Top Dogs and Underdogs

There’s no true GOP front-runner—but that doesn’t mean the primary playing field is level.

The closest thing the GOP has to pack-leaders: Rubio, Bush and Walker.
National Journal
June 5, 2015, 1:01 a.m.

An­oth­er polit­ic­al ana­lyst and I re­cently de­cided just for fun to write down what per­cent­age chance we would give the top con­tenders for the Re­pub­lic­an pres­id­en­tial nom­in­a­tion. My col­league was bold, giv­ing Wis­con­sin Gov. Scott Walk­er a 35 per­cent chance of get­ting the nod, Sen. Marco Ru­bio a 30 per­cent chance, former Flor­ida Gov. Jeb Bush a 25 per­cent chance, and “someone else” a 10 per­cent chance—spe­cific­ally say­ing that this in­cluded Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich. I con­fess to hav­ing been less cour­ageous, giv­ing 25 per­cent chances each to Bush, Ru­bio, and Walk­er, a 10 per­cent shot to Cruz, and a 15 per­cent chance to “who knows?” An­oth­er well-re­garded polit­ic­al ana­lyst sep­ar­ately (and even more boldly) pegged Walk­er’s chances at 40 per­cent, Bush’s at 35 per­cent, and Ru­bio’s at 25 per­cent.

The closest thing the GOP has to pack-lead­ers: Ru­bio, Bush and Walk­er. (An­drew Bur­ton, Joe Raedle and Joe Raedle/Getty Im­ages)So what does this sug­gest? My in­ter­pret­a­tion would be that, first, this is a con­test that is very much in doubt, with no single, dom­in­ant play­er, no “one to beat” this early out. This is un­usu­al for Re­pub­lic­ans, who tra­di­tion­ally have be­haved in a very hier­arch­ic­al man­ner, tap­ping the es­tab­lish­ment can­did­ate—or, as many have put it, “who­ever’s turn it is to be the nom­in­ee.” It also sug­gests, however, that des­pite the lack of a clear front-run­ner in a crowded and noisy field, there are few­er than a half-dozen pro­spects at most who are per­ceived to have a plaus­ible chance at win­ning the nom­in­a­tion.

The news is not likely to get bet­ter for the un­der­dogs. Ob­vi­ously, this is a busi­ness where sur­prises are more the norm than the ex­cep­tion, but a field of 15 to 20 can­did­ates makes it even more dif­fi­cult for any­one who is not near the top at the be­gin­ning to rise and sep­ar­ate from the pack. De­bate rules will make it even more ex­clu­sion­ary. The top three or so can­did­ates are draw­ing in­terest from re­l­at­ively broad swaths of Re­pub­lic­an voters; the rest of the hope­fuls are carving out smal­ler niches or pock­ets with­in the GOP primary elect­or­ate, of­ten with very nar­rowly tailored ar­gu­ments that don’t have much elasti­city. Think of the way cable chan­nels “nar­row­cast” with pro­grams that very clearly tar­get cer­tain groups, while broad­cast net­works go for a wider, more gen­er­al audi­ence. While Sen. Rand Paul’s sup­port among those with strong liber­tari­an views is likely to be very high, will he be able to di­ver­si­fy his sup­port bey­ond that group? Can former Arkan­sas Gov. Mike Hucka­bee or former Sen. Rick San­tor­um ex­pand their ranks bey­ond those Re­pub­lic­ans who are most con­cerned with so­cial and cul­tur­al is­sues?

(RE­LATED: Rand Paul’s Risky Polit­ics

Bey­ond Bush, Ru­bio, and Walk­er, if there is to be a fourth real con­tender, my money at this mo­ment would be on someone from the most con­ser­vat­ive third of the GOP, with Cruz the most likely, though an ar­gu­ment can be made for Hucka­bee as well. With his late and slow entry, Kasich has ceded ground to the top three that could have been his.

The volat­il­ity that we see in the Re­pub­lic­an race is matched by the un­cer­tainty sur­round­ing the gen­er­al elec­tion. An ABC News”Š/”ŠWash­ing­ton Post poll—con­duc­ted May 28 to May 31 among 836 re­gistered voters—looked only at a Clin­ton-Bush match­up and found Clin­ton lead­ing by 3 points (with­in the mar­gin of er­ror), 47 per­cent to 44 per­cent. In ABC”Š/”ŠPost sur­veys in April 2014, as well as in Janu­ary and March of this year, Clin­ton’s lead had been either 12 or 13 points—a totally un­real­ist­ic spread that more likely meas­ured the elect­or­ate’s feel­ings to­ward a former sec­ret­ary of State (and someone who hadn’t been a polit­ic­al can­did­ate in a half-dozen years). The cur­rent, more plaus­ible num­bers meas­ure Clin­ton as a polit­ic­al can­did­ate—off the ped­es­tal. A CNN”Š/”ŠORC poll taken at al­most the same time—May 29 to May 31, but of 1,025 adults (a lar­ger sample but one not lim­ited to re­gistered voters)—had Clin­ton lead­ing five Re­pub­lic­ans by as little as  1 point and as much as 9 points. Clin­ton ex­ceeded 50 per­cent against two: She bested Cruz by 9 points, 52 per­cent to 43 per­cent, and Bush by 8 points, 51 per­cent to 43 per­cent. In­ter­est­ingly, she held identic­al 3-point mar­gins over Ru­bio and Walk­er—Clin­ton with 49 per­cent, Ru­bio and Walk­er with 46 per­cent. Voters gave her a mere 1-point edge over Paul, with Clin­ton up 48 per­cent to 47 per­cent.’

(RE­LATED: A Few Bits of In­form­a­tion to Re­mem­ber When Elec­tion Time Rolls Around Again

This raises the is­sue of com­par­ab­il­ity of polls, the im­port­ance of com­par­ing apples to apples, not or­anges. Samples in­clud­ing all adults, as op­posed to those lim­ited to re­gistered voters, tend to be more fa­vor­able to Demo­crats and in­clude a lot of people who don’t fol­low polit­ics as much or vote as of­ten. It’s just a hunch, but I sus­pect that if the CNN poll had been lim­ited to re­gistered voters, that 8-point lead over Bush might have looked more like the ABC”Š/”ŠPost‘s 3-point lead.  At the end of the day, I pre­dict that the only way this race isn’t go­ing to be with­in 3 or 4 points is if one side nom­in­ates an aw­ful can­did­ate; the es­sen­tial dy­nam­ics are set­ting it up to be at least as close at the 2012 con­test.

What We're Following See More »
House Democrats Subpoena Don McGahn
7 hours ago

"House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler issued a subpoena to former White House counsel Don McGahn as part of a House-led obstruction investigation into President Donald Trump. The subpoena comes just days after special counsel Robert Mueller’s report revealed that McGahn witnessed and testified about potential obstruction of justice by Trump."

Trump Won't Nominate Herman Cain for the Fed
11 hours ago

"President Donald Trump said Monday that he would not nominate Herman Cain to the Federal Reserve after the former GOP presidential candidate asked him not to. Senate Republicans had warned the White House against naming the businessman and 2012 presidential hopeful to serve on the body's board of governors."

Nadler Subpoenas Unredacted Report
3 days ago
Mueller Made 14 Criminal Referrals
4 days ago
The Report Is Here
4 days ago

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.