February 10, 2008
McCain Wins - No Candidate Looks Strong

Our state's GOP caucus results exemplified the mixed results John McCain and Mike Huckabee found across the country yesterday.

McCain won a narrow and exceedingly modestly victory in the Evergreen State and scored a strong 2nd place finish to Huckabee in Louisiana, a deep South state holding a low-turnout primary. Of course, he also got crushed in Kansas. National and local journalists have expressed surprise that the presumed Republican nominee didn't receive a warmer embrace. They shouldn't be so perplexed.

Beyond the recent, high profile news coverage of conservative concern with McCain, a simple look at previous primary contests reveals much. Prior to this weekend ten states* had held GOP caucuses or conventions - where conservative activists hold more influence than broader primaries. In those contests McCain finished 4th three times, 3rd three times, and 2nd four times. Moreover, his second place showings ranged from 13% to 41% behind the first place finisher. That compares starkly to McCain's success in winning twelve of the nineteen states holding traditional primaries before this weekend.

Thus, his less than impressive showings this weekend should be little surprise, even as he remains heavily favored in Tuesday's Potomac primary in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC.

Huckabee's performance over the weekend likewise had its downside. The Kansas win was impressive, though hardly stunning given McCain's weakness in caucuses and Huckabee's natural affinity with a conservative, rural state in the heartland. His performance in Washington and even Louisiana was less noteworthy.

Given the widespread reporting of the near finality in the GOP race following Mitt Romney's decision this week, turnout in remaining Republican contests is going to be naturally lower than if the race were still in play. Such an environment favors Huckabee given the proven eagerness of his supporters to turnout. Thus, allowing McCain to eke out his first caucus win and only topping him by a mere percentage point in a core Southern state does not bode well for Huckabee in the two-man race he and his supporters claim exists.

If he can't beat a modestly performing McCain in a caucus state with Romney on the sidelines and if he can only narrowly beat McCain in deep South then it's tough to see how Huckabee can even grab good headlines in less fertile primaries to come. After Tuesday's Potomac primary come primaries in Wisconsin and Washington on the 19th, followed by Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, and Vermont all holding primaries on March 4th. Under that schedule, it could well get somewhat ugly for Huckabee.

*I'm excluding Louisiana from this grouping since their complex, Byzantine system of allocating delegates through multi-staged caucuses and a primary makes Washington's own hybrid system look simple.

Posted by Eric Earling at February 10, 2008 02:09 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Excluding Louisiana from any political process is probably a safe thing to do and should seriously be looked at with future election reform.
What happens with Louisiana is also one of the positive side-effects of raising sea levels that never get mentioned...
(hears boos from the audience after that joke...)

Posted by: Don Ward on February 10, 2008 02:36 PM
2. "The widespread reporting of the near finality in the GOP race..." also benefits Ron Paul, who's organization continues to sop up delegates left on the table by other candidates.

I'd say that the limited government folks stand to gain influence within the Republican Party as a result. This is just what the GOP needs.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on February 10, 2008 02:38 PM
3. Who truly knows who won yesterday. Luke halted the county with slightly more than 80 percent of the results tabulated. McCain was leading --- barely. I think Huck is correct in sending his lawyers here and checking this out. It will also be interesting to see what Postman, Cornfield, and other reporters find out.

Posted by: David Adams on February 10, 2008 03:27 PM
4. Now where are all those Rossi folks who wanted every vote counted properly??

Posted by: Unkl Witz on February 10, 2008 03:48 PM
5. What's most interesting about Louisiana's result, especially regarding the Ron Paul crowd, is that no one got 51% of the primary vote. If one candidate had, they would have had 20 of Louisiana's 47 delegates pledged to them.

Now if you remember the debacle that was the Louisiana caucuses which were the first step in deciding who the delegates were, the "Pro-Family/Pro-Life" slate "won." The state GOP claimed McCain won the most delegates, but the Paul campaign claims they did.

Also, previous to Romney's dropping out, Paul has hit second or third in preference polls in all the caucus states but Iowa.

If his organization is as good as this site is suggesting, he may be doing a lot better than the media is reporting. If the numbers of Paul delegates/Paul voters in the preference polls in other states are equivalent to what's happening here, and if Paul picks up a good portion of uncommitted or Romney delegates (which the CPAC reporting suggests could be possible), Bruce could be more correct than he thinks.

Posted by: telestai on February 10, 2008 04:15 PM
6. The rural vote isn't as cut and dry as this article suggests. See http://legalruralism.blogspot.com/search/label/rural%20vote

Posted by: Grena Seward on February 10, 2008 04:22 PM
7. Sound Politics was better when Stefan posted regularly. It's gone downhill even further with the pro-McCain shilling exhibited by the second-tier posters.

Posted by: Shank on February 10, 2008 05:05 PM
8. Pro-McCain shilling?!? You're shnerious?

Posted by: Don Ward on February 10, 2008 05:25 PM
9. LOL...schnerious as cnancer!

Posted by: Shank on February 10, 2008 05:43 PM
10. I think it is too early to say McCain won. First of all even now over 24 hours later we do not have a complete count. And second... it appears they are counting a completely useless number in terms of who actually won.

Just as it does not matter that Gore got more popular vote than Bush in 2000, it does not matter if more people went into the caucus with McCain as their preference. What matters is how many delegates left the caucus for him. My hunch is Paul left with the most.

Posted by: Lysander on February 10, 2008 05:50 PM
11. Shank -

I'm with Don on this one. I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. I've been the contributor speaking to the Presidential race the most in recent months at Sound Politics. It doesn't take a genius to realize my pro-Romney, anti-McCain leanings. Moreover, when Stefan has weighted in (briefly) in the last couple weeks on the topic he's been very anti-McCain too.

Posted by: Eric Earling on February 10, 2008 06:24 PM
12. You're right, Unkl Witz. Those of us that supported Rossi in 2004 wanted every vote counted properly. As I do in this case.

As I recall, it was the Dhimmicrats that wanted every vote counted improperly. Fatal Pends, provisional ballots from unregistered voters, ballots found in back rooms with no chain of custody, a ballot marked "Chris Rossi" is obviously a vote for Queen Christine. Yeah, all those ballots were counted properly.

In Florida in 2000 it was the Surrendercrats that wanted to read tea leaves and chicken etrails to divine "voter intent" from every pregnant, dimpled, and hanging chad.

Thanks for the reminder, Unkl Witz. Surrendercrats want every illegal vote counted.

Posted by: Obi-Wan on February 10, 2008 07:51 PM
13. My, how quickly we devolved to name-calling.

No matter, glad to hear you're on board with the investigation of this tragic usurpation of votes in the R's caucus.

Let's get Shark involved and publishing those tedious spreadsheets pinpointing the obvious voter fraud.

You'll also want to get your attorneys cranking out the memos outlining your causes of action against.... ooops,

Hold everything.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on February 10, 2008 08:25 PM
14. By the way, howcum Shark never lets anyone comment on his threads anymore? Guess he's just not feeling that secure in his posts after the last four years.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on February 10, 2008 08:29 PM
15. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as the GOP is concerned, nobody WON anything yesterday. None of the delegates selected at the caucuses were committed to vote for any particular candidate. I could have written down Brett Farve as my preferred candidate. That has NO bearing in our precinct on who we choose as a delegate. I don't recall being required to cast a vote when being elected as a delegate for my precinct. So, these numbers mean nothing. If well coordinated, everyone could have written down Fred Thompson. That would have REALLY screwed with people's heads. Particularly the media! "Fred Thompson "wins" GOP victory in WA".

On the GOP side, nobody one anying.

Posted by: Dave on February 10, 2008 09:00 PM
16. Yesterdays meeting did nothing more than produce a beauty contest. There were no "votes" to count as there were no ballots issued. Believe the irritation is caused by the King County Chairman issuing a statement saying McCain won. Actually McCain has reason to be concern by the low margin of "victory" among the the Washington Republicans.
25% win means 75% do not support. But please appreciate that Saturdays meetings were about nominating delegates to the next regional convention. Nothing more.

Posted by: snuffy on February 11, 2008 09:17 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?