Does a protracted primary process help the GOP?

January 17, 2008

The NYT’s Adam Nagourney made a compelling case yesterday that Mitt Romney’s win in the Michigan Republican primary was “proof from the ballot box of what polls have shown: this is a party that is adrift, deeply divided and uninspired when it comes to its presidential candidates and unsure of how to counter an energized Democratic Party.” Marc Ambinder added that even most Republicans would concede that the party is, at least for now, “listless, demoralized and casting about for unity.”

This struck me as plainly and obviously true, which is why I was surprised to see the National Review’s John O’Sullivan argue the exact opposite in a piece yesterday. (via Tim Grieve)

There is one clear winner, though: the GOP itself. Contrary to all expectations, the Republican race is exciting. No candidate has proved to be a complete dud. All have shone for their moment in the sun. And so far all have fought tough but fair in a series of good-humored debates. I suspect the voters are beginning to like them.

The bitter internecine crack-up that every political columnist has predicted has occurred all right — not in conservatism where they’ve been looking for it but in the Democratic party which was supposed to be coasting to triumph.

It’s hard to overstate how wrong this seems to be.

Let’s take these briefly one at a time:

“[T]he Republican race is exciting.” — True, but only in the way a car wreck is perceived as exciting. It’s a big, wide-open race, in which all of the candidates deserve to lose, but one of them won’t. “Exciting” can be value-neutral, and in this case, I don’t think it’s a positive.

“No candidate has proved to be a complete dud.” — Actually, they all have. Romney has blown previously huge leads, McCain can’t seem to sway actual Republicans, Giuliani has flopped, Thompson has flopped, and Huckabee is reviled by two-thirds of the party. The entire field is “a complete dud.”

“All have shone for their moment in the sun.” — The opposite is true. Whenever one becomes the focus of attention, he’s inevitably wilted. It’s why there’s still no GOP frontrunner.

“I suspect the voters are beginning to like them.” — Not only do voters in general not like these candidates, Republican voters don’t even like these candidates. This, coupled by Bush’s failed presidency, has left the party in an extraordinary funk.

Ten months before Election Day, Republicans are facing a threat that spells serious trouble for GOP candidates from the top of the ticket down to the most obscure races. The problem is the funk of the foot soldiers.

So far, the story of the 2008 campaign on the Republican side is what’s not happening.

Ambitious Republican politicians at the state and local levels are not deciding that this is the year to make a bid for higher office.

Republican contributors are not opening their wallets and writing campaign checks.

Most striking of all, Republican voters are not heading to the polls to vote in the GOP primaries in anything like participation rates of early years. […]

While voter turnout soared to new records in Iowa and New Hampshire on the Democratic side, it was actually down for Republicans in the first three states in which the candidates aggressively campaigned when compared to the last competitive race, in 2000. All told, 1.2 million voted in the Republican races in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan. In 2000, the number was 1.6 million.

“Voters are beginning to like them”? I really don’t think so.

This struck me as plainly and obviously true, which is why I was surprised to see the National Review’s John O’Sullivan argue the exact opposite

The exact opposite of plainly and obviously true is NR’s mission statement, isn’t it? Where’s the surprise;>

  • media rule #1: when bloviating about politices, whatever happens always helps the republicans.

  • They say no publicity is bad publicity. But the biggest threat to Republican candidates and Republican theory is overexposure. Eight years of Bush did not help, and none of these guys can or want to separate themselves from him, except by not mentioning his name. But a few more months of trying to defend the unnameable one is awkward to say the least.

  • Considering they’ve endorsed the Mittbot, they’ve got to find a positive spin for his performance so far. Rather than two depressing and expensive losses followed by a win based on nepotism and cash, with the clear lesson being that the only thing keeping Romney afloat is his enormous fortune, this view puts a happy glow on all of it. Why did he lose in Iowa and NH? Because Huck and McCain are super awesome! And Mitt won Mich. because he’s even super awesomer!! Go GOP! Feel the Mittmentum!

  • There they go, creating their own reality again. I, for one, am willing to let them live in this one, however. On Nov 5, 2008, they will be in for one hell of a shock.

  • Maybe the plan is we all learn to hate each of the Republican’t candidates so we forget we hate Boy George II. Because in the end we will never be reconciled with BGII, but we might be reconciled (well, THEY might, I won’t) with which ever of these seven dwarves wins the Republican’t nomination.

    Really, think about it. If the Republican’ts had coronated a nominee back at Iowa/New Hampshire, the Democrats would still be able to run against the Bushite record because a coronation would mean a continuation of BGII’s administration and his record of failure. But by NOT choosing a candidate early, the Republican’ts make their candidates seem to stand on their own feet, for their own policies and on their own records. They can argue in the General that their candidate is not a continuation of BGII and that the American people all got a say in who it was.

    And you only had to listen to Hillary at the Nevada debate to see how successful running against BGII will be. Notice she didn’t bother mentioning any of the Republican’ts candidates (though they all mention her).

    So while I agree with CB that John O’Sullivan is delusional, I think a different argument can be made that this protracted Republican’t primary is their only road to salvation.

  • McCain can’t seem to sway actual Republicans

    Alas, I think he will soon, once Romney finishes his flameout and Huckabee runs out of money. At least, that’s how I read the new Pew poll, in which McCain does very well (59% or better, and mostly in the 70s) in literally every demographic and cultural subgroup in the GOP.

  • While voter turnout soared to new records in Iowa and New Hampshire on the Democratic side, it was actually down for Republicans…

    Voter turnout is not an insurmountable problem if you let private companies count the votes inside proprietary black boxes. Remember the old adage about how it doesn’t matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes. And so far the Dimocrats seem happy to let a lot of votes be counted by companies which refuse to allow their counting software to be examined by outside experts. Hell, they’ve even ousted one of the people who identified the DRE problem long ago.

    The Ohio Democratic Party has ousted staunch election reform advocate, State Senator Teresa Fedor, from her position as Minority Leader. Senator Fedor was sounding the alarm regarding the unsafe nature of touch screen voting machines (DREs) years before most people had ever heard of them. Her removal as the leader of the Democrats in the Ohio Legislature is a dramatic blow to the election reform movement in Ohio. She has worked tirelessly for years for election reform, first as a State Representative and then as a State Senator.

    Among other things, Senator Fedor spearheaded the 2004 Joint Committee on Ballot Security, which, with the help of CASE Ohio members, prevented the purchase of any new DREs in Ohio prior to the 2004 election. She invited many computer experts, and others, to testify before the Committee, educating not only the legislature, but also the public, about the dangers of DREs. She introduced and passed the Bill requiring paper on any voting machine…

    http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/73/71266.html

    Never underestimate the ability of The Washington Generals the Democrats to lose by very small percentages. And anyone who thinks this is tinfoil territory should consider how many other laws the Republicans have been perfectly willing to violate and ask themselves why they wouldn’t violate this one, especially given the lax oversight and the murky nature of any “proof” that can actually be obtained.

  • It might be true if, the more we saw of them, the better they looked, but that hasn’t been the case. Have their debates gotten better? Has even one of them looked or sounded the least bit presidential in debates or interviews?

    I guess no one told them that Dean’s 50-state strategy was not designed to ensure that a different presidential candidate would win in each state, but it sure seems lke that’s what they’re going for.

  • I think this is clearly a case of “If I say it often and loud enough, it will surely come true.”

  • There may not be a GOP candidate that is a dud to all GOP voters, but most of the candidates are a dud to a not insignificant part of GOP voters. The crack up may or may not be showing now, but there have only been a few primaries. The writer may be writing another story at the time of the convention – especially if the primaries continue to be devided amongst the candidates somewhat evenly.

  • On NPR this morning I heard a Republican voter say she was concerned because the party hadn’t settled on a nominee already. Already? We’re barely three weeks into the primaries! I think it’s great that states beyond the first three will get a chance to contribute to the process. Is it better to have a candidate anointed a full year before the election?

    Why are the Republicans getting all the ink about being in fragments? Democrats are having just as hard a time settling on a nominee. Two big contests, two separate winners, and John Edwards isn’t going away yet. Both parties are taking the long route, and I couldn’t be happier.

    Actually, I would be happier if the media would shut up about how confused and fractious the process is. This is the process! If you don’t like it, go to Russia. (Sad how that saying is still up-to-date.)

  • National Review’s job is to talk up GOP prospects. You can expect them to act as if everything’s peachy all the way to the end. If they were aboard the Titanic, they’d be all on about how nice it was to be able to go swimming on the main deck instead of having to schlep all the way down to the pool.

    • Comments are closed.