Does McCain Have a Ceiling?

Ron Brownstein, in the latest National Journal:

Just as in 2000, McCain won decisively among moderate and independent voters in New Hampshire. But the final results in the New Hampshire exit poll conducted by Edison/Mitofsky showed that very conservative voters preferred Romney over McCain by more than 2-to-1 ... those results echoed McCain's performance in 2000, when he ran just even with Bush among New Hampshire Republicans and conservatives. McCain then failed to win the 2000 nomination because he ultimately could not attract enough core Republicans in other states. In states with Republican electorates that were more conservative than New Hampshire's -- such as South Carolina, California, Florida, Georgia, and Missouri -- Bush routinely beat McCain among both Republicans and conservatives by at least 2-to-1.

Once again, McCain's most urgent challenge is to expand his appeal among those core Republican constituencies, because few other states are tailored as precisely to his strengths as is New Hampshire. Conservatives represented just 55 percent of New Hampshire Republican voters on Tuesday, according to exit polls. That's lower than in almost any state outside the Northeast.

Likewise, voters who identified themselves as independents (as opposed to those legally registered as independents) cast nearly four in 10 of the Republican ballots in New Hampshire, according to the exit poll. That's a higher percentage than independents contributed in 2000, the last contested GOP presidential race, in almost any other key state -- from South Carolina and Florida to New York and California.

As Brownstein goes on to note, of course, the great advantage that McCain '08 enjoys over McCain in 2000 is the fact that everybody else in the race seems to have a ceiling too. So even if self-described conservatives never start breaking McCain's way, the weakness of his opponents will probably prevent any of them from playing the George W. Bush role from 2000 and sweeping him aside. But at the very least, if McCain keeps stalling out around 35 percent of the vote, he's going to start losing some primaries, and even when they lose his rivals can keep racking up substantial numbers of delegates in the states that aren't winner-take-all. Which begins to makes a brokered convention scenario - which is bandied about every election cycle and never materializes - seem shockingly plausible.

Comments

But who's going to win those primaries? If anything, the fractured nature of the process helps McCain. The establishment will never get behind Huckabee, so unless a damaged Romney, fading Rudy or apparently constipated Fred, somehow pull off a miracle, McCain will win the upcoming primaries almost by default. And come Feb. 5 the party will end the suspense by breaking toward him in just large enough numbers to make him the presumptive nominee. McCain doesn't need to popular to win this thing. And if he ends up facing Hillary in the general, he doesn't even need to be popular to with the whole shebang. Personally, I don't see anyone else who can.

Posted by JZ | January 11, 2008 3:41 PM

The Republican establishment lost their conscience some time ago, and conservative America no longer cares what they want. This election is about what the people want, not the "bosses". If they do not endorse Huckabee and he wins the nomination anyway, Thomas Jefferson will be the happiest man in heaven. Also Abe Lincoln: government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Posted by David Anderson | January 11, 2008 3:49 PM

Let's be careful with our terms, Mr. Brownstein:

"very conservative voters preferred Romney over McCain by more than 2-to-1"

--Yes, but didn't McCain beat Romney among ALL Republicans by something like 37 to 31 percent? That puts the lie to the idea that ONLY Independents support McCain. So he does well with "moderate" Republicans, and with a third of Conservative Republicans. That's enough. Why isn't the 37-31 split the story here?

"Bush routinely beat McCain among both Republicans and conservatives by at least 2-to-1."

But as I just noted, the comparison falls apart this year. McCain may be losing *Conservatives*, but he's winning *Republicans* broadly. This needs to be said over and over and over again. It's up to Ross and others to point this out, rather than to highlight factors from the 2000 race that don't match up this year.

Posted by Discman | January 11, 2008 4:44 PM

Giuliani already is so strapped for cash he can't pay his people's salaries. And already he's 5-4 behind McCain in Florida, his absolutely-must-win last chance.
Romney has pulled out of SC and Fla and staked everything on a win in MI--where he's falling further behind McCain every day.
Thompson disappeared months ago.
That leaves two. And the one who faces a ceiling is Huckabee--only the religious right votes for him.

If it narrows to two, as it soon will, why should there be a brokered convention?

No wonder the odds on McCain are 40% and rising fast.

Posted by Nosecounter | January 11, 2008 5:44 PM

McCain is the best candidate among the Republicans to pull the party together and appeal to independents and conservative Democrats. He has convinced many conservatives including me that he has an adequate combination of social and economic conservative credibility along with a superb national security position. At this point, he has made the sale to most Republicans. and it his primary election to lose through some dumb move.

McCain is a moderate and sensible conservative and a true hero, having extraordinarily braved six years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam.

He is clearly the superior Republican to defeat Clinton or Obama. As to his age, one thinks of Adenauer, the greatest German post-war figure who led into his late eighties.

Posted by Peter Leavitt | January 11, 2008 6:01 PM

It seems to me that by essentially pulling out of Michigan (Huckabee was running neck and neck with McCain and Romney there until they hit Michigan and he hit South Carolina after the NH primary), Huckabee has more or less conceded and is banking on McCain winning and choosing him for Veep. I think Huckabee's goal in running was to make himself a national political figure, which he's done. Now he's shifted gears to try to become V.P., and I actually think he would fill the role admirably. He'd be a reliable conservative vote in Senate tiebrakes and could push domestic policy ideas while actually learning something about foreign policy. As for the campaigning, he's a good debater, and he's shown he can maintain a sunny disposition while sticking in the knife, which isn't a bad skill for the job. Of course, demographically, he'd be a big help to McCain.

It seems to me that by conceding Michigan, Huckabee has attempted to create a situation where one of two things happens: if McCain wins MI, he should get the establishment behind him and be able to secure the nomination, with Huckabee collecting enough votes among southern evangelicals to ensure that Thompson and Romney can't get anywhere. If Romney wins Michigan, Huckabee hopes to still be able to stave him off in South Carolina long enough to keep the race going and for McCain to recover in time for the bigger Feb 5th states. My guess is that's what he's planning now.

I don't really have a dog in the republican fight, since I'm mostly a social conservative with mostly liberal economic views. Someone like Huckabee would appeal to me but I don't want another president who will need to rely 100% on "trusted advisors" for foreign policy, so I don't support him, though I experience a lot of what Ross calls "Huckenfreude"

Posted by hugo | January 12, 2008 11:11 AM

McCain's ceiling lasts only so long as the fractured field lasts. McCain is the second choice of many voters supporting someone else. As challengers drop out, McCain's percentages will rise.

The problem is who will drop out and when? Romney need never drop out. He simply can keep collecting delegates and hope for a brokered convention. He does not hold office and has a personal fortune.

Huckabee can also go all the way to the convention. He holds no office and "lives off the land" as it were. Why not keep collecting delegates, developing a national profile and await a brokered convention?

Thompson must win or "tie" in South Carolina or go home. He is the first bloc of voters available to McCain. Who does he endorse? Either McCain or hope for VP on a Giuliani ticket? Where do his voters go?

Giuliani can be embarrassed. He is not going to go to the convention if he loses on February 5. If he comes close in Florida he should still stay in for NY,CT, California etc...but after the 5th he could drop out.

Ron Paul-he will go all the way as he is also a message candiate who "lives off the land." The question is "which convention?" We do not want him going solo. (I refuse to analyze Duncan Hunter or Alan Keyes).

The Republicans have more winner-take-all states so less likelihood of brokered convention but the scattered strength of the nominees this year make it more likely than in the virtual two man race on the Democrat side.

Posted by jjv | January 12, 2008 11:36 AM

Speaking as one GOP voter....if Mccain wins the GOP nomination I will not vote for him in the general election. I won't vote Democrat but there's no way Mccain will ever get my vote and I know a lot of fellow Republicans who feel the same way.

Huckabee will also not get my vote if he is the GOP nominee.

Mitt, Rudy and Fred all would receive my vote in Nov however.

Just one guy's opinion.

Posted by Dave M | January 12, 2008 2:03 PM

I'm another GOP voter who will not vote for McCain or Huckabee in the general election.

Posted by Lucy | January 12, 2008 2:23 PM

I have heard of McCain being a POW but knew little about his life and so that is why I am sharing some of the things that others may not have read.

"The seven years following McCain's homecoming were uneven. He advanced professionally, attending the National War College in Washington, D.C. and receiving a promotion to captain in 1977. 1977 also saw his appointment as the Navy's liaison to the U.S. Senate, a position that laid the groundwork for his political ambitions. His personal life, however, was less than stellar. Carousing, womanizing, and a poor choice of companions led to some unsavory episodes, and ultimately resulted in a divorce from his first wife in 1980. Candid about this period in his life, McCain explained to Pierce, "One of the reasons I've been reluctant to judge other people is that I've had so many failures of my own. I failed when I was in prison. I failed in my [first] marriage. I think that if there are any benefits from my failure, it's to realize that other people fail, too."

Yes, we all do make mistakes, but the fact of the matter is we also know better as were are doing it. The stronger person is the one who can so "no" when choices are place before them. The easy way is to give into temptations. There are candidates out there who have said "no" to temptations and they should also have some recognition for being strong first and foremost.

Posted by Wendy | January 12, 2008 3:18 PM

I have all the respect in the world for McCain's history and what he went through as a prisoner of war.

I will not vote for him if he is our nominee, period. I have gone back and forth with this for months if not years. I'm done.

#1 Fred
#2 Mitt
#3 Rudy

No McCain, no Huck. (RP doesn't exist.)

Posted by Peg C. | January 12, 2008 5:45 PM

McCain was against the Bush tax cuts before he voted for them. and must have joined the Minutemen the way he talks about border security. He has had 30 years to fix the border and has done nothing. I will give him consistency in the war on terror. Otherwise, his positions have been so unpredictable that who knows what you get with mcCain in the White House. Talk about Mitt flip flopping!!!
Mitt is the best debater I have ever seen and both he and Fred are consistently conservative. Either is a better choice than McCain.

Posted by The (Old Man | January 12, 2008 7:14 PM

One has to wonder if Mccain is elected president will he behave toward the press during press conferences the same way he behaved toward his fellow GOP candidates during the debates.

Will Mccain roll his eyes when he's asked a question he doesn't like? Will he snicker and sneer when he makes some smartass remark to a reporter?

Will this be the face of AMerica?

I hope not because it's very ugly to watch.

Posted by Mike R | January 13, 2008 8:35 AM

All the GOP candidates have ceilings, but I believe Huckabee's and Romney's are lower.

Posted by Bird Dog | January 14, 2008 12:34 AM