Why Fred Might Be the Big Winner in Iowa

In the aftermath of the Iowa caucii, there are a number of views circulating throughout the Right Blogosphere about What It Means?  I’m going to add my $0.02 because I haven’t seen it really discussed much anywhere (although I crossposted this to Redstate.com for feedback).

My take on Iowa is that Fred Thompson may have been the big winner.  Now, I know most of you are going, “WTF are you smoking, son?”  And I realize the skepticism is warranted.

Although I am a Fredhead, I describe myself as a rational Fredhead.  I know he’s a dark horse candidate at this stage of the game.  But if you look at the race, several things emerge (and Redstate is a good example of the environment amongst Republican faithful).

First, 2008 promises to be the election that tests the Republican coalition, comprised primarily of Social Conservatives (SoCons), Fiscal Conservatives (FisCons), and War Conservatives (DefCons).  Yes, there’s a strong libertarian contingent, but I get the sense that they aren’t one of the pillars of the party, but more of a theme that infuses all pillars (except SoCons to some extent).

Second, none of the top tier candidates appeal to all three pillars.  Indeed, most of them are unacceptable to one or more of the pillars.

Huckabee is unacceptable to the FisCons and DefCons. Romney is apparently unpalatable to a large block of SoCons. Rudy is unacceptable to most SoCons, and a few FisCons. McCain is unacceptable to allCons. Paul is unacceptable to saneCons.

And every conservative has Fred Thompson as their first or second choice. He is the compromise candidate. If conventions still meant something, he would emerge as the nominee after backroom politicking by the party bosses.

Now Iowa comes along, and Huckabee out and out wins the thing.  Romney drops to second.  And Fred has an upset at coming in third.

But among the top tier, no candidate is as unacceptable as Huckabee.  Further, Romney was probably the most “electable” of the top candidates.

Huckabee’s win in Iowa no more catapults him into the nomination than a Kucinich win in Iowa would have on the Dem side.  He’s simply not in the mainstream of most of the Republican voters, even if he has very strong support among the SoCons.

Romney was and remains the “electable” candidate.  Apart from the devoted supporters (and every candidate has a cadre of those), I really got the sense that Republicans didn’t really trust the man.  There’s just something about him where even as you like him, even as you admire his competence, his perfectly coiffed hair, his speaking abilities, everything… just something unsettling about him.  All the flip-flop charges are, I believe, a symptom of this unease with Romney.

Republican support for Romney stemmed from the notion that he was the Guy That Gets It Done.  His money, his organization, his technology, and his personality were all supposed to build an inexorable vote-getting machine that we could ride to victory in the General over the expected Hillary-Media ticket.  I don’t know that Republicans truly love the guy; I don’t know that Republicans really believe the guy; I think we thought he is a winner, and that was the real basis of our support.

So for Huckabee the Pariah to win Iowa, and Romney the Chosen One to lose by 8 points, is frankly a nightmare for those FisCons and DefCons who cannot accept Huckabee and backed the Winner, who turns out to be a loser.

All of those people who backed Romney because he’s a winner now starts casting about for someone else to throw against Huckabee.  So who’s out there?

McCain benefits the most… except that there is a very significant part of the Republican base that cannot stand McCain.  Extremely influential opinion makers from Rush to Mark Levin and others are deadset against McCain.  As I see it, those who identify themselves as conservatives first and Republicans second find McCain unacceptable.  His Gang-of-Fourteen deal, the McCain-Feingold Crushing of Speech law, the repeated courting of the liberal media, his willingness to cut deals left and right… all of it leads to many conservatives rejecting McCain.  Plus, Fred beat McCain in Iowa.

Rudy stands to benefit, except that would splinter the party in all likelihood.  SoCons may admire his unwillingness to pander to their demands that the candidate stand for the Culture of Life, but they’re unlikely to back a man who has donated funds to Planned Parenthood.  I don’t know that the powerful Second Amendment group could countenance Rudy.  And he has weaknesses on illegal immigration.  Plus, Fred beat Rudy in Iowa.

This situation is perfect for powerbrokers to settle on Fred as the compromise candidate who can keep the party together.  He’s right on all of the principles.  He is everyone’s second choice.  SoCons, FisCons, DefCons… all say, “Fred would be great… if he could win.”

The critical question for Fred has always been, “Do you really want this?”  Obviously, I personally think he does, but for the good of the country, not for personal aggrandizement.  Nonetheless, Fred has to show the powerbrokers in the party, especially the money people, that he wants it and that if he is given the opportunity, he will close this out.

New Hampshire and Michigan are important, of course, as is South Carolina.  A huge win by McCain in NH changes the landscape, and I assume Romney’s support at that point starts to really move into McCain’s camp: after all, these are people who value winning more than rock-solid conservatism.  Romney could come storming back, and reestablish himself as the Winner.

But the path to the nomination is not as preposterous as people think.  The Head might say Romney or McCain or Rudy or whomever; but I believe the Heart of every conservative says Thompson.

The fundraising over the next couple of weeks will be very telling.

I think the big winner last night was one Fred D. Thompson.

-TS