Consider these three propositions:
1. A Mormon, moderate conservative from Massachusetts won 30% of the vote in Alabama and Mississippi in Republican primaries in which 80% of voters were evangelical Christians. Not bad!
2. The Republican front-runner, armed with a massive advantages in cash, organisation and “establishment” support, was rejected by 70% of conservative voters in two of the most conservative states in the Union. Plainly he is weak, weak, weak. Not good!
3. Mitt Romney is still liable to be the Republican nominee.
Each of these propositions benefits from being true. Rick Santorum’s narrow victories in the Deep South are a credit to his dogged stickability and the suspicion with which conservative voters, not altogether unreasonably, view Mitt Romney. But, as Romney will rmeind you any time he can, the race ain’t just about votes it’s also about delegates. And it is difficult to plot a path to 1144 for Santorum. Last night was another delegate-draw which means, in this respect, it was a victory for Romney.
Romney’s problem is not Mississippi or Alabama. Nicolas Sarkozy is as likely to win in the Deep South as Barack Obama. Mitt Romney’s problem is whether cultural conservatives in other states – Virginia, North Carolina and Ohio most especialy – will rally to him in November. Nevertheless: would you measure a candidate’s appeal to Middle America by his performance in Alabama and Mississippi? I doubt it.
Even there, Romney won about half the votes of those Republicans who based their decision on “electability in November”. In other words, not many people, even in Alabama or Mississippi are confident Rick Santorum (or, lordy, Newt) can prevail in the fall. If Romney is weak (and he is) so are his rivals.
But what if Gingrich drops out? Would Santorum prevail in a head-to-head match-up? You might think so given Romney’s ceiling appears to be about 40% of the GOP vote but it’s not as simple as that. Look at it this way: absent Newt, Santorum must both retain his existing support and win almost all of Newt’s voters. This is quite a stiff task, especially since Ron Paul will plod along winning 5-10% of the non-Romney vote. Santorum has almost no margin for error; Romney still does. (Which is just as well for him, frankly.)
Moreover, we are moving towards the time when states begin to apportion their delegates on a winner-takes-all basis. And Romney has an advantage, theoretically at least, in many of these states.
The Republican base doesn’t much like Mitt Romney and it certainly doesn’t much trust him but he’s still the man they’re likely to be lumped with. Maryland and Wisconsin will tell us more than did Alabama and Mississippi.
Comments