Romney Wins the Iowa Caucus by just eight votes

Former Massachusetts governor and presumptive Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, defeated Rick Santorum by just eight votes in Tuesday’s Iowa caucuses.  Despite Romney’s narrow victory, political pundits on both sides of the aisle are heralding the caucuses as a victory for Santorum, the little-known former Pennsylvania senator who was polling in the single digits, in the days leading up to the caucuses.  In this article, the author examines the state of the 2012 Republican presidential race, what the Iowa results tell us about the Romney and Santorum campaigns, and a brief history of the Iowa caucuses.  Last evening’s results indicate that Romney remains the frontrunner, and that Rick Santorum has solidified himself as the conservative alternative to Governor Romney.

Turnout for the 2012 Iowa caucuses was nearly identical to 2008.  The Republican Party of Iowa found that 122,000 ballots were cast in the caucuses.  Of those, 30,015 went for Mitt Romney, and 30,007 were cast for Rick Santorum.  Despite a first place finish, Romney received just twenty-five percent of the vote.  Four years earlier, in 2008, Governor Romney finished second behind Governor Huckabee, with just twenty-five percent of the vote.  Romney’s inability to eclipse the thirty percent mark indicates that he remains a weak frontrunner.  Republican strategist Karl Rove noted that three-fourths of the votes cast during the Iowa caucuses, were for someone other than Mitt Romney.  As the reader can discern, Republican voters, especially those who consider themselves “very conservative” or “conservative,” possess reservations about Mitt Romney.  Rick Santorum captured the support of those who considered themselves “conservative” or “very conservative,” whereas Romney was favored by moderates and liberal Republicans.  Representative Ron Paul, the third place finisher, was favored by nominal Democrats, Independents, and liberals.  Joe Trippi, a Fox News Correspondent, and Howard Dean’s former campaign manager, noted that the Ron Paul campaign worked assiduously to court voters who traditionally do not participate in the Republican caucuses: disenfranchised Democrats, Libertarians, liberal-leaning Independents, and liberals.  In fact, Ron Paul captured nearly eighty-five percent of the vote from each of the aforementioned groups.

Perhaps the greatest surprise of the evening was Rick Santorum’s second place finish.  For much of the race, the former Pennsylvania senator was polling in the low single digits, and was considered to be a non-factor in the 2012 presidential race.  Unlike Mike Huckabee four years earlier, Santorum did not spent copious amounts of money in Iowa, and had not developed a large statewide organization.  Instead, Santorum placed a profound emphasis on retail politics.  Retail politics, for those unfamiliar with the idiom, refers to visiting homes, knocking on doors, interacting with voters, and traveling around the state.  Rick Santorum was the first Republican candidate to visit all ninety counties in Iowa, and delivered over 330 speeches in the Hawkeye state.  Santorum’s success is an indication that retail politics, not money is paramount in caucus states.  As a result of his strong showing in Iowa, Rick Santorum has positioned himself as the leading conservative challenger to Mitt Romney.  Throughout the campaign, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and Rick Santorum, have sought to brand themselves as the “non-Romney” candidate.  After last evening, just Rick Santorum has earned the title of the “conservative favorite.”

The Iowa caucuses proved, once and for all, that Rick Santorum, not Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, or Rick Perry, is the choice of conservative voters.  With Michele Bachmann out of the race, and Rick Perry’s campaign dwindling on the precipice of collapse, it appears as though Rick Santorum has solidified his position as the conservative favorite. While Newt Gingrich is still a viable candidate, it does not appear as though he will be able to generate the same amount of excitement among social and fiscal conservatives, as Rick Santorum.  Thus, this author posits that 2012 will be a two person race between Mitt Romney, the favorite of moderates and the Republican establishment; and Rick Santorum, the conservative outsider, and former Pennsylvania senator.  While Mitt Romney remains the frontrunner, he will have a difficult time capturing the nomination.

Since 1976, the Iowans have traditionally supported underdog candidates over the presumptive frontrunner, in the caucuses.  In 1980, George H.W. Bush narrowly defeated Ronald Reagan, thirty-two percent to thirty percent.  Reagan went on to win the New Hampshire primary, and the Republican nomination.  Eight years later, George H.W. Bush finished third behind Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson.  George Herbert Walker Bush’s nineteen percent of the vote was the lowest total for any Republican candidate who went on to win the nomination.  In 1996 and 2000, the eventual Republican nominees, Bob Dole and George W. Bush prevailed in the Iowa caucuses.  In 2008, however, Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor shocked the political establishment by defeating Mitt Romney thirty-four percent to twenty-five percent.  Romney outspent Huckabee 5-to-1, and had developed a superior organizational structure in the Hawkeye State.  In 2012, Mitt Romney defeated Senator Rick Santorum by a paltry eight votes.  While Romney can claim a statistical victory, Rick Santorum was the real winner in Iowa. His meteoric rise was precipitated by a superior grassroots strategy, hard-work, the development of a populist-conservative economic message, and his penchant for social issues..   As the reader can discern, the Iowa caucuses, unlike the New Hampshire primary, the focus of the next section, traditionally favors the underdog candidates over the presumptive frontrunner.

The New Hampshire primary has a better track record of selecting presidential candidates than the Iowa caucuses.  According to Jon Huntsman, “Iowa picks corn, New Hampshire picks presidents.” As such, Mr. Huntsman has decided to focus his campaign solely on New Hampshire.  Since 1952, just three Republican candidates: Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., (1964); Pat Buchanan (1996); and John McCain (2000), have won the New Hampshire primary and lost the Republican presidential nomination.  Conversely, five Democratic candidates: Estes Kefauver (1952 and 1956), Edmund Muskie (1972), Gary Hart (1984), Paul Tsongas (1992), and Hilary Clinton (2008), have won the primary and gone on to lose the nomination.  As the reader can discern, no Republican candidate has lost New Hampshire and won the Republican nomination since George W. Bush in 2000.  At this writing, Mitt Romney holds a twenty-three point lead over Ron Paul, forty-one percent to eighteen percent.  Newt Gingrich is in third place with thirteen percent of the vote, and Jon Huntsman is in fourth place with nine percent of the vote.  It appears certain that Mitt Romney will prevail in New Hampshire, a state in which the Massachusetts governor owns a summer home, and has captured numerous big name endorsements, including Senator Kelly Ayotte, former Governor John Sununu, and Judd Gregg, a former governor and senator. Based on historical trends, if Mitt Romney wins the New Hampshire primary, he will win the Republican nomination.  With a victory in New Hampshire, Mitt Romney would become the first Republican nominee to ever win the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary in the same election cycle (excluding 1984, 1992, and 2004, which were uncontested).

The 2012 Republican presidential contest is poised to be one of the most enthralling and highly anticipated races in American history.  While Mitt Romney is the frontrunner and presumptive nominee, it is much too early in the process to discount Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich.  Each of the aforementioned candidates has worked assiduously to brand themselves as the “true” conservative, anti-establishment candidate.  The alacrity that has engulfed Republican primary voters is palpable and does not show signs of dissipating.  Unlike 2008, when John McCain had the nomination locked up by early February, the author predicts that the 2012 contest will be a long, drawn out process. This is due, in part, to the fact that the Republican Party discarded the winner-take-all delegate acquisition model, and instead employed a system that awards delegates proportionally. If, however, Mitt Romney prevails next Tuesday in New Hampshire, the race will conclude before it ever began.

Despite Rick Santorum’s strong showing in Iowa, and the conservative movements clamoring for a candidate other than Mitt Romney, it appears certain that the Massachusetts governor, who has received hundreds of endorsements, and raised $32 million at this writing, will win the Republican nomination.  The American electorate should begin to prepare for what is expected to be the most expensive and vitriolic general election campaign in history, between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.  If conservatives intend to achieve their ultimate goal: ensuring that Barack Obama is a one-term president, it is imperative that they rally around the candidate who best exemplifies their views on seminal policy issues.