I have two unrelated parts to this post. First, as we are probably all aware, Huckabee has polled at first in Rasmussen. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315264,00.html This is the first national poll where he has come in first. I was wondering how large of an effect polls have traditionally had on voters. It seems that voters are more likely to support a candidate if that candidate is polling well. Huckabee seems especially likely to pick up voters because he is becoming the most fashionable Republican candidate. His decidedly populist demeanor is likely to serve him well among undecided voters. How much does this Rasmussen poll help him with those voters?
Second, I was curious with Romney's speech set for tomorrow about the potential power of the Mormon vote. While at a national level Mormons aren't likely to make a significant impact, could a strong Mormon voter turnout help Romney win the nomination? I am particularly thinking about the Mormon vote in states like Idaho, Arizona, and especially Nevada, where there is a fairly high Mormon population, particularly in the Las Vegas area. There are approxamately 7 million Mormons in the US. Obviously, not all would vote for Romney, but even if 2/3 of them voted for him in the primaries, couldn't that significantly help him win the nomination. Since only about 1.5 million live in Utah, the impact of the remaining supporters could be huge. On a related note, most of those who wouldn't vote for a Mormon are Republican. If Romney were to win the nomination over those votes, would it indicate that he had a strong chance of winning the general election, kind of like what happened with JFK in W. Virginia?
Continuing with Romney, I was wondering if he would have a weak presidency. Considering that he was governor of Massachusetts as a Republican, he must be very willing to compromise and work towards a centrist solution. In addition, his constant flip-flopping on issues shows that he is not terribly dedicated to sticking to the Republican core. In 2002, he earned a reputation for getting people to come together, again demonstrating his tendencies to try and bring people towards a middle ground. Finally, his mission in France would have taught him to reconcille two very different ways of living. So, all of this to me indicates that if elected president, he would try to just work things out, allowing Congress to trample all over him. Hasn't Congress best responded to strong executives?
1 comment:
With regards to Huckabee, I think that the biggest impact of his rise in national polls will be on his fundraising. People are less likely to support a candidate if he's doing poorly in the polls, but they are even less likely to donate to a losing candidate. This recent momentum should get the Christian right to open up their wallets.
You also brought up the effect of the Mormon vote for Romney. I think the one state where it could really be significant is Nevada because they have a caucus instead of a of a primary. This is the first time Nevada has had a caucus, so a lot of people don't know what's going on. Also, Nevada is generally ranked as one of the least politically engaged states in the country. As a result, caucus turnout is being predicted to be about 5%. Nevada is 9% Mormon, so if they actually turn out for him, they could have a big impact.
Finally, I don't think that Romney's work in MA on things like health care should be held against him, at least in terms of how he handled the state's legislative body. He was a Republican Governer in a clearly Democratic state and he managed to pass significant legislation. That's not a bad thing.
Post a Comment