Iowa Gives Us 2008’s Early Winner of the John Connally/Phil Gramm Award

This was written in August after the Iowa Straw Poll (story on those results is here):

Will Mitt Romney be the John Connally of our age?

Y’all remember John Connally, right? Nixon’s Secretary of the Treasury, he’s notable in election lore for spending $11 million running in 1980 and gaining a single delegate. Another famous party-switcher and Texas, Phil Gramm, did John one better in 1996, spending more than $20 million, tying Bob Dole for first place in the Iowa straw poll, finishing 5th in the Iowa caucus, and pulling out before New Hampshire.

Is Mitt Romney destined to be the next Connally and Gramm? Romney and his flacks did the morning talk show circuit today, claiming that their candidate’s win in the Iowa straw poll is a “big start” and is “not hollow.” When you have to claim a first place finish is “not hollow,” you know you’re in trouble.

The Washington Post quotes one campaign official who estimates that Romney spent more than $7 million in Iowa, and in so doing, beat out such GOP heavyweights as Mike Huckabee, Sam Brownback, and Tom Tancredo ….

Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney spent $7 million to win 4,516 straws in August. That’s over $1,500 per straw.

Romney has, I believe, spent another estimated $10 million since then. Tonight, as of this writing, he garnered only 25% of Iowa’s estimated 80,000 - 90,000 caucusing Republicans. Using 85,000 as the midpoint, those 21,250 or so votes cost over $470 each.

(Jan. 4 Update: GOP turnout was really a stunning 120,000-plus, and Romney’s 25% of the vote is about 30,600 votes, or over $325 per vote. Aside: I wonder if this bodes well in any way for the general election?)

Future generations may be nominating presidential candidates for the Mitt Romney Most-Money, Least-Results award. Phil Gramm and John Connally, may he rest in peace, may turn out to have been relative pikers.

As Green Mountain Politics said on December 7:

If Mitt loses Iowa to Huckabee it will be an unmitigated disaster for Team Romney.

I don’t see how it can be anything but that.

My own reax to Romney’s second-place beatdown? This is about right:

So is this from AP:

Romney sought to frame his defeat as something less than that, saying he had trailed Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, by more than 20 points a few weeks ago. “I’ve been pleased that I’ve been able to make up ground and I intend to keep making up ground, not just here but across the country,” he said.

The words were brave, but already, his strategy of bankrolling a methodical campaign in hopes of winning the first two states was in tatters - and a rejuvenated McCain was tied with him in the polls in next-up New Hampshire.

Oh, and I do believe that Fred is not dead.

Now it’s on to New Hampshire, supposedly a good place for Romney because it’s in Massachusetts’s back yard. I would suggest that it will be a rough place for Romney because it’s in Massachusetts’s back yard.

I believe the Mass Resistance folks (who, do not doubt it for a minute, played an important role in taking down Romney’s Iowa numbers) have a surprise or two for the Mittster in the “Live Free or Die” state. It’s their back yard too.

On the Dem side, Obama pulled away, finishing ahead of Edwards and third-place, no longer Mrs. Inevitable (oh, that was fun to type) Hillary Clinton. As of this writing, it looks like it will end up 37.5% - 30% - 29.5%.

_______________________________________________

UPDATE: The Dem result is a thoroughly deserved humiliation of former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, who ended his presidential bid very early, and threw his support to Hillary. It serves him right for being such a jerk (fourth item at link) on eminent-domain reform.