL states. He can campaign hard and win FL and Mega Tuesday states, and has laid the groundwork to do so. McCain of 8 years ago shows how you can have big wins in friendly states after losing the momentum. Reagan of 1976 shows how you can lose the first 6 contests and then turn around the momentum.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:45 am
Metro, not much in #7 to respond to. You set up a false presumption (that Romney’s absolutely dead if he doesn’t get #1 in either IA/NH), based on little supporting data (two polls in NH, I think?), and expect that to somehow affect Rudy’s oncoming implosion (circling the drain, sorry Aron) that’s little more than a month away.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:45 am
What’s internal polling? Why would they differ than regular polls? And why would someone put more stock into them?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:47 am
murphy, I referenced the last 3 polls in NH. Most everyone agrees Mitt is dead if he loses IA+NH. Care to explain how he comes back from that? Bearing in mind there is effectively no Dem contest in Michigan and independents will be voting in the GOP race?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:47 am
On #21. How did Reagan do that out of curiosity?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:49 am
24, I just had a shocking thought, if Rudy and Mitt are effectively out before super Tuesday, what candidate has all the money? Ron Paul. NOOO!!!!
December 21st, 2007 at 2:49 am
E Dogg, internal polling is the polling done by the campaigns themselves. (Not to be confused with “internals” which are the secondary/internal questions within the polls.)
They differ because they poll all the states all the time, and there is a whole lot more money behind them. They catch trends much faster than the public polls. We need multiple public polls to see a trend. The campaigns’ internal polling spots them days before we do. Thus you see them make decisions that seem to predict the public polls.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:49 am
ajay, with the help of Jesse Helms in North Carolina.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:52 am
Aron,
Look at Rudy’s RCP numbers. He went from 29.9% a month ago to 20.9% today. That’s a much steeper drop then even McCain had during the summer. Intrade is even worse, he was at 47% a month ago and is at 28.2% right now. His support in the early states has been halved or worse, he’s dropped 15 or so points in Florida.
If that’s not an implosion, I don’t know what is.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:52 am
Metro, just so I’m clear on your theories:
1. Mitt can’t survive getting #2 in both IA (to Huckabee) and NH (to McCain), despite being several times better funded than the two of them put togethor.
2. Rudy can survive getting #3 or #4 (or worse) in ALL the early primary states, and then make a stunning dash from behind while having strained resources.
Not sure this discussion is going to productive, buddy. As usual.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:54 am
No republican has money other than Romney and Ron Paul. Who else can afford internal polls, or is it Romney’s own internal polls that show him losing to McCain in NH?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:56 am
On #30. I actually agree with Metro on number 1, b/c what state does Romney win afterwards? McCain wins Michigan, Huckabee wins South Carolina, no?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:56 am
On #32, actually one thing I realize we all gloss over is margin of victory. maybe mitt could survive slight losses in both on second thought.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:57 am
murphy, nice attempt, I must say.
But Mitt’s STORYLINE is that early wins will catapault him. Storyline = expectations. If you REALLY study primary history, you’ll find that it’s the expectations game that mattered most, most of the time. Heard of the Comeback Kid? That was a 2nd place showing.
Also, Mitt has done relatively little to put organizations in place on the Mega Tuesday states, and Rudy’s got massive GOTV operations running from CA to ND. Yes, ND. Rudy’s got 201 momentum-proof delegates on that day. Mitt has UT.
But really it’s about the storyline/expectations. That’s why most agree Mitt is dead if he loses IA+NH.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:00 am
murphy,
Neither Mitt nor Rudy can survive early state losses without a win. Their support will drop to mid to low single digits.
E Dogg,
I’ve heard that Romney’s internals have him behind McCain in NH. That explains why he has decided to shift his schedule and spend a few more days campaigning in NH. Also, the only candidate that doesn’t have many to conduct internal polling is Mike Huckabee. But he’ll have enough money by early next week. McCain is just conducting internals in NH as of right now. But his fundraising his had a substantial uptick in the past few days, so that will probably change.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:01 am
murphy wrote: “Mitt can’t survive getting #2 in both IA (to Huckabee) and NH (to McCain)”
That is correct.
Based on your denial-driven response in #30, I presume then that you also disagree with Pat Buchanan who said: “Two losses by Romney in states where he has invested millions would put his campaign on life support.�
December 21st, 2007 at 3:02 am
murphy/Rombots, did you note in #35 that McCain’s internal polling is showing him winning NH? I think Romney’s and Rudy’s are showing the same thing……….
December 21st, 2007 at 3:03 am
Aron, nice quote.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:07 am
LJ,
It’s more than a bit premature to use the term “implosion” when Giuliani remains the frontrunner in national polling, albeit by a small margin, and is still perceived by those who put their money where their mouth is as the Republican candidate most likely to win the GOP nomination.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:08 am
What Rudy’s had is a massive lowering of expectations. A politics 101 textbook would tell you that’s the very best way to enter a series of primaries.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:10 am
Aron, Metro, and LJ,
You guys seem to be misunderstanding me. I’m not saying #2 in both IA and NH wouldn’t be bad news. I’m saying that it wouldn’t write Romney out of the race conclusively, as both of the men slanted to beat him in those scenarios have some serious problems of their own.
And Rudy’s already suffering nationally due to a few weeks of low level primary chatter. The idea that he can survive a month of intense primary state losses is just nutty. Especially when paired with the assertion that Mitt and $20 million can’t survive two second place showings.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:10 am
LJ, how do you get this inside information?
December 21st, 2007 at 3:10 am
Especially when you’ve got skeletons and don’t want to attract negative ads. Especially when the other candidates are going to beat one another up before you’re expected to show a win. Especially when you’ve got strong areas of support in later states (see McCain in 2000, Reagan in 1976).
December 21st, 2007 at 3:12 am
murphy, did you miss the item about the storyline? and expectations?
Mitt’s failure to win IA or NH would be a MASSIVE failure of expectations. His storyline is all about winning those.
Yes, Rudy’s got awful expectations right now. You don’t see that is a GOOD thing, entering a string of primaries?
This is so elementary……
December 21st, 2007 at 3:12 am
E Dogg, it means LJ knows someone (or knows someone who knows someone) at Team McCain who’s been instructed to leak info, or who’s in danger of being fired.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:14 am
Metro,
You are starting to sound as crazy as the Ronulans. I’m glad that you are an optimist but I, and those on intrade, don’t think Rudy is TRYING to lower his expectations. Maybe, just maybe, that is a natural side effect of his recent precipitous decline.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:15 am
Mcon, have you noticed Rudy is still leading on Intrade, even after a major fall?
December 21st, 2007 at 3:16 am
Of course Rudy is TRYING to lower expectations! Why do you think they put out virtually nothing for 2-3 weeks? Why do you think he has a whole chapter on this strategy in his book?
December 21st, 2007 at 3:16 am
Metro,
Yes, it is elementary. You will spin and contort yourself any which way you can to make everything Rudy’s doing look like it’s all part of the plan. It’s quite breathtaking.
Did I miss the leaked memo in early 2007 where team Rudy decided it could best win the nomination by torpedoing its #1 or #2 lead in every early state, and destroying its national polling lead? Maybe he could lower expectations even further by pulling a Perot and dropping out of the race, only to jump back in and surprise everyone!
December 21st, 2007 at 3:18 am
murphy, do you realize you just ignore most of my points and say I’m contorting? Doesn’t that imply you cannot answer them?
December 21st, 2007 at 3:22 am
murphy, Rudy’s book was published before early 2007.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:23 am
Metro, once again I find myself not ignoring ENOUGH of your posts, and it’s very late.
Tell me again tomorrow how Rudy’s rock bottom expectations are a good thing for the candidate who’s whole campaign rests on being the most electable.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:25 am
murphy wrote: “You guys seem to be misunderstanding me. I’m not saying #2 in both IA and NH wouldn’t be bad news. I’m saying that it wouldn’t write Romney out of the race conclusively”
There is no misunderstanding. I do appreciate your ‘glass half-full’ optimism and enthusiasm for your candidate, but to assert that losses in both Iowa and New Hampshire “wouldn’t write Romney out of the race conclusively” is merely wishful thinking on your part, and has no basis in political reality.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:37 am
“Mcon, have you noticed Rudy is still leading on Intrade, even after a major fall?”
By less than one point. I don’t think you can hardly call that a lead, more like a tie.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:39 am
John Mark, fine, a tie. But this site is full of people who say Rudy is dead. There’s an inconsistency, there.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:49 am
Yeah, I don’t at all think Rudy is dead. He definitely headed in the wrong direction and fast, but he could certainly turn things around.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:59 am
MR “Yes, Rudy’s got awful expectations right now. You don’t see that is a GOOD thing, entering a string of primaries?”
This is true, but only in so far as the candidate can exceed their expectations enough to get a significant positive part of the pursuant narrative.
This is why it is a blessing that Romney has moved into second in Iowa already, and not next week for the first time.
If McCain is to move into first in NH, it’s best that he do it very soon AFA Romney is concerned. Of course, it would probably be better if Romney held a large lead and never lost it, just as it would have been better for Rudy to hold a lead and to have never lost it.
Put another way, given that your numbers are going to go down, the worst thing for your post-primary narrative is for your expectations not to have followed the numbers before the actual primary happened. In a sense, though, this is cold comfort.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:13 am
LJ, As a McCain supporter I’m sure you were a little upset how the press prematurly wrote off McCain’s campaign last summer. You sure you aren’t making the same mistake only on Rudy?
December 21st, 2007 at 5:55 am
#7: I find your comment to be a hilarious example of the silly things people say about Romney. You said:
“He’s behind in IA and McCain is shooting up in NH.” This a perfectly legitimate analysis. But so is this:
“He’s ahead in NH, and he’s shooting up in IA.” Do you see the problem?
December 21st, 2007 at 5:56 am
A big question is where do we Pro-Choice Republicans go if Rudy exists the stage?
None of the other candidates are acceptable to us. Romney and Thompson somewhat. But they need to reach out to Rudy supporters and moderate their positions on abortion, to really gain our trust.
Gallup found back in May that fully 35% of all GOPers were Pro-Choice. Obviously, that number is much higher in states like Florida, Oregon, Washington, and California.
At some point, the Republican frontrunners are going to have to focus in on those three states and other Pro-Choice Republican bastions. It will be interested to see how they handle that if Rudy is no longer in the race.
But something tells me he will still be in the race. Cause the Pro-Choice wing of the GOP is stronger than some believe it to be.
December 21st, 2007 at 6:01 am
Rudy’s “scandals” have already been aired in the public. He’s weathered to massive liberal media blitz against him. He is without doubt the candidate the Dems and the liberal media least want to face in the Fall. But despite the onslaught all last month, he’s still standing. Down a bit, but not much.
McCain’s scandals are just beginning. We haven’t seen polls yet post-Lobbyist scandal that Drudge reported on. Plus, McCain has a growing scandal in Texas that’s festering like a sore, with a campaigner who was arrested twice, once for credit card fraud.
Watch McCain’s numbers start to level off once these two scandals start to sink in a bit with the GOP electorate.
December 21st, 2007 at 6:57 am
Rudy is in full retreat hey.
Not a good look.
The race was a 2 man race for about 9 months. 1.5 man race now.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:04 am
I, for one, do not think 2nd place finishes in Iowa and NH will kill Mitt, not even close. Mitt will still win Nevada, Michigan, and Wyoming, and no worse than 2nd in SC. I know its possible he loses Michigan but intrade has him with better than twice the chance as McCain. It’s a very interesting race for sure!
December 21st, 2007 at 8:31 am
Eric, think of it this way: Romney and Thompson are fine with you guys other than the abortion issue, right? When you think of it both houses of Congress are Democrat, and when and if a Supreme Court vacancy appears, its going to be very, very difficult for us to get a Roberts/Scalia type through them. They will fight very, very hard to prevent it and they may not even clear them through committee. Assuming, somehow, that we got a strict constructionist Jurist through Congress, then, and only then would there be a situation in which Roe vs. Wade could possibly be overturned, and then only if the right case were to come before them. In that case, its still not obvious that it would be overturned, but it probably would be. In that case, it goes to the states to make their own decisions as to how to handle the abortion issue. Many states would keep it legal, and those making it illegal would vary greatly from one state to another as to how they would handle the issue. Even though I would like to see a Constitutional Amendment making it illegal, that’s not going to happen. We’re not even close to having the kind of plurality to make that change. I’m just saying, when and if Rudy fails, we Romney guys would love to have you on board, even though we don’t see perfectly eye to eye on that one issue.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:38 am
Eric,
You say you have pro-choice views on abortion and don’t know where to go if Rudy drops out. You worked for Ron Paul, who says he has never seen an abortion that was medically neccesary. Why would you have worked for and supported ron Paul, if you are not willing to support a pro-life candidate now? Is this a new position?
December 21st, 2007 at 8:46 am
I don’t generally have anything to add in horserace discussions or projections, but if we look at nothing more than known financial capability, Romney can self-finance enough to run all the way to the convention if he wants to. (Wave bye-bye to your inheritance, boys!) The other with plenty of money would appear to be Ron Paul. He, too, could fight for quite a while on the funds he’s raised — and he seems not to toss cash around like the others.
Personally, I think either of those two would be something of a death sentence for the GOP if they get the nomination. Unless some donors start donating to GOP candidates soon, the money race could become the deciding factor.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:51 am
MarkG - Romney is trying to hold on to the same coalition as Reagan, how could that be a death sentence? Huckabee is a death sentence because it alienates (kicks in the teeth actually) fiscal conservatives, and Rudy does the same to the social conservatives. They are the two of the remaining four viable candidates that destroy the party.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:54 am
BTW - Intrade last trade has Rudy 28.0, Mitt 27.9
December 21st, 2007 at 8:58 am
McCain was never dead. It was just a narrative written by the media. Fred will drop out after Iowa and then back McCain. Mitt will lose Iowa and NH and will have to fold up or risk more of his millions in a losing cause. Huck is a one trick pony.
McCain will win the nomination and beat Hillary in the General. Heck, after Feb 5th Rudy will side with him too.
Finally, Eric Dondero in post #61 is spreading lies. There is no growing scandal in Texas. The person you referred to WAS NEVER A MCCAIN CAMPAIGN STAFFER. Get your facts straight instead of just posting lies.
December 21st, 2007 at 9:03 am
For MetroRepublican and all those others who are attempting to spin Rudy’s falling numbers by comparing his possibilities after losing the first 6 contests to Reagan in 1976, could you remind me how well Reagan did as the Republican nominee for President vs Carter that year?
December 21st, 2007 at 9:04 am
IG: I’ve confessed many a time here which candidates I dislike most, so take my comments as you wish. Guess I was running my worst-case-scenario.
But it could well be that some observers are noticing a counterintuitive trend, suggesting that the rump of the so-called Reagan-to-Dubya coalition may be lumbering off to the elephants’ graveyard.
Otherwise, I don’t pretend to be capable of guessing who will win the GOP side. On the Dem side, it’s really Billary’s to lose. The Dem candidate will definitely have moolah galore in the general.
December 21st, 2007 at 9:11 am
Metro, I had no idea I was expected to answer number 7. If you want me to answer something then the best tactic is for you to address it to me.
Besides, I have made it point now for the last six months not to answer anything from you that you try to force the conversation on. THe point of this post is how Rudy is tanking like a lead balloon and you are trying to turn into a thread about how Romney can’t win.
You’re a sore looser, which leaves alot of fun of watching how badly you spin the egg on your face right now.
December 21st, 2007 at 9:12 am
66 “(Wave bye-bye to your inheritance, boys!)” - are you serious? Do we need to have a discussion about compound interest? Whether Romney wins or not, all the money he contributes to his run will be earned many times over within a few short years. He’s just changing his allocation schedule for a short while.
Wealth creation minded people invest
Poor minded people hoard
December 21st, 2007 at 10:00 am
Rudy may or may not win the nomination, but I believe he will, and most of you will be eating a lot of crow for lunch. When this primary campaign is over, there is one thing I will be looking forward to:
Not having to read the persistantly OBNOXIOUS and ARROGANT and PREJUDICIAL comments by people like:
Econ Grad Stud
Irish Right
dskinner…
just to name a few.
December 21st, 2007 at 10:23 am
Okay. I feel I need to speak up as a committed, but realistic Mitt supporter. If Mitt loses both IA and NH then I think his chances of capturing the nomination are next to nil. I would put his chances at about .1% if he loses both IA and NH - and yes, second is still losing. He has put in so much time and money into these 2 states that he has to win at least 1 and show very strongly in the other. His expectations are EXTREMELY high and if he doesn’t match or exceed (he can now exceed expectations thanks to Huck’s rise in IA) then he will be written off by the media and that folks is history.
I still think he has a legit chance of pulling off a major surprise in IA and I think, in the end, he will win NH, but maybe not by double digits. SO MUCH depends on the Dem results in IA. If the Dem race becomes interesting then all the legit indies and left-leaning indies jump to the Dem primary in NH and McCain loses his support - amazing that a GOP candidate needs LEFTIST support to win a GOP primary - says a lot about McCain, who is far from a conservative.
I don’t know what I think about Rudy yet and his falling numbers. I’m not quite smart enough to discern between lowering expectations and plummeting numbers. Guess, we’ll have to wait and see what sort of coverage he gets from the media after the first few primaries.
December 21st, 2007 at 10:32 am
McCain is a one trick pony. NH is the only state that he has a shot at.
There is 0 grassroots support for McCain beyond NH.
Just like in 2000, McCain may win NH, but he is going nowhere.
December 21st, 2007 at 10:36 am
75: Ray, I also wonder how much coverage the fourth quarter fund-raising game will get near the end of ‘07, fist days of ‘08. Headline stories about Mitt “lending” his campaign a lot of money could proliferate if that’s what turns out to be the case. A story of Mitt reaching into his deep bank accounts would magnify anything perceived of as a poor showing for Romney.
December 21st, 2007 at 10:46 am
#77. I recall reading that it will not be released until Jan 30.
December 21st, 2007 at 11:15 am
#70 Irish Right, you really believe Reagan ran against Carter in 1976? Wow. Some Republican you are.
#75, Hooray for a sane Romney supporter!
December 21st, 2007 at 11:22 am
Hello, all (McCain-site publisher)-
My two cents on all of this…
I would agree w/ the point made above that Mitt has the personal wealth to continue to slog through to the Twin Cities, if he wants to. I don’t think he would be willing to do it if there was no chance of victory, but short of that, he has more staying power than anyone else.
As for Rudy running out of money - the bloggers cited here undoubtedly have access to info that I don’t have, so I’ll defer to whatever they hear. My own opinion - if you exclude Mitt’s own wealth (which we should), Rudy has raised more money than anyone else on the GOP side. He has now famously not competed in Iowa. He is now famously withdrawing from NH after running saturation ads for one month. Based on that info, it would seem unlikely that he’s running out of $$$… But I could be wrong.