The meeting opened with a discussion about the 2 articles Paul emailed group members about Herman Cain. The first article discussed Cain in the context of the conventional (but often wrong) wisdom that the front runner in the invisible primary in the polls usually secures the nomination (think Giuliani and Clinton). The second article, written by Nate Silver on his FiveThirtyEight Blog, talks about how Cain lacks many of the fundamentals seen as critical to winning the nomination. In order to analyze this, Silver runs some simple correlations to measure how quintessential fundamentals such as organization and fundraising prowess (which he combines to form what he calls the candidate's GPA) correlates with poll standings in November back to the 1992 primaries. He finds that his GPA correlates with poll standings at .80-a relatively strong value. There is, however, one data point that is a considerable outlier: showing a weak non-polling GPA of 4.0 with an usually strong polling GPA of 8.0. And that data point belongs to none other than Herman Cain.
We then discussed one critical variable in Silver's non-polling GPA: the puzzling paradox of Cain's current strong showing in Iowa polls (see the latest Des Moines Register poll of likey caucus particpants http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/cain-and-romney-top-iowa-poll/ despite the fact that he has virtually no presence in the state. Only 2 months out from the election, Cain still isn't actively campaigning in Iowa, focusing instead on his national book tour and on appearances on political talk shows. Meanwhile, Romney's substantial organization in Iowa has yet to result in pushing him to front-runner status, nor in more than 23% in most polls. (For interesting and quick analysis of how support breaks down by demographics see The Des Moines Register caucus analysis page.
This led to a discussion of what might happen should Cain win Iowa without engaging in the traditional boots-on-the-ground retail politics long seen as vital to winning the state. With Santorum spending 65 days thus far in Iowa, and scheduled to make his final appearance in the 99th of Iowa's 99 counties (the only candidate to do so thus far) yet failing to make any headway in the Register poll between June and now-some group members opined that a Cain victory might have 2nd and 3rd tier candidates questioning the effectiveness of the the retail politics strategy in future contests. It certainly didn't work for John Edwards in the 2008 cycle. He literally moved his whole family to Iowa for the year before the caucus only to come in 3rd in the caucus and to drop out of the race.Still, pre-contest organization and retail politics is one thing but the real importance of organization becomes apparent on caucus day. Because of the complexities of the caucus system, candidates need to have caucus experts and insiders on hand to wheel and deal for delegates, as well as the organization to get potential supporters to the caucus. Lacking these resources, it is quite possible that the candidate leading in the polls (Cain) will not ultimately prevail on election day. This is why despite the fact that Romney has not yet spent a great deal of time actually in Iowa, he has a substantial organizational presence there.
Other topics discussed: the chatter regarding Perry floating the idea of not participating in anymore debates (which most group members and pundits alike think would be a fatal decision), Cain's flub on the abortion issue, and Romney's flip-flopping on several issues in the lat 2 years. The group agrees that Romney's triangulation is substantive and not similar to Kerry's mistake of trying to explain congressional procedure which led to his infamous quote which was levied as an effective weapon by the Bush campaign team of being "for [the bill] before being against it." In contrast Romney has changed positions on several key issues and not over long period of time. Some of this is a result of Romney's tenure as the governor of Massachusetts, a liberal stronghold. The rest is a result of the sharp turn to the right the Republican Party has taken over the course of the last decade, which has forced Romney to waffle on issues as he tries to address his conservative shortcomings, which ironically are some of his best weapons against Obama should he win the nomination and they are both fighting for the coveted Independent vote. Regardless of the rationale behind these policy position changes- voters may be wary of supporting a candidate seen as blowing whichever way the wind blows and just as his fellow GOP contenders are doing, Obama's team will certainly highlight the issue during the general election.
So, that's what you missed at this week's meeting. Only 2 months out from the first contests, the meetings are heating up. Hope to see some new folks there this week! (Thursdays 2:15-3:15, room 302 Baldwin Hall).
Monday, October 31, 2011
Monday, October 24, 2011
10/20/11 Meeting
The meeting opened with a discussion of the latest polling from
RealClearPolitics.com. A poll from Iowa showed Cain with a modest lead over
Romney with 26% to Romney’s 22%. The latest polling from NH reflects Romney’s current
surge with the establishment and more moderate wing of the party with Romney at
40% and Cain at 18%. The SC poll shows that Cain leads Romney by 9% with 31% to
Romney’s 22%. Finally, Florida’s poll shows Romney and Cain in a virtual tie
with Romney at 31% and Cain at 29%.
Paul provided an interesting update regarding the primary
schedule by sharing with the group recent developments of counties in South
Carolina refusing to stage a primary due to budgetary concerns. The state is in
the process of challenging this in court. Paul opined that the state’s
Republican Party would likely receive substantial assistance from the national
GOP to stage a party-sponsored primary rather than see the important SC primary canceled.
The rest of the meeting focused on the (at the time) latest
debate in Viva Las Vegas. Unfortunately for Romney, what happened in Vegas
definitely didn’t stay in Vegas as the airwaves replayed Perry’s and his chest-pointing
“fight” over immigration and Perry’s charge that Romney used illegal immigrants
as landscapers. But by and large, the debate focused on Herman Cain’s 9-9-9
plan. The debate opening with each
candidate ripping it to shreds leaving Cain affable but flustered as he tried
gamely to defend his plan using an apples and oranges analogy that reminded
viewers of Perry’s poorly executed “flip-flopper” attacks on Romney in the
previous debate. The criticisms were buoyed by a recent analysis from The
Heritage Foundation (among other groups) that found Cain’s original plan (he has since been
trying to modify it) would result in a net tax increase for 86% of all
Americans: making it dead on arrival to the rest of the field as well as the
congressional Republicans.
Although this developed after Thursday’s meeting, Cain has
also come under fire from the other candidates for comments he made in an
interview regarding the government’s proper role on the abortion issue. Cain
committed the cardinal sin of trying to stay consistent with conservative
orthodoxy on limited government by taking a quasi-pro choice position on
abortion-leading some to speculate that he has committed political suicide, particularly
in Iowa. The base of the Republican Party has not often embraced candidates
with moderate stances on abortion-particularly at the presidential primary
level. Although they begrudgingly got behind John McCain in 2008 (his efforts
to appease them by debating Obama with Pastor Rick Warren seemed to help
somewhat) the primary is not a good time to wax philosophical about limited government
in private matters, although it was probably well-received by Ron Paul
supporters. As the polling discussed at the
beginning of this post was released before this story broke and before the
critiques of the 9-9-9 plan were widely covered, it remains to be seen whether
Cain will still be the front runner in Iowa by the time the next major debates
are held on November 9th and 12th.
That’s what you missed-hope to see you next Thursday in room
302 of Baldwin Hall at 2:15pm.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
9/22/11 Meeting
* I apologize for the delay in getting this post up. I had to let my dog (my
very best friend in the world for the past 15 years) go on Monday night and was
unable to do a post.
The 9/22 meeting was focused on the fallout from the Florida Tea Party debate and Rick Perry’s fall from frontrunner status due to his lackluster debate performance. Discussion centered on Perry’s inability to articulate his points contrasted with Romney’s polished performance which looked even more so against Perry’s blunders. Clearly, Romney is benefitting from the experience factor of having competed in the 2008 cycle and the numerous debates he participated in. In 2008, Romney was seen as the frontrunner in the invisible primary period and as such, most of his fellow contenders were focused on him. This has no doubt better prepared him for this cycle’s debates. One group member posited that it was strange that Bachmann, Cain, and especially Hunstman focused their attention on Perry, who came into the debate with a modest lead on Romney in some polls. He argued that despite this modest lead, the other candidates should focus on Romney because he has been consistently competitive, has the best organization, and of all the candidates (aside from Huntsman), he has the best appeal to moderate Republicans and Independents. This point was countered with the argument that the candidates tend to focus on whoever is leading in the polls going into the debate in a classic “attack the frontrunner” strategy and that now that we know beyond a doubt that the field is settled (even though Palin still refuses to publically state that she is not running, the filing deadlines are this week and next) we can expect that debates will focus on trying to mitigate the lead of the frontrunner, which has now reverted to Romney.
However, the most interesting result of the debate is the surge in the polls by Herman Cain, who was identified by the FL caucus members as the winner of the debate. Cain’s surge is largely comprised from people fleeing Perry and switching their support to Cain, who is now the strongest Tea Party candidate in the field. We discussed how Cain’s lack of political office experience and his race might affect Republican primary voters in the early states and in the general against Obama. Because the Tea Party movement has made “outsider” status an asset and not a curse, some group members feel that his lack of elective office experience will only help him with TP Republicans. Additionally, he has an extensive business resume including his time as CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, so as he gains exposure to the masses, more moderate Republicans may dismiss his more extreme right positions and focus on his business credentials as this election cycle will be all “about the economy, stupid.” I opined that Cain has an advantage over Romney in IA and SC because he is an evangelical Christian whereas Romney is a Mormon. Although some of the mystery about his Mormonism will be tempered by the fact that it was a key issue in the ’08 cycle, it is not clear if social/religious conservatives will be comfortable with his religion. This will be hard to determine because they may reject him purely on the basis of his relatively moderate social issue positions. How this plays out will be one of the more interesting aspects of the primaries should Romney stay in the top tier. Rob pointed out that Romney understood and made good use of the debate rules. He rarely referred to other candidates, particularly Perry, by name because doing so immediately allows that person a 30 second response. However, Perry did not seem to be aware of this, or if so could not discipline himself to not say Romney’s name. This allowed Romney to get a lot of extra talk time, which he used to his advantage.
The group also discussed the potential role of race should Cain win the nomination. If this happened then we would again have a historic election as there would be two African-American candidates as the major party nominees. Should Obama win-his legacy as the nation’s 1st black president extends to a 2nd term. Should Cain win, then we would have consecutive black presidents representing both sides of the political spectrum, neither of whom had substantial experience coming into the Oval Office- a tantalizing situation for scholars of presidential politics. Would Cain’s presence on the ticket neutralize the race factor for Obama? Might it also help to neutralize it for the element of the TP that were (and in some cases still are) in the “birther movement?” Would Cain be able to pull any of the solidly Democratic black votes away from Obama or would it have the inverse affect of galvanizing the black vote like in ’08 as black voters become aware of Cain’s decidedly conservative social and economic positions? As far as the primary goes, the group was divided on whether Cain would be attractive to black voters. Statistics on the black vote show that 95+% of black voters cast their ballots for Democrats in most cases. However, if Cain was able to pull even 5% away from Obama it could be decisive in a few cases.
These issues and more are sure to be discussed in this week’s meeting on Thursday, October 6th at 2:15 in room 302 of Baldwin Hall. Be there or be square. However, I’ll be tailgating in the parking lot of Autzen Stadium in Oregon, so the nest 2 weeks will be blogged by a guest blogger. Should you have any interest in doing the blog for both or either of those weeks-please talk to Paul Gurian.
The 9/22 meeting was focused on the fallout from the Florida Tea Party debate and Rick Perry’s fall from frontrunner status due to his lackluster debate performance. Discussion centered on Perry’s inability to articulate his points contrasted with Romney’s polished performance which looked even more so against Perry’s blunders. Clearly, Romney is benefitting from the experience factor of having competed in the 2008 cycle and the numerous debates he participated in. In 2008, Romney was seen as the frontrunner in the invisible primary period and as such, most of his fellow contenders were focused on him. This has no doubt better prepared him for this cycle’s debates. One group member posited that it was strange that Bachmann, Cain, and especially Hunstman focused their attention on Perry, who came into the debate with a modest lead on Romney in some polls. He argued that despite this modest lead, the other candidates should focus on Romney because he has been consistently competitive, has the best organization, and of all the candidates (aside from Huntsman), he has the best appeal to moderate Republicans and Independents. This point was countered with the argument that the candidates tend to focus on whoever is leading in the polls going into the debate in a classic “attack the frontrunner” strategy and that now that we know beyond a doubt that the field is settled (even though Palin still refuses to publically state that she is not running, the filing deadlines are this week and next) we can expect that debates will focus on trying to mitigate the lead of the frontrunner, which has now reverted to Romney.
However, the most interesting result of the debate is the surge in the polls by Herman Cain, who was identified by the FL caucus members as the winner of the debate. Cain’s surge is largely comprised from people fleeing Perry and switching their support to Cain, who is now the strongest Tea Party candidate in the field. We discussed how Cain’s lack of political office experience and his race might affect Republican primary voters in the early states and in the general against Obama. Because the Tea Party movement has made “outsider” status an asset and not a curse, some group members feel that his lack of elective office experience will only help him with TP Republicans. Additionally, he has an extensive business resume including his time as CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, so as he gains exposure to the masses, more moderate Republicans may dismiss his more extreme right positions and focus on his business credentials as this election cycle will be all “about the economy, stupid.” I opined that Cain has an advantage over Romney in IA and SC because he is an evangelical Christian whereas Romney is a Mormon. Although some of the mystery about his Mormonism will be tempered by the fact that it was a key issue in the ’08 cycle, it is not clear if social/religious conservatives will be comfortable with his religion. This will be hard to determine because they may reject him purely on the basis of his relatively moderate social issue positions. How this plays out will be one of the more interesting aspects of the primaries should Romney stay in the top tier. Rob pointed out that Romney understood and made good use of the debate rules. He rarely referred to other candidates, particularly Perry, by name because doing so immediately allows that person a 30 second response. However, Perry did not seem to be aware of this, or if so could not discipline himself to not say Romney’s name. This allowed Romney to get a lot of extra talk time, which he used to his advantage.
The group also discussed the potential role of race should Cain win the nomination. If this happened then we would again have a historic election as there would be two African-American candidates as the major party nominees. Should Obama win-his legacy as the nation’s 1st black president extends to a 2nd term. Should Cain win, then we would have consecutive black presidents representing both sides of the political spectrum, neither of whom had substantial experience coming into the Oval Office- a tantalizing situation for scholars of presidential politics. Would Cain’s presence on the ticket neutralize the race factor for Obama? Might it also help to neutralize it for the element of the TP that were (and in some cases still are) in the “birther movement?” Would Cain be able to pull any of the solidly Democratic black votes away from Obama or would it have the inverse affect of galvanizing the black vote like in ’08 as black voters become aware of Cain’s decidedly conservative social and economic positions? As far as the primary goes, the group was divided on whether Cain would be attractive to black voters. Statistics on the black vote show that 95+% of black voters cast their ballots for Democrats in most cases. However, if Cain was able to pull even 5% away from Obama it could be decisive in a few cases.
These issues and more are sure to be discussed in this week’s meeting on Thursday, October 6th at 2:15 in room 302 of Baldwin Hall. Be there or be square. However, I’ll be tailgating in the parking lot of Autzen Stadium in Oregon, so the nest 2 weeks will be blogged by a guest blogger. Should you have any interest in doing the blog for both or either of those weeks-please talk to Paul Gurian.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)