A recent Washington Post Poll asked voters a bevy of questions and nestled amongst them an important nugget regarding the 2012 election: Rick Perry is seen as most electable. Conventional wisdom suggests that Romney has traditionally been seen as the most electable candidate and this has been one of his greatest strengths. What turned that conventional wisdom on its head? One possibility is that Perry is simply at the Zenith of his popularity, but another hypothesis is that the view of electability differs from conservatives and the news media (Ellis, Kilgore).
Samuel Popkin, in his book, The Reasoning Voter described what he calls “Inkblot candidates,” little known candidates who voters project their opinions onto. Inkblot candidates arise when there is discontent regarding a front runner, but no viable alternative. Upon a primary victory, or strong entry into the race, candidates usually go from obscure, to well-known very quickly (Popkin 1994).
Without a lot of policy information about the candidates, voters project their preferences onto the inkblot candidate, are also seen much more favorably, in regards to policy and personality than before. With this newfound goodwill, the inkblot candidate unites the frontrunner’s opposition and improves immensely in the polls (Popkin 1994).
Following his win in New Hampshire, pollsters found that voters believed Gary Hart had fresh, new ideas for the country and represented a new way of Democratic politics. In fact, Hart led Walter Mondale in most, if not every category pollsters tested. Yet when questioned, voters unable to concrete examples new policies or any other category (expand) eventually leading to Walter Mondale’s “where’s the beef?” line (Popkin 1994).
This anti-front runner coalition rarely lasts, once voters received more information regarding Hart, their opinion of him started to gradually change and his polls fizzled. A candidate needs to be more than the anti-frontrunner, if he cannot create a coalition based on anything more than charisma and antipathy towards the front runner, it fails. This could be happening to Perry (Popkin 1994).
Difficult as it is to believe, Perry has only been running for one month, meaning the information voters have regarding him is far more limited than say, Mitt Romney who’s been running since 2002. The Washington Post poll shows voters think Perry is closest to them on the issues 21% against 15% for Romney, supports Republican values 19%-18% and understand “people like you” 17% to 13% for Sarah Palin (Washington post poll).
This inkblot argument is augmented by a recent CNN poll asking voters about their perceptions of the candidates. When asked which candidate is most like them, most electable, most likely to fight for their beliefs, who is strongest leader and most likable, Perry won every question. Given the limited information about Perry, Popkin’s argument that voters are not reacting rationally to information about candidates, but are instead caught in his charisma seems possible (CNN Sept. 2011).
Some of the questions may be based on information and not just emotion. Regarding republican values, a recent national PPP poll shows that only 13% of very conservative voters believe in global warming, 25% believe in evolution, 53% believe social security is a Ponzi scheme, against 33% who don’t. Conservative and very conservative voters compose 76% of the electorate and their positions on the issues are similar to Perry’s, which he has been vocalizing quite loudly. (CNN Sept. 2011, PPP Poll Shear, Michael).
There is another possibility however, that republican primary voters see electability from a fundamentally different viewpoint than non-republicans. After an election loss, partisans usually complain that the party wasn’t partisan enough, that democrats weren’t liberal enough in 2010 and that because McCain was not conservative enough in 2008. The liberal argument usually doesn’t gain traction, because they don’t comprise much of the electorate, the PPP poll suggests 12% are very liberal and 17% somewhat liberal of the national electorate. Given that conservatives and very conservatives comprise 40% of the national electorate and 76% of the party, it’s possible that believe Perry’s more conservative positions make him more electable (PPP REP).
This is possibly supported by the CNN and Washington Post polls showing that Perry is considered the most electable by 42% of the respondents, versus 26% for Romney and 30-20. The CNN poll also states that by a 78-22 margin, voters would rather have an electable candidate than an “ideologically pure one.” Yet, as polls continue to show Perry losing ground with independent voters and against President Obama, trailing Obama 52-41 it seems there is a contradiction here (PPP NTL).
Either Perry is not as electable as Romney, or the definition of electable is different. If republicans believe that a more conservative candidate is an electable candidate, regardless of what polls say, or said candidates perceived ability to appeal to swing voters, Romney likely cannot win. Romney’s primary advantages prior to Perry were electability, money and a split opposition, two of these are, for the moment, gone.
Normally this wouldn’t be too dangerous for Romney, except that his frontrunner position was always precarious to begin with.
Romney’s support was never too stellar, reaching a peak in the aggregate of polls in July 2010 and his peak in a single poll same in a June 2011 Rasmussen poll, placing him at 33%. In 2008, the frontrunners from both parties, Giuliani and Clinton lead their opponents by margins as large as 12 and 22 respectively (Pollster aggregate).
Giuliani and Clinton’s failures could argue that a large margin means nothing, as their support was thin and usurped. However, there are few times when it would be better to have a low lead than a large one. Furthermore, consider how Romney’s support has barely faltered, dropping from an aggregate of 22 before Perry to 16 now.
Perry, just like an inkblot candidate has united Romney’s opposition. This is exemplified by other candidates and undecided falling precipitous in the recent months, as he rose. Since August, when Perry entered, every candidate except for Ron Paul has lost ground, whereas Romney, Bachmann, Gingrich, Cain and Palin have all lost support, but the non-Romney, non-Paul candidates have lost the most support (Pollster 2008 aggregate, Dem, REP).
The difference between this dynamic and dynamics from previous elections is that the Romney wasn’t polling well to begin with. Hart, Kennedy and other inkblot candidates failed because they had to hold disparate factions together, on the basis of nothing but personality and opposition to the frontrunner to remain competitive. Perry isn’t competitive with Romney; at the moment his support is twice that of Romney’s in the aggregate, he’s dominating (Pollster 2008 Rep, Dem).
Hart and others could not afford to lose factions of their coalition, as they were within the margin of error with their opponents, or the factions were too large. Perry in comparison could lose some establishment support to Romney, tea party support to Bachmann, or libertarian support to Paul and still be competitive. Even in much of Perry’s current support is superficial, Romney’s consistently weak standing means Perry can survive a reasonable tough fall, without falling behind Romney.
Whether Perry’s precipitous rise is real, or merely the vocalization of anti-Romney sentiment coupled with a weak field is hard to say. On the one hand, his suddenly high favorables, measured across a litany of questions is suggestive of an inkblot candidate. On the other hand, it’s not as though his opponents, Romney in particular are formidable, Perry could be uniting the usual republican, or conservative coalition that has been on the sidelines or split amongst lesser candidates until now.
Works Cited
CNN Poll http://i2.cdn.turner.com/...
Ellis, John http://www.businessinsider.com/...
Kilgore, Ed http://www.tnr.com/...
Polling Aggregate http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Pollster 2008 REPhttp://www.pollster.com/...
Pollster 2008 DEMhttp://www.pollster.com/...
Popkin, Samuel. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. University of Chicago Press. 1994.
PPP REP http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...
PPP NTL http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...
Shear, Michael http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...
Washington Post Poll
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...