The editorial staff at National Review Online make a compelling argument for the former Speaker to quit the race for the Republican nomination:

At the moment Rick Santorum appears to be overtaking Newt Gingrich as the principal challenger to Mitt Romney. Santorum has won more contests than Gingrich (who has won only one), has more delegates, and leads him in the polls. In at least one poll, he also leads Romney. It isn’t yet a Romney–Santorum contest, but it could be headed that way.

We hope so. Gingrich’s verbal and intellectual talents should make him a resource for any future Republican president. But it would be a grave mistake for the party to make someone with such poor judgment and persistent unpopularity its presidential nominee. It is not clear whether Gingrich remains in the race because he still believes he could become president next year or because he wants to avenge his wounded pride: an ambiguity that suggests the problem with him as a leader. When he led Santorum in the polls, he urged the Pennsylvanian to leave the race. On his own arguments the proper course for him now is to endorse Santorum and exit.

My emphasis.

And yet high-profile conservatives like Sarah Palin continue to flirt with a Gingrich endorsement. One can only wonder at what would happen if Palin did publicly endorse Newt Gingrich…

Yes, you read that right. Another day, another crazy outcome in the GOP primary season. Well, actually 3 crazy outcomes.

Here’s the lowdown from Politico:

Rick Santorum dealt an embarrassing setback to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign Tuesday night, sweeping non-binding contests across three states and raising new questions about conservatives’ willingness to accept Romney as their nominee.
Santorum beat Romney handily in the Missouri primary and Minnesota caucuses, and well after midnight on the East Coast he was also declared the winner of Colorado’s caucuses. He defeated Romney by 30 percentage points in Missouri, 55 percent to 25 percent; in Minnesota, Santorum took 45 percent to Ron Paul’s 27 percent and Romney’s 17 percent.

The margin in Colorado was the closest of the three contests — Santorum led by 5 points with 100 percent of precincts in. But that defeat may have stung the most for Romney, who led polling in the Western state, where his Mormon faith was expected to be an asset.

So if these are non-binding…what’s happening to the delegates? Apparently the GOP thought this contest would be over because party leaders will decide in two of the states…which doesn’t really seem fair, does it?

Here’s more…

All three primaries and caucuses are largely symbolic and no delegates were awarded Tuesday night. Colorado and Minnesota Republicans will apportion their delegates in subsequent party meetings, while Missouri will hold an entirely new, nonbinding caucus process next month.

At this point, Rick Santorum has now won more primary contests than Mitt Romney. And the fact that he won 3 in one night is pretty amazing.

Also, Romney actually came in third in Minnesota. Ron Paul was second with 27%.

Has this race been blown wide open?

More as it develops…

According to FiveThirtyEight, looks like Mitt is certain to win in Florida tonight…

The support for Gingrich had the floor drop out of it for two reasons. First, Romney has been outspending like crazy has gone gone incredibly negative. Second, Romney was better at the last debate. Had their been an additional debate scheduled, Newt might have been able to mount a comeback, but that doesn’t look likely now.

Interesting to see how the debates are actually perceived as having an effect in this primary cycle. Perhaps all 1,037 were worth it.

Here’s some more about what this means for Gingrich…

If the results are close enough that it takes some time to declare a winner in Florida, Mr. Gingrich might be able to declare a moral victory of sorts, chalking up the result to an uncharacteristically poor performance in the debates and to Mr. Romney’s substantial advantage in advertising dollars. These excuses are not necessarily convincing ones, but they are liable to be given more credence by the news media the longer it takes to call the state.

Barring a win or a close call, Mr. Gingrich’s ability to spin the outcome might depend on the extent to which he is able to point toward any signs of life in the exit polls. One reason that Mr. Gingrich’s victory in South Carolina seemed so persuasive was that he beat Mr. Romney among almost every demographic cohort. If Mr. Romney’s victory instead appeared to result from groups like Cuban Americans that have more presence in Florida than in other states, Mr. Gingrich might make a credible claim toward being poised to rebound in subsequent contests.

More as it develops…

When George Will is not wasting his WaPo column singing praises for the latest long-shot GOP candidate in the media spotlight, he can lyrically voice the truth of a matter like few other pundits. His latest column is a pitch perfect observation on how President Obama’s State of the Union address betrays a longing for an “unfettered executive” branch by his administration and among his supporters:

“Obama, an unfettered executive wielding a swollen state, began and ended his address by celebrating the armed forces. They are not “consumed with personal ambition,” they “work together” and “focus on the mission at hand” and do not “obsess over their differences.” Americans should emulate troops “marching into battle,” who “rise or fall as one unit.

Well. The armed services’ ethos, although noble, is not a template for civilian society, unless the aspiration is to extinguish politics. People marching in serried ranks, fused into a solid mass by the heat of martial ardor, proceeding in lock step, shoulder to shoulder, obedient to orders from a commanding officer — this is a recurring dream of progressives eager to dispense with tiresome persuasion and untidy dissension in a free, tumultuous society…

To enact and execute federal laws under Madison’s institutional architecture requires three, and sometimes more, such majorities. There must be majorities in the House and Senate, each body having distinctive constituencies and electoral rhythms. The law must be affirmed by the president, who has a distinctive electoral base and election schedule. Supermajorities in both houses of Congress are required to override presidential vetoes. And a Supreme Court majority is required to sustain laws against constitutional challenges…

Like other progressive presidents fond of military metaphors, he rejects the patience of politics required by the Constitution he has sworn to uphold.”

Will’s column is not without false notes.  He implies by omission that the desire for an unfettered executive branch is unique to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.  Not so. The executive privilege, unitary executive definition and war power assertions of the Bush/Cheney Presidency is still fresh in my mind, even if forgotten or minimized by Mr. Will. The single greatest disappointment of the Obama Presidency has been his willingness to use the Bush/Cheney Unitary Executive definition as a jumping off point to further expand the power of the presidency.

This appetite for expanded executive authority is also clearly evident in all of the current batch of Republican Presidential hopefuls save Ron Paul.  None more so than “Big Government Conservative” Newt Gingrich,  who would also like to remove any judicial constraints on both the executive and legislative branch. I am not sure which is more frightening…

New Gingrich claiming authority to disregard or dismantle the judicial branch:

“I decided that if you had judges that were so radically anti-American that they thought ‘one nation under God’ was wrong, they shouldn’t be on the court.”

- or –

President Obama dismissing the joint session of congress in his SOTU address:  with “You won’t act, so I am.”  

Both sentiments represent a depressing prospect for all but closet monarchists.

Today, the Republican House of Representatives, divided government, and the Supreme Court are the only meaningful constraints on the Democratic executive branch. This election cycle the GOP is likely to maintain their majority in the House and take majority control of the Senate. Senate control will add one more fetter to a Democratic president but, if recent history is a guide, will put no additional limitation on the power of a Republican president. This should give pause to George Will and anyone else who purports to care about Madisonian democracy and the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution.

There is a real risk that we will return to One Party Rule under the Republicans in 2013. If that still looks likely in the fall, I would hope that anyone as concerned about executive branch overreach as George Will would endorse the re-election of Barack Obama. At least this would prevent loosening the remaining tenuous legislative fetters still constraining the expanding executive branch beast.

While ever hopeful, I will not be holding my breath.

^{Cross-posted from “The Dividist Papers“}

Check out his latest video blog post. Some pretty compelling prognostication…

Long story short…the Newt map is bad…very bad…

Yes, we’re still a long ways out…but people know Newt. And they’re not exactly fond of him.

Well, let me rephrase. Moderate Dems and Independents know Newt…and they’re not exactly fond of him.

What do you think?

Just over an hour…

Let me know what you think in the comments below!

More as it develops…

Well, you could see this one coming from a mile away…

From Gallup…

The most shocking stat? Romney’s 23 point lead has evaporated…in a week!

Romney held a 23-point lead over Gingrich as recently as Jan. 11-15. Thus, in a matter of one week, Republicans who are registered to vote have shifted their support substantially — with Romney dropping 8 points and Gingrich gaining 14 points. The latest Gallup tracking update covers Jan. 18-22, encompassing Gingrich’s come-from-behind 12-point victory over Romney in Saturday’s South Carolina Republican primary. Gingrich began to gain on Romney well before Saturday’s vote, however, most likely reflecting his performance in the two nationally televised debates held in South Carolina last Monday and Thursday.

So goes South Carolina…so goes the GOP nation?

More as it develops…

Looks like Newt is leading in most early polls before the debate and PPP had Newt up by 6 a day before the South Carolina primary, where he won by more than twice that.

The numbers…

Gingrich has gained 12 points since a PPP poll conducted in Florida a week ago. Romney has dropped 8 points. Paul and Santorum have pretty much remained in place. Their favorability numbers show similar trendlines. Gingrich’s has increased 8 points from +15 (51/36) to +23 (57/34). Meanwhile Romney’s has declined 13 points from +44 (68/24) to +31 (61/30).

Here’s why that’s good news for Gingrich…

1) His supporters are more committed than Romney’s. 78% of his voters say they’ll definitely vote for him compared to 73% for Romney, and among folks whose minds are completely made up he leads by 9 points at 45-36.

2) If Rick Santorum drops out between now and next Tuesday, Gingrich will be the beneficiary. His voters prefer Gingrich over Romney 50-23, and in a field where he’s no longer a candidate Newt’s lead expands to 43-36.

3) Voters see him as better positioned ideologically than Romney. 52% think his views are ‘about right’ compared to 42% for Romney. Only 14% of voters think he’s ‘too liberal’ compared to 25% for Romney.

4) Newt is drawing out new voters. With the 11% of the electorate that didn’t vote in the 2008 primary, he leads 40-30. Meanwhile Romney is having trouble holding onto the folks who voted for him in 2008. 37% are supporting someone else this time, with 19% of them moving toward Gingrich. This was a big problem for Romney in Iowa as well- if he could just hold onto the folks who supported him last time he’d be winning easily. But he doesn’t inspire a passionate enough following to keep folks in the fold.

5) Newt’s continuing to do well with all the groups he dominated with in South Carolina. He’s up 42-23 with Evangelicals, 46-20 with Tea Partiers (Mitt’s actually in 3rd with them), 42-28 with men, and 44-23 with voters describing themselves as ‘very conservative,’ which is the largest ideological group in the Florida electorate.

More as it develops…

InsiderAdvantage shows very similar numbers to the Rasmussen poll we posted earlier, although Ron Paul pulls a lot more support in this one.

Gingrich – 34%
Romney – 26%
Paul – 13%
Santorum: 11%
Other – 2%
Undecided – 14%

Could the tide be turning in Newt’s favor? It certainly seems so. In fact, look at these overall preference numbers from Gallup…

And that was BEFORE South Carolina. No doubt that gap will get a lot closer when they run these numbers again.

GOPers have decided that they’re not happy with Romney and they’re actively seeking an alternative.

Game on.

Rasmussen has the numbers…

Less than two weeks ago, Mitt Romney had a 22-point lead in Florida, but that’s ancient history in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. Following his big win in South Carolina on Saturday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich now is on top in Florida by nine.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Florida Republican Primary Voters, taken Sunday evening, finds Gingrich earning 41% of the vote with Romney in second at 32%. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum runs third with 11%, while Texas Congressman Ron Paul attracts support from eight percent (8%). Nine percent (9%) remain undecided.

Romney’s campaign has always been about inevitability, but South Carolina’s winning record for picking the GOP candidate since 1980 has essentially smashed that…

Throughout the GOP race, Romney has always benefited from the perception that he was the strongest general election candidate in the field. However, among Florida voters at the moment, that is no longer the case. Forty-two percent (42%) now believe Gingrich would be the strongest candidate against Obama, while 39% say the same of Romney. At the other extreme, 64% see Ron Paul as the weakest potential candidate against Obama.

Looks like the GOP might have a long nomination fight on its hands, ala Democrats 2008. And that might not be the worst thing in the world because what that allowed Obama to have was a continuous national spotlight where people got to know him through the prism of a Democratic debate…instead of being defined by the Republicans.

Now, I’m not sure if that’s the best thing for Newt, but for Romney? Perhaps.

One other question…what happens when Santorum drops out? My guess is that a lot of that support will go to Newt because those are the GOPers who can’t abide by Romney’s former support for abortion or his Mormon background. And while I hate to be simplistic about such things, I have to think that if you’re casting your ballot for Santorum, you’re probably a single issue voter given how polarizing he is.

More as it develops…

Pubilc Policy Polling, which has done some great work over the years, has Gingrich up in their first day of polling:

Newt Gingrich led Mitt Romney 34-28 in PPP’s South Carolina polling last night, the first of what will be three nights of tracking. Ron Paul at 15%, Rick Santorum at 14%, Rick Perry at 5%, and Buddy Roemer at 3% round out the field.

This is not a case of Romney imploding. His support has been pretty steady in the 28-30% range in our South Carolina polling so far. But Gingrich has risen from 23% to 34% over the last two weeks, benefiting from declining support for Santorum and also from undecided voters moving into his camp.

It’s clear that the debate Monday night did a lot to help Gingrich’s prospects in the state. 56% of voters say they watched it, and with those folks Gingrich’s lead over Romney is 43-27. Romney still has a 29-22 advantage on Gingrich with those who didn’t tune in.

But does tonight’s debate performance hurt or help him with SC voters?

My guess? It helps.

More as it develops…

Just in case you missed it…

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Part Four

Part Five

Part Six

Part Seven

Part Eight

Pundits tend to obsess over people who will never accept the #2 spot on the ticket. For instance, during the 2008 election, every other article was about how Barack Obama was “definitely going to select Hillary Rodham Clinton as his VP,” but deep down, you had to know that wasn’t going to happen — not after all they’d been through. This election cycle, people are still pining for Clinton. For the GOP ticket, the obvious favorite is Marco Rubio… but again, I really don’t see that happening. Every once in a while I come across a name that hasn’t been widely circulated in the Veepstakes yet, but ends up being so perfect I have to wonder why no one is squawking about it. One of these people is Paul Ryan.

Roots

If you’re looking for someone who appeals to middle class voters, Paul Ryan could talk nostalgically about how his hardworking great-grandfather started the Ryan Incorporated Central construction business. Or perhaps he’ll stump about his years of driving the Wienermobile for Oscar Meyer to put himself through college. Some of his other odd jobs during college included opening mail for Wisconsin Senator Bob Kasten as a lowly intern, waiting tables at the Tortilla Coast restaurant, and fitness training at the Washington Sport and Health Club, to name a few. He’s a pretty “real” guy, wouldn’t you say?

Career

Once he had his BA in Economics, his mother urged him to give up his dreams of being a ski bum and accept a position as a staff economist for Bob Kasten, which he did. Once Kasten was pushed out by Russ Feingold, Ryan went on to write speeches and contribute to conservative think-tank Empower America. He wrote speeches for Jack Kemp during the 1996 election cycle and worked as legislative director for US Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. He was elected to the US House of Representatives (WI) in 1999, where he still works today. He was one of three founding members of the Republican “Young Guns Program” (along with Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy) in 2008, which was wildly successful in recruiting and generating enthusiasm for up-and-coming Republican leaders. In 2010, The Daily Telegraph ranked him the “9th Most Influential US Conservative,” and he won 68 percent of the vote that year in his re-election bid. He outlined his vision for America in a detailed paper entitled, “Roadmap For America’s Future,” which discussed topics like healthcare, job creation and debt reduction — all hot topics for this election. On Capitol Hill, he is very much known as a man who thinks bold and comes up with realistic solutions to America’s greatest problems. Just last year, he was named Chairman of the House Committee on the Budget.

Continue reading to learn about Paul Ryan’s popularity & what Mitt Romney has to say about him…

Popularity

This year, editors of Human Events magazine lauded Paul Ryan as “Conservative of the Year”. Honestly, he would probably be the most exciting fresh young face Romney could use to enhance his conservative appeal.

Romney himself had this to say of Ryan (who has been serving in the Wisconsin House of Reps since 1999):

“Paul Ryan has three qualities that make him central to the definition of conservatism in America today. He’s not afraid to speak the truth. He has the gift of marrying conservative principles to practical solutions. He has the leadership abilities that turn thought into action. His success in gaining bipartisan support for his latest Medicare reform proposals exemplifies exactly what I am talking about.  With the country facing a slow-motion entitlement crisis that will eventually bankrupt us, we are extraordinarily fortunate that someone with his combination of courage, probity, and wisdom has come to the fore.”

Does this not sound like everything that Mitt Romney would need to get things done in Washington?

He’s also received positive accolades from well-known superstars like Marco Rubio, Newt Gingrich and John Huntsman to key figures like Mark Levin (Conservative Radio Host), Reince Priebus (Chairman of the Republican National Committee) and Al Cardenas (Chairman of the American Conservative Union). If you were to use Facebook as any gauge of popularity, then you might note that Romney has over 1 million fans, but Paul Ryan has over 87,000.

Interest

Paul Ryan recently told local news station FOX6 that he didn’t want to run for president this cycle because he has three young children, but he would consider a spot on the ticket as vice president because the campaign is much shorter and less demanding. He reportedly told the news station:

“I’m not going to focus on that only because it’s someone else’s decision, so what’s the point of answering that question? I’m focused on doing my job right and that’s so far away and it’s out of my control, so I just don’t spend my time worrying about it. I spend my time worrying about my job, which is balancing the budget, getting this debt under control and creating the conditions that will get jobs created in this country.”

I think it sounds like he is up to the task… don’t you?

Also at VicePresidents.com This Week…

A History Lesson: How We Choose VPs

VP Speculation Takes Center-stage!

1944 Political Cartoon

When Do We Pick The GOP VP Nominee?

Over at Slate they point out some interesting parallels between 2008 and 2012.

Any of this sound familiar?

The social conservative (wins/almost wins, depending on what math you believe) Iowa. Flush with victory, eager to prove himself in all battlegrounds, he spends most of the next week in New Hampshire. But the surge can only take him from the margin of error to (13/9) percent of the vote. The old dream candidate, now a national laughingstock only known for a debate moment (“I’m not doing any hand shows”/”Oops”) has already moved on to South Carolina. He flies to New Hampshire just to participate in a debate, deeply annoying the supporters of (Ron Paul/Buddy Roemer), whose candidate had worked harder there. He polls a pathetic 1 percent, but stays in the race. The field is crowded enough that a horrified base sees how the front-runner, who’s won the endorsement of (Lindsey Graham/Nikki Haley), can win South Carolina with a plurality of the vote.

And how about between 2004 and 2012? Although this time it’s not a comparison between the GOPers, but between Mitt Romney and John Kerry.

• Massachusetts politician
• Super wealthy
• Base isn’t excited about him
• Is seen as a flip-flopper
• Voted for or implemented key policy of opponent. For Kerry it was the Iraq war. For Romney it’s mandated health care.
• Running as the “Anybody But” candidate

I’m sure if I thought some more I could come up with even more parallels, but it seems like I’m not the only one thinking this.

From NY Times:

Can Mr. Obama overcome the bad economy, and perhaps even turn it to his advantage in certain ways, in the same way President George W. Bush overcame and in a sense turned to his advantage the bloody, expensive and increasingly unpopular war in Iraq eight years ago?

And can Mr. Obama do to his opponent – for now let’s say Mitt Romney – what Mr. Bush did to Senator John Kerry in 2004?

The parallels are sufficient enough that Mr. Obama and his team have studied, and to a striking degree are replicating, the Bush re-election playbook.

Already they are building a narrative in which Mr. Obama made politically brave decisions to do what was right for the economy, even if those decisions were unpopular. It’s a theme that echoes Mr. Bush’s argument in 2004 that he did what it took to keep the country safe, and that even if you disagreed with him, you knew where he stood.

As for defining the opponent, Mr. Obama’s supporters are already hard at work hammering home the idea that Mr. Romney is an inveterate flip-flopper, a man without core or convictions who says and does whatever is necessary to advance his political interests. It’s an approach that bears a passing similarity to the Bush re-election campaign’s efforts to paint Mr. Kerry as an inveterate flip-flopper, a man without core or convictions who. … You get the idea.

Yep.

And he raised quite a bit in Q4 2011.

From The Hill…

Mitt Romney followed up an easy victory in the New Hampshire primary by announcing he raised $24 million in the last three months of 2012, further establishing himself as the candidate to defeat in the GOP presidential race.

The total is the strongest quarter so far for Romney’s campaign and leaves him with $19 million in cash on hand. It is likely to dwarf what his Republican rivals report for their fundraising totals, and adds to a sense of inevitability that he will be the Republican challenging President Obama this fall.

How much did he raise all of last year?

Romney raised a total of $56 million in 2011, and has benefited from the support of outside groups, which have run ads in early-contest states savaging his rivals. This has allowed Romney to preserve some of his own resources.

Impressive…sort of.

Because candidate Obama raised $129M in 2007.

And in Q2 in 2011, President Obama and the DNC posted impressive numbers…

Barack Obama’s presidential campaign reported that it and the Democratic National Committee together raised $86 million for the second quarter, blowing past what they said had been their goal of $60 million for the period.

Obama himself raised $47 million—more than he raised in the second quarter of 2007, and more than the entire GOP presidential field that has reported its cash haul so far.

I don’t think there’s any way he’ll be able to keep pace with Obama in 2012 in terms of fundraising, but maybe he doesn’t have to if enough money flows into those SuperPACs to attack Obama.

But then again…what are those SuperPACs really going to be able to do? Usually that’s an avenue for dirty laundry. But they can’t really attack Obama with the Reverend Wright thing anymore. And Fast and Furious and Solyndra really haven’t gone anywhere.

More as it develops…

NBC is already calling it with 17% reporting, and it would definitely be difficult for anybody to catch up in such a divided field. Too many candidates taking away votes from each other.

The numbers…

1. Mitt Romney – 35%
2. Ron Paul – 25%
3. Jon Huntsman – 17%
4. Newt Gingrich – 11%
5. Rick Santorum – 10%
6. Rick Perry – 1%

Here’s what the exit polling suggests about those who supported Mitt:

Romney won with a coalition of those who thought electability and the economy were most important, as well as wealthy voters. Just over a third of voters in today’s primary said a candidate’s ability to beat President Obama was the top issue in deciding their vote, according to exit poll data available at 8 p.m. ET. Of those voters, 59 percent went for Romney.

Voters who said they were concerned about the economy also sided with Romney, who also won self-described conservatives and even Tea Party voters – two blocs that had seemed disinclined to support Romney in last week’s Iowa caucus, in which Romney scraped by with an 8-vote win. Sixty-one percent of voters said the economy was their top issue. Of them, 42 percent went for Romney.

So…the lingering question…will it be enough?

Back in 2008, Mitt got 32% of the vote and McCain got 37%. So while this 35% is 10 points better (if it holds up) than Ron Paul’s take, it’s not as impressive as him blowing away the field.

Also, what’s more impressive? Romney getting 35% when he got 35% last time or Ron Paul getting 25% when he got 7% in 2008? That’s a massive jump and the same can be said for Paul’s run in Iowa, which went from 10% in 2008 to 21% in 2012. Romney didn’t even reach 26% in 2012 in Iowa, which was his 2008 total.

Regardless, New Hampshire is over and South Carolina is next. Look for a lot of these candidates to mount their last stand. Personally, I think Huntsman may bow out after this, and Rick Perry should…but he probably won’t. So you’ll have a lot of negative ads directed at Romney and his Bain years, with Gingrich being the biggest spender.

Interesting times ahead…

More as it develops…

From Public Policy Polling…

Mitt Romney continues to be headed for a comfortable win in New Hampshire. PPP’s final poll there finds him with 35% to 18% for Ron Paul, 16% for Jon Huntsman, 12% for Newt Gingrich, 11% for Rick Santorum, 3% for Buddy Roemer, and 1% for Rick Perry.

Romney’s support has been remarkably consistent over the course of PPP’s three Granite State tracking polls, never straying from 35-36%. He’s the most popular of the candidates in the state, with a 60/34 favorability rating. And he also has the most committed supporters…85% of them say they’re definitely going to vote for him and when you look at the race just among those whose minds are completely made up his lead over Paul expands to 40-19.

Still, could Mitt’s “fire” comment cost him some votes?

I think so, and that could make it a lot closer than Mitt may want.

Still, he’ll win. That’s my predict.

More as it develops…

Mitt walked away with it. No question. Nobody was able to hurt him and since he’s up in New Hampshire and South Carolina…this nomination process could be over very quickly.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

‘

It’s Rick’s big night! The Iowa faith-based contingent really turned out this caucus for the underdog, and that should make waves in the evangelical community.

Will they support a Mormon? I think that’s a tough call right now. They definitely could, but it depends on what this group decides.

Personally, I think Santorum will be up all night waiting for the returns.

Public Policy Polling is out with their final numbers and it’s a photo finish…

It looks like pretty much everybody has lost support in this except Santorum and Gingrich. And Santorum hasn’t had millions of dollars in negative ads lobbed his way.

Maybe that’s why his favorability numbers are so high…

Santorum’s net favorability of 60/30 makes him easily the most popular candidate in the field. No one else’s favorability exceeds 52%. He may also have more room to grow in the final 48 hours of the campaign than the other front runners: 14% of voters say he’s their second choice to 11% for Romney and only 8% for Paul. Santorum’s taken the lead with two key groups of Republican voters: with Tea Partiers he’s at 23% to 18% for Gingrich, 16% for Paul, 15% for Bachmann, and only 12% for Romney. And with Evangelicals he’s at 24% to 16% for Gingrich, and 15% for Paul and Romney.

A few weeks ago Gingrich was the talk of the town, but looks like he peaked too early. The only person left? Well, besides Huntsman…who doesn’t have a chance in hell. Yes, Santorum. Who is far more unelectable than Huntsman, but don’t tell the evangelicals that.

But let’s talk reality. Paul is still technically in the lead with these numbers. Does he have a shot at it? Yes, but only if non-traditional caucus-goers turn out.

For all that Paul still has a very decent chance at winning on Tuesday- it just depends on whether his unusual coalition of young voters and non-Republicans really comes out to caucus. Among actual Republican voters Paul is tied for 3rd place with Gingrich at 17%, behind Romney’s 21% and Santorum’s 19%. But with independents and Democrats who plan to vote, which we peg at 24% of the electorate, Paul leads with 30% to just 14% each for Santorum and Romney.

Newsflash for all you Paulites…remember 2008? When you thought there’d be this big surge and there wasn’t? That reminded me of 2004 when I went up to help organize for Howard Dean. Long story short…non-traditional caucus-goers don’t turn out. Especially if it’s a highly confusing system like the Iowa caucus system.

Here’s how Republicans do their caucuses in Iowa…

In the Republican caucuses, each voter officially casts his or her vote by secret ballot. Voters are presented blank sheets of paper with no candidate names on them. After listening to some campaigning for each candidate by caucus participants, they write their choices down and the Republican Party of Iowa tabulates the results at each precinct and transmits them to the media.

In 2008, some precincts used a show of hands or preprinted ballots. The non-binding results are tabulated and reported to the state party, which releases the results to the media. Delegates from the precinct caucuses go on to the county conventions, which choose delegates to the district conventions, which in turn selects delegates to the Iowa State Convention.

Thus, it is the Republican Iowa State Convention, not the precinct caucuses, which selects the ultimate delegates from Iowa to the Republican National Convention. All delegates are officially unbound from the results of the precinct caucus, although media organizations either estimate delegate numbers by estimating county convention results or simply divide them proportionally.

Got that? No? Well, don’t worry. Hardly anybody else does either.

Last, here’s a video from the Des Moines Register running down what’s going on up there…

More tomorrow!!!