« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

“Flavor of the month” is not serious analysis

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  November 8th, 2011 at 06:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Conservative activists have this nasty habit of denigrating our own politicians, and in fact the very practice of running for office to represent our side. We kick our guys (and girls) at every opportunity, sometimes for no reason but to kick politicians.

It’s in that vein that some have taken to referring to one Presidential candidate or another as the ‘flavor of the month,’ suggesting they’re not serious people, that our electorate isn’t making serious decisions, and that our choices in this election are trivial.

Not only is that not the case, but the plain fact is, the actual rise and and fall of the various candidates doesn’t even match up with the trend. In particular, it’s either ignorant or dishonest to put Herman Cain and Rick Perry into the same category as Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty.

It doesn’t take more than a casual visit to the Real Clear politics archive of polls to discredit that idea, either. Start with Tim Pawlenty, supposedly the first “flavor of the month” of the four. Where did he get in the polling? Did he ever even crack double figures, in those early days of polling loaded with non-serious choices like Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Chris Christie, Rudy Giuliani, and Donald Trump? I actually tried to find last night a single poll that had Pawlenty over ten. I got no higher than six.

Michele Bachmann was the candidate that rose as Pawlenty fell. It was in the same debate that she announced her candidacy that Pawlenty wussed out from attacking Mitt Romney on Masscare’s similiaries with Obamacare. How well did she get? In the RCP average, a crude instrument but good enough for our purposes here, she didn’t even get close to Mitt Romney. She hit double figures, sure. But the closest she got to Mittens was within five points, and that was as Rick Perry was shooting past her.

Rick Perry, supposedly the third flavor of the month, now there’s a peak. The only candidate to cross the 30 point threshold, his peak is over double that of Bachmann’s 14. Perry’s 31.8 took a 12.0 point lead over Mitt Romney. Bachmann’s peak wasn’t even in Perry’s league. Even now, with Perry having bottomed out, he’s at 10.2 in the RCP average. That means Perry at his trough is less than 4 points from Bachmann at her peak. Again: the two candidates just aren’t in the same league.

The same goes for Herman Cain. Cain was actually in second place in the RCP average for much of June, before being passed by both Perry and Bachmann. Does that mean he was flavor of the month twice? Cain’s also only the second candidate to pass Romney in the RCP average. He’s only the third candidate in the race to be a frontrunner.

If you’re going to call Perry and Cain flavors of the month, then you’ve got to call Mitt Romney the same. Those three are in the same class and have had the same kind of popularity in this race. Whatever you do though, don’t even pretend that Perry and Cain are new iterations of Pawlenty and Bachmann. There’s just no there, there.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • tarnishedroses
    Romney and all of the above-referenced “flavors of the week”.

    It is staying power.

    Look at this chart: http://www.gallup.com/poll/150617/Cain-Ties-Romney-Atop-GOP-Field.aspx

    In the chart, you can see that Romney led outright in 3 of the 6 polls conducted between June of 2011 and November of 2011. Cain led in one. Perry led in two (August and September) and Cain and Romney tied in the most recent one.

    Also worth noting is that only Romney has stayed at or above 17% throughout the 6-month polling period.

    No other candidate has stayed above even 12% during that period.

    The biggest weakness of polls is that they only give you an idea of where the electorate is now, as opposed to where it will be when it is time to vote.

    But when you look at polls over a 6-month period of time, you can see momentum and you can start to construct theories as to whether certain candidates have a “ceiling” of support and whether certain candidates have a “floor” of support.

    Romney may have a 27% “ceiling” according to gallup, but he also has a 17% “floor”. Every other candidate’s support floor is 11% or lower.

    It is also worth noting that Romney and Perry have the same amount of support among conservatives according to this poll: http://www.gallup.com/poll/150134/Romney-Competitive-Top-GOP-Rivals-Among-Conservatives.aspx

    You don’t hear that very often on RedState but there it is.

  • snowshooze

    I thought it was probably the most tasteless thing I ever heard her say…and it seemed out of character for her to do so.
    All these Candidates deserve a great deal of respect for who they are, what they are trying to accomplish and what they are willing to expose themselves to, even if we do not support their plank.

  • doncorleone

    That liberals do, irrefutably, is circle the wagons, defend to the nth degree (no matter how guilty, and to what degree) their guy and gals. Republicans, conservatives to a degree, and especially the r.i.n.o.s feel the need to tear down and help liberals wreck conservative/republicans election chances. It’s nearly seditionary, I can understand the r.i.n.o.s, they want to have liberals be nice to them, they like glowing press and glossy invites. Conservatives on the other hand, need to stick to the plan, and follow Reagan’s 11th commandment. Four more years of obama is our death knell.

  • libertardo

    If he can issue a solid statement on his plans for immigration if elected, and if he can notch a solid debate performance, then I’d say he can recover. He’s had some stumbles, but these things are quickly forgotten. He’s an excellent foil for Obama. Romney is just this pile of mush. Voters are going to have to choose someone, and Perry, for all his faults, is still a strong candidate in this field.

  • pttx333

    have really good videos from interviews he’s been doing and they typically appear on this site. He’s a good and honorable man who will do the right thing for us and this country of ours.

  • libertardo

    I know I’m going to get pilloried here for suggesting this, but I think he needs a strong foreign policy specialist, and someone who can act as his go-between with Congress. That’s why I think he should strongly consider Dick Lugar as his VP, if he wins.

    That would clear the way for Murdock to win the senate seat in IN. And since Perry is fairly healthy, we shouldn’t need to worry about the succession of a President Lugar.

    Lugar would bolster his ticket quite a bit. But I guess first things first.

  • pttx333

    a great deal about it. He has a phenomenal team put together, and he’s no slouch himself, so don’t know what they will come to decide. It will be a great ticket, though!

  • acat

    I am reserving judgement on your point until after the upcoming foreign policy debate.

    If, after the debate, Perry seems weak on foreign policy, though .. Lugar? He’s 79 years old, he’s been in D.C. for 34 years… he’s exactly the wrong guy.

    Mew

  • earlgrey

    I can’t stand him, butI can’t argue with your reasoning. I just am not overfilling with confidence in Perry right now.

    It would really make for an interesing ticket

  • libertardo

    VP is essentially a worthless position. He commands respect in the world as the chairman of the foreign relations committee, and he commands respect on Capitol Hill. That’s going to be important for a President Perry. And Mourdock would be a great senator. I see it as win-win.

    But Lugar could make himself a pain in the A if he wanted to, I guess. I could see his words and past actions being used against republicans by obstructionist democrat senators and congressmen.

    It’s tricky, but I think he’s an asset in the general election. And ultimately, I think he’s been a standard bearer of the republican party for a long time, and he’d work hard to help republicans across the country get elected. He wouldn’t be using VP as a springboard for the presidency, either. He’d essentially have less power than he does now.

  • NeoKong

    It’s difficult at first to choose when all you can hear are thirty second soundbite or one minute answers.
    During a few of the debates I found myself wishing “Why can’t we have them all…?”
    One is POTUS One is VP and we sprinkle the rest between the cabinet and the Chief of Staff.
    But it doesn’t work that way.

    It’s coming down to what seems to be the four strongest candidates.
    Perry, Cain, Gingrich and Romney.
    Cain has his troubles. I think Perry could revive his campaign and people are giving Gingrich a hard second look and his numbers show that.
    No one seems to warm up to Romney except for Charles Krauthammer , David Brooks and MSNBC but everyone calls him inevitable.
    People rise and fall but I think we will have to wait for the primaries and see what the voters say.
    Four will become two and then two will become one.

    In Nov. 2007 nobody thought McCain and Obama would go head to head.
    The race belonged to Hillary and McCain had just fired his whole team.

    I have my favorites but who can say at this point.
    Two weeks ago I would have said Cain was locking it down.
    Now look at him.
    Two months ago I figured for sure Gingrich was toast.

  • libertardo

    Republicans will do well in 2012 on the Senate front, and we will almost certainly take control. That said, I see no path to taking 60 senate seats next year. And we proved that all you need is 41 senate seats to grind things to a halt. They pushed through the stimulus cause of the Maine twins, and they got Obamacare through during their supermajority after that turncoat in Penn, whose name I’ll not suffer repeating here.

    Nothing can be more destructive than to win the presidency and topple the Obama nightmare, than to endure Schumer’s bunch looking for revenge for no Republican ever voting for their plans. Or if they get fresh and hold up nominees to the Supreme Court and to important administration positions and the lower courts?

    I don’t think Ben Nelson will be around next congress. My point is that Perry is going to need a finesser for his legislative plans after what promises to be a brutal general election. There’s going to be a lot of sore feelings, and saying ‘no’ is pretty easy. If someone better is out there, then fine. But Rubio doesn’t have any legs. He needs to continue to be a good senator, in my opinion.

  • acat

    It’s one thing for an egotist like Obama, who wants all the spotlight for himself, to pluck a stick of deadwood like Biden from the Senate… but why does the GOP nom, especially a guy with Perry’s experience, need to follow that path?

    If you *really* want one with D.C. insider cred, Gingrich is a better fit than Lugar. So’s Haley Barbour, for that matter. Foreign policy, why not see if Condi Rice is interested? Economics? Paul Ryan.

    The other point – age. Perry/Lugar would be dicey – Lugar’s almost 80 – in 2012. No way Lugar runs in 2020. No way Lugar runs if, deity of your choice forbid, anything bad happens to Perry…

    Mew

  • gekster

    Nothing is settled until it is settled.

  • acat

    If you want a Senate-insider, then just pick McConnell and be done.

    Far as I can tell, Lugar’s shown no particular flair for moving legislation through the Senate.

    There’s better choices than Lugar.

    (and I didn’t mention Rubio – that’s on you)

    Mew

  • libertardo

    Lugar is essentially Biden. And I didn’t realize I was suggesting the “Obama” strategy. Gingrich is toxic. He will turn off women, like Erik said today. I can’t see him being helpful in the election, and actually hurting the nominee. Once elected, I’m sure Gingrich would be a fantastic asset.

    And Barbour would be a good choice. But if the nominee is Perry, then we’re looking at a ticket of two white guys from the south. It’s not a disqualifier, but it is a distraction, and knowing republican strategists, it’s one that they wouldn’t be able to leave alone. Why didn’t he run? Maybe he’s got skeletons in his closet too.

    And I consider Lugar’s age a benefit. I don’t want him to run in 2020. I want him to retire and be happy he served his country. It’ll be time for Rubio by 2020, I’d think.

  • pttx333

    my choice was in stone from the get-go and hasn’t even wobbled. I’m in the tank for Perry down to the finish line. Perhaps it is because I’ve observed him, listened to him speak (which is NOT what you saw in the first couple of debates) and lived under his great leadership all of these years, so I’m biased. Okay, I confess, I’m biased, I said it – it is what it is. But I do understand those who must, for whatever reason, take a back seat and wait it out.

  • tngal

    if Obama is still in and still playng his games of running outside routes. If he can’t get his environmental laws passed, he just has the EPA proclaim some silly rule that things fall under their jurisdiction so they can claim everything’s under their pervue. .

    If he won’t order his patrol agents to actually enforce immigraiton laws currently on the books, forcing states to enforce the plans by signing their own legislation. Then ordering his justice deptartment to court ot shoot down the state plans.

    Wasn’t it last month he just went around the No child left behind rules set up by congress and implemented his own rules and gave waivers to states who agreed to use his. What good is having everything if the O is still in there.

    What good is having Thing one and Thing 2 if we don’t have the Cat in the Hat?

    (that is by far the worst analogy I’ve ever used. )

  • gekster

    It’s for those claiming victory for thier candidate before even one primary has happened.
    Sticking to a candidate you believe in is one thing.
    Falsely believing he has it all wrapped up is another.
    You have claimed no such thing.

  • NeoKong

    Perry is a good guy.
    Most people like him.
    He caught hell over in state tuition, gardasil and his heartless comment but I like him too.
    My major concern with him was I was worried Obama would shred him in a debate even though I believe Perry is ten times more qualified to lead.
    Also I don’t think for a second the drive bys are done with him.
    He is trailing so they keep their powder dry but if he became the front runner again they would enact plan number two.

  • libertardo

    That’s obviously the plan. And my point is that most any nominee is going to need a good VP, who properly compliments the candidate, in order to win in 2012. I’ve seen people trying to push Bachmann as a VP nominee, and that is a miserable idea. I suggested Lugar, because I think he would bring gravitas and likability to the debate.

    It’s become a truism (largely because the media, controlled by the left, perpetuates this myth) that republicans just obstruct everything and don’t want to offer any solutions to fix anything. Lugar would be encyclopedic in his knowledge of Republicans helping and democrats acting like bullies in the Senate. He would be a sympathetic voice for senate republicans, which will help tremendously in the election. We need to take the Senate by a large margin, no matter who wins the WH.

    People here generally don’t like him because he’s liberalish and is often cited as being “Obama’s favorite republican” cause he helped with START II and has said nice things about him. But that’s why I want him to serve his country out of the Senate (making room for a much more palatable, Senator Mourdock), and he would be a great help in the election. He may not be the guy, but I think he brings a lot to the table.

  • acat

    First, your proposal would make 2020 a “no clear nominee” election, and Conservatives don’t tend to do as well… witness our current election where all the conservatives in the race are chasing Romney.

    Second, I think Perry would do very well at holding Gingrich’s leash. Newt’s a policy wonk, and used to run the House. As veep, could poke his DC insider nose into each and every department as well as having a damn good idea of how to work the Senate.

    Finally, I note you ignored my other choices, perhaps because they don’t match your narrative?

    Mew

  • pttx333

    No, gekster, I’ve never believed that anyone was a be-all, end-all – there is no such person. You should have seen me have a hissy fit when I first learned of the gardasil thing … until I learned exactly what was what shortly thereafter. But initially, I was ready to nail him to the cross! How’s that? I forgave him because I know for a fact that he would never intentionally harm anyone (except a coyote or three, maybe a deer or eleventy-five). He is a totally honorable and decent man with whom I do not always agree, but I do totally support him.

    Yep, Kong, hang around with us long enough and you’ll see Perry in action. Believe me, he has his own powder that he keeps very dry. Of course, the evil ones are not done with him – he knows it, his wife knows it, we all know it. He has his own style, does things in his own way and in his own time. Timing is everything, and he has that down to a tee, believe it not,

    How do I know all these things? Well, I’ve been to at least 3 goat ropin’s and no less than a few hundred rodeos during my 71 years on this earth. And I feel off the turnip truck just this past week. So from someone who has been around the block, I say we’re going to do it – Perry is gonna pull it off and move to that 1600 address with Anita, just as soon as the clean-up folks find enough bleach and Febrez bombs to fumigate and sterilize our lovely White House. How’s that sound?

  • pttx333

    third sentence, second row, last paragraph: “And I FELL … ” Guess I did feel that truck before I fell off, but oh well.

  • gekster

    You are smart enough to know whats right,
    and smart enough to know when wrong.
    You are smart enough to know, that when you don’t know, to find out.
    You have a wisdom most hope for, but few achieve.
    You have knowledge that comes from living life, and not from reading books.
    You, kind lady, are a rare comodity in this land.

  • pttx333

    thing anyone has ever said to me. I am not all of those things, gek, but I’m mighty proud that you think so. Thank you so much for your kindness and thoughtfulness.

    Can I borrow your hankie?

  • gekster

    leave me with my dilusions. It won’t cost you anything,

    Here, I got a Reble one you can use.

  • pttx333

    what is a “rebie?” I’ll gladly borrow it but sure would like to know exactly what it is.

  • gekster

    But it’s the blind squirrel thing,
    And a broken spell check.
    Which I don’t use.
    Hey, I got one thing right today.
    And I made a lady happy.
    I’m satisfied.

  • pttx333

    guess my eyesight is going now, or CRS has really kicked in.

    I don’t spellcheck either unless something is a really important document that I work on sometimes. Just bop stop out as my fingers go along … Lordy, I write just like I talk!

    Thanks for your kindnesses, gek. You’re a good guy.

  • gekster

    nt..nt..

  • johnt

    A tad to sanctimonious and posturing. But it’s so much fun puffing up the ego. Usually the self congratulatory crap is at least bearble, but now, with the future of the country at risk, with human filth from bottom to top [ the WH] we ought to spend less time advertising our virtue and standards for the world to admire, expressing our disdain for candidates incapable of measuring up to our lofty expectations, and do what the left does, mute the criticism and be prepared to work for any viable candidate,
    For once and for real the threat, domestic policy and foreign, issued by the barbaric primitives of the left, and their odiferous leaders, demands it.

  • littlehouse18

    Ryan would wipe the floor with Biden in a debate. Despite Mediscare, I think he would finally have a chance to set the record straight in a very forthright way. He still seems to be a man of integrity and I think that would come across. He relates to people very well, and could draw in the younger vote. He brings in the midwest region. Also, the bumper sticker looks really good! :)

    Could Ryan be VP and Treasury secretary at the same time?

  • annie54

    were mentioned by Perry last week during his Hannity interview as to whom he would include. I agree. They are two of my personal favorites!

    How would he use them? John Bolton as VP? Liz as his press secretary? Or vise versa. Or, Bolton as Secretary of State?

    He only committed the two names, then stopped there.

  • annie54

    but he could over-shadow Perry if he were too close. If he were granted an appointed position, the vetting wouldn’t be delved into as deeply as if he were the VP. Also, his intern/wife wouldn’t be in the limelight as frequently.

    Gingrich is a wealth of knowledge. I believe him when he says that he has changed; however, we never know when some idea or stance will surface like we’ve seen in the past.

  • http://www.periodictablet.com superamerican

    Obama will win.

    Republicans are afraid. After the “drubbing” in Ohio they’ll be even more afraid. Only Cain and perhaps Newt can stand up and shout truths into the Republican/Democrat wind. Neither party really wants change, the Democrats want the status quo of union, trial lawyer and bank financings Republicans know what they want but are afraid to stand up for it. That business is the creator of jobs, prosperity and the immense innovation this country has had. And that convernment central control inhibits all three: jobs, prosperity and innovation. SPEAK UP REPUBLICANS OR LOSE.

  • romeg

    Acat.

  • http://www.periodictablet.com superamerican

    I said Obama will win.

    Because Republicans are afraid of the “popular” media, their liberal friends and neighbors and they hunger for electio and reelection and bend to the winds of the Democrats. The Democrats want to protect the status quo of financing by union bosses, trial lawyers and bankers. The Republicans don’t really want too much change either. SO: ROMNEY. Of the rest only Newt and Cain speaketh the truth: only busiiness creates jobs, prosperity and the immense innovation; government central control suppresses all three.

  • cldonley

    are afraid of the popular media.

    That’s why I like Perry and Cain, unafraid. But Cain’s unsubstantiated blame game against the other candidates has turned me off.

    Give me a candidate that is unafraid. I think Perry is the only viable one.

  • shadowmane

    no more Cheneys.