Too Early To Designate G-Men "DOA" I know it seems I'm too
taken with the subject of Newt Gingrich. And yet, this development
bears closer scrutiny: Several weeks ago, the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution published a column by Peter Brown of the
Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. Brown wrote that two past
political stars, former Vice President Al Gore and former Speaker of
the House Newt Gingrich, are essentially "dead on arrival" in the race
for the White House. I offered a counteranalysis, which the
newspaper declined to provide its readers. So I'll share it with the
rest of the country.
I agree that Gingrich and Gore might appear unelectable right now. But
remember that pollster John Zogby declared early in the 2004 race that
John Kerry would defeat George W. Bush.
Remember, too, in 1980 when Ronald Reagan had high polling unfavorables
nationwide and was not the choice of most of the "Republican elite" in
critical primary states.
Also recall that just a year before Richard Nixon suddenly jumped into
the 1968 race, he was thought to be GOP political baggage.
It was the primary/caucus system that ended up nominating these and
other candidates supposedly unacceptable to the public. Nixon-Humphrey?
Yuck. Reagan against the wounded Jimmy Carter? That race hardly met
with wild enthusiasm either.
If nothing else, this should teach us that early national primary polls
are not always instructive. Just for fun, let's look at what's really
happening now.
First, while former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and U.S. Sen.
John McCain, R-Ariz., lead in national surveys for the GOP, and Sen.
Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., have captured
the early attention of Democrats, the reality is that a combination of
early maneuverings -- organizational strengths and weaknesses, or
rescheduled primaries -- are making the polls largely irrelevant.
On the Republican side, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is
out-organizing his rivals in most key early-primary states by tying up
much of the Bush leadership team as his own.
Gingrich already has a very strong base of grassroots supporters in
several early caucus/primary states, thanks in large part to his having
laid the groundwork prior to the 1998 election cycle for a possible
presidential bid in 2000.
He's particularly strong in Iowa. His top political adviser of over 30
years is from there and made sure Iowa Republicans flourished when
Gingrich was in charge in Congress. That's why Gingrich has repeatedly
been invited to speak at annual GOP events in Iowa, while other
announced presidential candidates haven't.
If any of those other candidates somehow slip up over the coming
months, Gingrich could enter the race with an organization already
built. His ability to captivate small crowds could bode well for him in
the caucus environment. If he were to win Iowa, he would have the
beginnings of a Nixonesque return to prominence, a la 1968.
Al Gore's entry point might come later. Suppose Obama, Clinton and
perhaps Sen. John Edwards, D-North Carolina, or others split small,
early primaries and caucuses among themselves. It's a not-so-well-kept
secret that Florida's legislature is intent on moving that state's
primary date forward to immediately follow New Hampshire's. That would
cast Florida's huge shadow over other early primaries and give Gore a
chance to tap into Clinton's base in the critical Palm Beach and
Broward counties in South Florida. There's still plenty of sympathy for
Gore from the 2000 contest, when many Democrats believed he was
"robbed" of the presidency.
This would also rob Obama of the opportunity to score a big potential
win in a stand-alone South Carolina primary, where the Democratic
electorate is heavily African-American.
As for the general election, Newt Gingrich might seem a negative, but
in the eyes of some voters, he wouldn't be nearly as negative as
Hillary Clinton. Al Gore would seem to be more in touch with
independent voters than, say, Mitt Romney, who is feverishly working to
capture his party's right wing. Moving back to the middle following the
primaries might be problematic for him.
No one is saying either of the two "G men" -- Gingrich or Gore -- will
pull off a political miracle in 2008. Even so, writing off such
big-time players this early is premature to the point of foolhardiness.
By Matt Towery
Friday, February 23, 2007
Comments