Is Mitt Romney the Nevada front-runner? Yes, but . . .

The expectation is that Mitt Romney will win Saturday's Nevada caucuses handily. But where there are high expectations, can disappointment be far behind?

|
Brian Snyder/Reuters
Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney greets the Fisher family backstage before a campaign rally in Elko, Nevada, on Friday.

Mitt Romney is the heavy favorite to win Saturday’s Nevada caucuses, in case you hadn’t noticed. The most recent Bling State – excuse me, Silver State – polls have Mr. Romney far ahead.

A Public Policy Polling survey released Friday has Newt Gingrich eating Romney’s desert dust, for example. Romney gets the nod of 50 percent of likely GOP caucus-goers, according to PPP. Mr. Gingrich comes in second at only 25 percent. Ron Paul is third at 15 percent and Rick Santorum fourth at 8 percent.

“The bad news for Gingrich isn’t just that he’s headed for a distant second-place finish. Nevada Republicans actively dislike him, with only 41 percent holding a favorable opinion of him to 49 percent with a negative one,” writes PPP analyst Tom Jenson. “That’s an indication that GOP voters might be starting to sour on him again, sending his numbers back to pre-South Carolina levels.”

It doesn’t look good for the former speaker, does it? New York Times polling analyst Nate Silver puts the chances of Romney winning Nevada at 100 percent.

But there are several caveats we should mention. There haven’t been many recent statewide polls of Nevada, so the data sample here is small. Plus, the vote in caucus states is notoriously hard to predict. Who will show up? Who will stick around if the speeches are boring? Who will bolt for home when the nachos run out?

Slate political blogger David Weigel points out that in 2008, final polls predicted that Mr. Paul would finish fourth with 7.3 percent of the vote. He actually finished second with 13.7 percent of the vote. Clearly Paul voters are hardened against lack of snacks.

Should Romney be worried? Well, not really. But now that he’s supposed to win a blowout, reporters might treat anything less as slippage. You know how devious we journalists are – always playing an expectations game with rules we control by ourselves.

“If this winds up being at all close, [Romney] may have some explaining to do,” writes the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake Friday on the paper’s political blog The Fix.

The biggest danger for Gingrich is that he won’t even finish second. A third or even fourth-place showing might make it much tougher for Newt to slog through until Southern states vote in March’s Super Tuesday. Rick Santorum is going all-in to try and displace Gingrich as the anti-Romney in Nevada. He’s released a brutal radio ad, for instance, that mocks Gingrich’s proposed US colony on the moon.

“Gingrich’s idea is fiscal insanity, and another reason why true conservatives are uniting around Rick Santorum,” says the radio spot.

Then there is Paul. Nevada is a test case of the libertarian’s caucus-first strategy, in which he focuses on states where organization and enthusiasm count for a lot. Nevada’s 28 delegates will be allocated proportionally and the caucus results are binding, so if Paul supporters can stack the house in a few counties their guy could do better than expected.

Paul’s made a play for the Nevada vote by releasing a state-specific economic plan that among other things proposes that tip income be tax-free. That might play well in a state where (according to the Paul campaign) 20 percent of workers have jobs that involve tip money.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Is Mitt Romney the Nevada front-runner? Yes, but . . .
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2012/0203/Is-Mitt-Romney-the-Nevada-front-runner-Yes-but-.-.-.
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe