« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Consolidation Now! The Iowa Lesson for Conservatives.

Consolidation Now!

We have less than a MONTH until the conservative electorate wakes up to see the shadow of the elite Republican establishment, and collectively hands the nomination to a “big government conservative”, or alternatively it ignores the shadow and consolidates behind a true champion of conservative principles. That’s correct, we have 3 primaries (New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida) all before Punxsutawney Phil makes his grand prediction on Groundhog Day. Then what 4 more years of squishy big government winter?

What exactly is a “big government conservative” anyhow? I’m sure it’s as mythical as a jackalope.

I understand that primaries are for knocking off the rough edges, refining the candidates, and making sure that we put our best candidate forward. However, All of our candidates have been programmed by consultants to take a stance based on polling, data, and strategy that may “knock down” their candidate. If the message isn’t tested, analyzed, focus grouped, and deemed approved by a marketing team… then the candidate should avoid the subject at all cost… right?

Iowa did not winnow the field.

It did in fact removed Rep. Michele Bachmann from contention. Without a win in Iowa, Rep. Bachmann wouldn’t have gotten the funding necessary to carry on. She was a great candidate, and hopefully, she’ll continue forward, she’s got a great career ahead of her as a champion of conservatism. However Iowa didn’t winnow her out, the lack of funding did.

From CNN Entrance Polls:

none

Look at the age groups. Iowa was split by age. If you were 39 and under, likely chances are your ideology got the best of you, and you voted for Ron Paul, or had a little more sense and voted for Santorum over Paul.

If you were 40 and older chances are you bought the “electability” argument from the media, as well as the negative ads on Newt, and you voted for Romney, or… just couldn’t help feeling bad for a guy that visited 99 counties, and established his Pro-Life bonafides and decided to reward him for his effort (a cruel joke to play on such a nice guy, giving false hope like that).

Primaries are better at determining real support. New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida will be the last opportunity to take momentum away from Mitt Romney. Romney will likely take New Hampshire, and downplay a loss in South Carolina, if Romney wins solidly in New Hampshire, takes 3rd in S.C, and wins in Florida, it may end the hopes of any “anti-Romney”.

So why are we looking for someone that is “Not Romney”?

I don’t understand why we’re looking for “not-Romney” when we should just be looking for the most conservative candidate that can win.

The age difference above shows that a small plurality in Iowa agrees with he media establishment, that Romney is the most electable, and therefore he should be the nominee.

Romney has wanted a fractured conservative coalition. Nobody else is likely to leave the race until after S.C. unless they run out of money (I’m predicting that Santorum either drops out after a dismal performance in N.H. or holds on to hope and fails miserably again in S.C.)

The Lesson

The lesson of Iowa is, conservatives should consolidate BEFORE the caucus, otherwise they allow the media to dictate expectations for entire the month of January.

So this is my plea… It’s time to for conservatives to consolidate. We need to air it out, we’re either with Newt, or we’re with Perry. Without consolidation, Romney skates in S.C. by downplaying its significance and focuses on building momentum in FL the same way McCain did it in 2008… and then declares victory going into Super Tuesday.

If consolidation doesn’t happen, Romney becomes the nominee. I can think of worse outcomes — not many, but I can imagine a lot better outcomes to the contrary, and I’d rather think positively.

COMMENTS

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Before Iowa, Perry was claiming the ‘conservative primary’ in Iowa was between him, Santorum and Bachmann.

    Ooops.

    Yes, consolidate, but I dont see how you can consolidate on a 5th place finisher and ignore the guy who got tied for first.

    • nuclear139

      I don’t like Santorum but I will vote for him over Romney any day. Yes we need to consolidate around a social conservative candidate but that man right now is Rick Santorum for better or worse and your right it is not around a fourth of fifth place finsher.

      • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

        How so? Has he ever run anything? Has he ever solved any problems? What about his pro tariff policies? What about his willingness to use the federal government to pursue social goals? His lack of commitment to federalism?

        Santorum is a guy who scares away a lot of Republicans, he will do abysmally with independents.

        If it becomes a two man race, I will go with Romney.

        • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

          If the race were strictly between Santorum and Romney…

          Santorum would have to convince me that not only can he win the general, but that he can stop the “Rick Santorum did this before it was cool” speech pattern.

      • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

        no text here.

    • Spazzinout

      around a “one-trick” pony? Let’s be realistic here…he won’t fly out-side of Iowa.

    • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

      I tell you what, if Santorum finishes second in New Hampshire, and gets BOATLOADS of money… then I’ll consider him viable.

  • clowngirl

    That means Mitt Romney can’t quickly gain an insurmountable lead and we can allow the other candidates to compete and see who looks most effective over several contests.

    • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

      a fractured conservative base loses in this scenario, regardless of the dates…

      going for a brokered convention, I believe ends up becoming the equivalent of what we saw last night… only worse… Mitt ends up winning.

      Consolidation is needed NOW.

      • clowngirl

        And keep contributing to our preferred candidates.

        • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

          handing money to non-viable candidates is a waste of resources… if you’re not going to use discretion, you ought to just either donate to all equally if you have the resources to do it, or none at all, and wait for the general to beat Obama.

          That’s the point, if the base is still fractured, and people are donating just to keep hope alive for their preferred candidate… then they shouldn’t, rather they should put that resource in an acceptable alternative, and avoid letting small pluralities dictate who the nominee is…

          • clowngirl

            I’m a Newt supporter and I don’t think his losing support after an extraordinary number of misleading or outright dishonest attacks in a short period of time, in a small state , before he had the resources to fight back.

            But he needs to prove he can overcome this stuff and win in spite of his baggage.

            Governor Perry has a great resume and (apparently) not much baggage, but he needs to prove he’s electable. After spending 5.5 million in Iowa and coming in 5th, many have doubts. (including me, frankly)

            Santorum performed well in Iowa but has to prove it wasn’t a fluke and largely dependent on lucky timing.

            Don’t get me wrong, I’d love if everyone suddenly agreed that Newt was the best choice and started giving him lots of money and voting as a block– but how do you make the case for that without him clearly outperforming the others?

            I think our candidates are just going to have to compete.

  • elayman

    I agree it would be miraculous if the field wasn’t all over the place. And the meaning of conservatism is a non-starter because it depends on its comparison point. Everyone is going to give priority to different aspects of a campaign. It’s a sad fact of life but realistically you just can’t coerce people into doing things for you ? you can’t make them vote for anyone they don’t like.

    • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

      no text.

  • Common_Cents

    Gingrich is the only one that can consolidate the anti romney. Gingrich consistently clocked in #2 choice preferences by many campaigns.

    He “could” be endorsed by Perry, Palin, Bachmann(she’ll prob sell out to Romney), Santorum, Cain etc…

    Gingrich has the biggest staff in SC of all candidates, he has a decent staff in NH, and a growing staff in FL.

    Gingrich will continue to excel in debates but would pick up money/ground game from endorsements.

    gingrich is still leading in national polling, he can be competitive in many states.

    Gingrich has been the most thoroughly attacked so likely has reached his bottom, which is much higher than other candidates who fell from the top w/ much less vicious attacks waged on them.

    If we split up SC and FL and go into super tues splintered, its a guaranteed loss.

    It’s time to put down egos and wishful thinking and start thinking logical and strategic.

    • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

      You’re saying…

      Go for the fat old gray-haired congressional historian personality because we’d rather the devil we know than Romney…

      I did say Newt or Perry… but as an ardent Perry supporter, I would hope to persuade this argument toward Perry.

      In effect, I just want to see a moratorium on discussing the “path to victory” with any other set of “conservative” candidates.

      I’ll accept Newt… if Perry drops out… not any other way around that.

      But I think you make a great pitch for Newt… my compliments to you…

      • elayman

        It’s like too many of our people have blinders on, and don’t even want to see the vast body of evidential truth that Perry probably cannot either.

    • clowngirl

      And for Newt to exceed expectations in NH. Wish it weren’t coming up so quick – but at there are two debates this weekend…