TRF will examine the fallout from yesterday’s straw poll in more depth over the next few days, but following on David’s post, here are a few initial thoughts:
- Apathy wins: The candidates had more buses shipping voters to Ames this year than they had in 1999, yet there were over 8,000 fewer votes cast. In ‘99, the George W. Bush campaign had about 70 buses bringing in supporters; Bush won the straw poll with over 7,400 votes. Despite dispatching 125 buses this time, Mitt Romney only garnered 4,516 votes. The Republican frontrunner continues to be “None of the Above.”
- Romney’s hollow victory: Romney did best his nearest rival by over 13 points, technically accomplishing the campaign’s stated goal of matching Bush’s ‘99 margin of victory. But in doing so he recieved almost 3,000 fewer votes than Bush did. Bush’s disastrous presidency no doubt accounts for a lot of the apathy in Ames yesterday, but at the same time it’s clear that Mitt Romney, as the only frontrunner to contest the straw poll — and despite his heavy spending — is failing to generate any enthusiasm.
- Huckabee beats Brownback: Mike Huckabee was on Face the Nation this morning insisting that the poll’s results should serve to vault him into the “top tier” of Republican candidates. Given Huckabee’s terrible fundraising and his Club for Growth problems, it’s a little early to be getting so carried away. But there’s no doubt that Huckabee is the only Republican to come out of Ames with anything resembling a victory. In particular, despite being outspent by Sam Brownback (who hired 100 buses of his own), Huckabee beat the man who had been assiduously building an image as the favorite candidate of the social conservatives. Now the former Arkansas governor can stake a legitimate claim to that title, and begin working to make the argument that he is both socially conservative and electable. This was a clear victory for Huckabee over his most important rival; for Brownback it’s disastrous.
- Frontrunners go nowhere: The Thompson, Giuliani, and McCain camps can say that it’s impossible to lose a poll in which you’re not participating, but they might be a bit disappointed anyway — had any of them won a statistically significant number of votes, he could claim to be generating some degree of excitement. McCain, FDT and Giuliani sat out the dance, a trio of wallflowers claiming not to be interested, but probably hoping to be noticed anyway. Instead, they were ignored.
- Let the winnowing begin: We were promised winnowing. So let’s get to it! Is there any reason at all for Duncan Hunter, Tommy Thompson, or John Cox to stay in this race?
4 Responses to “Digesting Ames”
[...] The Right's Field: “TRF will examine the fallout from yesterday's straw poll in more depth over the next few days, but following on David's post, here are a few initial thoughts… [...]
I’ve heard that the Iowa GOP more assiduously checked Iowa IDs, which could have at least something to do with the lower turnout.
I have two comments.
1. I also read that part of the reason for the lower voter turn out at the Iowa Straw Poll was that they required ID to vote. (What a new idea!!) So in a way the Straw Poll gives a more reliable look at the number of supporters each candidate collected. I think that is a huge improvement! This alone gives the race more validity.
2. In the sports world, does refusing to play against a rival team mean that you were stronger or weaker. Of a truth you never know. But it does mean, that the ones who refused to play thought they would be the loser! Did they lack confidence in their own message or their ability to connect with the voters? They lost because they didn’t think they had what it takes to win a little straw poll in one state. How can they ever expect us to have confidence in their ability to win in an all out contest against the Democrats. In the short run the stratedgy has merit…. save face. However, in the long run it doesn’t build confidence in the American voting public. All three no shows try to portray the image of strength and leadership. They might have accomplished this better had they been willing to work in Iowa instead of giving up. What is the old saying “When the going gets tough the tough get going.”
Mitt Romney really did win in so many ways. In my opinion he has shown us all that he will work like crazy if we elect him President of the USA.
Something to say?
Huckabee is a very adroit public speaker. He communcates his message in life-like, cogent terms, with compelling examples like the story he told (at the Ames Straw Poll) of what his then-11-yo daughter entered into the “Comments” section of a Visitors Book after visiting the Yad Vashem holocaust museum: “Couldn’t somebody do something?”
Effective.
Huckabee puts listeners at ease, and reassures them through clear concepts and a natural, integrated manner of communication (no doubt something well-cultivated as a pastor). He’s not demanding, like a Ron Paul, nor is he as “well-scripted” as Romney, nor as mechanical-squinty like Brownback.
Most importantly, Huckabee convinces many that he is ONE with the FairTax grassroots movement (5). While many – like Romney, and others, who are invested in the current income tax system – seek to demagog (1) the well-researched FairTax plan, its acceptance in the professional / academic community (2) continues to grow. Failure to enact the FairTax – choosing instead to try to “flatten” a NON-FLATTENABLE income tax system – will result in an irrevocable economic meltdown (3)!
Just take a look at the WEAK response Romney followed Huckabee with on last weekend’s “This Week with Geo. Stephanopoulos (4)”
Here is why the FairTax MUST replace the income tax. It’s:
• SIMPLE, easy to understand
• EFFICIENT, inexpensive to comply with and doesn’t cause less-than-optimal business decisions for tax minimization purposes
• FAIR, loophole free and everyone pays their share
• LOW TAX RATE, achieved by broad base with no exclusions
• PREDICTABLE, doesn’t change, so financial planning is possible
• UNINTRUSIVE, doesn’t intrude into our personal affairs or limit our liberty
• VISIBLE, not hidden from the public in tax-inflated prices or otherwise
• PRODUCTIVE, rewards, rather than penalizes, work and productivity
Its benefits are as follows:
FOR INDIVIDUALS:
• No more tax on income – make as much as you wish
• You receive your full paycheck – no more deductions
• You pay the tax when you buy “at retail” – not “used”
• No more double taxation (e.g. like on current Capital Gains)
• Reduction of “pre-FairTaxed” retail prices by 20%-30%
• Adding back 29.9% FairTax maintains current price levels
• FairTax would constitute 23% portion of new prices
• Every household receives a monthly check, or “pre-bate”
• “Prebate” is “advance payback” for monthly consumption to poverty level
• FairTax’s “prebate” ensures progressivity, poverty protection
• Finally, citizens are knowledgeable of what their tax IS
• Elimination of “parasitic” Income Tax industry
• NO MORE IRS. NO MORE FILING OF TAX RETURNS by individuals
• Those possessing illicit forms of income will ALSO pay the FairTax
• Households have more disposable income to purchase goods
• Savings is bolstered with reduction of interest rates
FOR BUSINESSES:
• Corporate income and payroll taxes revoked under FairTax
• Business compensated for collecting tax at “cash register”
• No more tax-related lawyers, lobbyists on company payrolls
• No more embedded (hidden) income/payroll taxes in prices
• Reduced costs. Competition – not tax policy – drives prices
• Off-shore “tax haven” headquarters can now return to U.S
• No more “favors” from politicians at expense of taxpayers
• Resources go to R&D and study of competition – not taxes
• Marketplace distortions eliminated for fair competition
• US exports increase their share of foreign markets
FOR THE COUNTRY:
• 7% – 13% economic growth projected in the first year of the FairTax
• Jobs return to the U.S.
• Foreign corporations “set up shop” in the U.S.
• Tax system trends are corrected to “enlarge the pie”
• Larger economic “pie,” means thinner tax rate “slices”
• Initial 23% portion of price is pressured downward as “pie”
increases
• No more “closed door” tax deals by politicians and business
• FairTax sets new global standard. Other countries will follow
(1) http://snipurl.com/taxpanelrebutted
(2) http://snipurl.com/econsopenletter
(3) http://snipurl.com/meltdowninprogress
(4) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW4fa6Z_4Po
(5) http://snipr.com/scrapthecode
Left by Ian
August 13, 2007 at 9:43am