After the Iowa straw poll, more clarity has now emerged in the GOP presidential race. TPaw has now bowed out of the race, and I hope a few more will as well like Santorum, Gingrich, and Cain. There now appears to be a solid three candidates who have potential to win some of the early voting states. Romney, Bachmann, and Perry are now the powerful Trifecta in the GOP race. It seems very likely that one of these three, most likely Romney or Perry, will win the GOP nomination.
Splitting the Vote
Interestingly, Bachmann and Perry will have to compete directly with one another for the Tea Party and Social Conservative vote. There is a high possibility that Bachmann and Perry will attack each other in order to solidify support, which will not only damage the reputation of each candidate, but most likely split the Tea Party vote and the religious conservative vote. A divided Tea Party is a good thing for Mitt Romney.
The Long Shot Candidate
I see Bachmann as a long shot candidate so I highly doubt she will win the GOP nomination. However, due to her family history in Iowa, it is very possible that she could win Iowa. I believe that most voters support a candidate for very simple reasons and I think a lot of Iowans will vote for her due to her family history in the state. If it weren't for Bachann's family history in the state, I would say this is a two person race between Romney and Perry.
So what would happen if Bachmann wins Iowa, Romney wins New Hampshire, and Perry wins South Carolina? We would have a long, drawn out nominating process.
Two Things Nobody is Talking About
First, why is nobody talking about how close Ron Paul came to winning the straw poll? Ron Paul had an amazing second place finish, losing to Bachmann by only 150 votes. If you look at how Ron Paul did last time in 2007 and compare it with today, that is an impressive turn of events.
Second, Nevada holds its primary right after New Hampshire. It bothers me that nobody in the press corp is giving Nevada any importance in the nominating process. The press is still stuck in the old days where the only states that matter are Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Nevada is a place that Romney won last time and where he is widely expected to win again so it is quite troubling to me that Nevada is being overlooked and considered insignificant.
How Often the Pundits are Wrong
Now that some clarity is emerging on the GOP field, its worth looking back and holding the political pundits and talking heads accountable for their predictions. After analyzing many pundits predictions, what we realize is that pundits are wrong most of the time. Consider a few examples, Lawrence O'donnell on MSNBC proclaimed many times in the recent months "I think Tim Pawlenty is going to get the GOP nomination." O'donnell's prediction wasn't just wrong, it was colossally wrong when you consider that the candidate he predicted to win wasn't even a competitor. In fact, TPaw was the very first candidate to drop out of the race.
Second, George Will said a few months ago "There are only three people who have a chance of winning the GOP nomination, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, or Mitch Daniels. And I think it will be either Pawlenty or Daniels." Wrong again Mr. Will.
Third, Mark Halperin, who I generally like, stated in a recent article in Time magazine that the top three candidates for president are Romney, Pawlenty, and Huntsman. With Pawlenty being the first candidate to drop out and Huntman going nowhere fast, it seems obvious that Halperin's "Big Three" were way off. I guess if you get one out of three right, you deserve to be Time's chief political correspondent.