Michael Graham of National Review puts McCain’s candidacy in proper perspective
Read the whole thing. Here are some choice quotes:
In 2000, running against George W. Bush and the entire Carroll Campbell machine in South Carolina, John McCain got 42% of the vote, and 240,000 votes out of 573,000 or so cast.
Tonight, he got 33% of the vote in a field where his top challengers—Romney and Giuliani—aren’t even running, and 135,000 actual votes. If just the same people who voted for McCain in 2000 had voted for him today, he would have won 50+% of the South Carolina vote. That would have been truly impressive.
Instead, John McCain LOST the support of 100,000 people—and he’s the winner?
McCain had the same “success” in New Hampshire (McCain, 2000: 48%, 116,000 votes; McCain 2008: 37%, 89,000 votes) and Michigan (2000: 50%, 600,000 votes; 2008: 30%, 257,000 votes).
January 20th, 2008 at 2:03 am
Mitt’s pulling out of SC was seen as helping McCain by some.
Is there something I don’t know or wouldn’t a Huckabee win have been better for Romney? Is it possible that Mitt’s people prefer McCain going into Florida? Perhaps they have found that Huckabee is the biggest competitor for the specific demographic Mitt is targetting in Florida.
I don’t know… this next week or so will certainly be something though.
January 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Do you think Mitt and his campaign made a strategic mistake for skipping South Carolina? I was listening to the FOX news this morning and it was commented that Mitt may’ve made a big mistake for withdrawing from SC. His withdrawl may’ve helped propel McCain to the nomination. What is your take on this?
January 20th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I think it was probably the right move, though not a fun position to be in regardless. Post-Michigan polling showed a clear 2 tiered race. McCandidate vs. Duckabee for 1st and then Mitt vs. Fred about 10-12 points back vying for 3rd. If the campaign believed that they actually had a shot at 2nd, I’m sure they would have fought for it, but they probably figured they couldn’t do it.
So then it becomes a competition with Fred for 3rd. There are 4 possibilities:
1. Fight for SC and get 3rd
2. Fight for SC and get 4th
3. Don’t fight and get 3rd
4. Don’t fight and get 4th
From an expectations management and buzz perspective, #1 and #2 would be spun in the most negative possible way by the press and not buy the campaign much. That leaves #3 and #4 which was really close and practically a coin flip. Either way, they don’t benefit much, though #4 is on the margin a bit worse.
They probably thought that with Leno and with McCandidate, Duckabee, and Fred in a deathmatch, there could be some unexpected developments that would change the landscape. They probably correctly assessed, however, that in SC their destiny was not at all in their hands, so they ought to just step back and watch it unfold.
We should remember that in the eyes of the media, Mitt is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. Regardless of which option (#1-4), they would have find a way to spin and second guess it.
Most important thing for us is to buckle down and get ready to rumble for Florida.
Thanks for your comment.
January 20th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
David Kim, I don’t think the issue is whether or not Romney had a chance at 2nd in SC… or any position for that matter… what they were saying on FOX is that had Romney stayed in and fought he would have taken votes from McCain and possibly given Huckabee the win.
A Huckabee win may have been better for Romney than a McCain win, is the thinking. McCain was leading in Florida and other big Feb 5th states pre-SC, now those advantages may become pronounced.
January 20th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Hey, this Graham stole my comment which I made yesterday immediately after the SC win about how he lost 40% of his votes in SC, comparing to 2000
No, really, I am glad someone in a better position noticed this too!