http://theiowarepublican.com/2015/bypass-iowa-will-bush-play-in-iowa-now-that-mitt-is-gone/Mitt Romney’s decision to not seek the Republican nomination for president in 2016 ended three weeks of intense media coverage about his political future. To say that Romney’s departure will impact the 2016 race is an understatement.
Had Romney run, New Hampshire would have likely been uncompetitive, forcing even the more moderate candidates to give it a go in Iowa where their message would be questioned by the state’s conservative-leaning activists. Romney’s decision not to run in 2016 provides candidates like former Florida Governor Jeb Bush with a full set of options on how and where to engage his campaign.
Had Romney run in 2016, the idea of a Bush candidacy would have been on shaky ground. The most hospitable early state for Bush is New Hampshire, but recent polls showed that voters there were firmly behind a third Romney candidacy. Romney’s strength in New Hampshire would have forced Bush to play in Iowa, and while members of the Bush family have typically done well in Iowa, establishing a foothold in Iowa could be difficult for Bush.
In the lead up to the 2014 mid-term elections, Bush campaigned for candidates in South Carolina, Texas, Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, and, of course, his home state of Florida. Despite having two open congressional seats and a hotly contested U.S. Senate race, Bush didn’t find his way to Iowa. Not spending time campaigning in Iowa last fall was a missed opportunity. While Iowa candidates like Joni Ernst didn’t run short of surrogates, he could have used the trip to gauge Iowa’s feeling toward him.
When Bush hired Iowa political strategist David Kochel last week, many national journalists surmised that the move indicated that Bush was taking Iowa seriously. That may very well be the case, but now Bush looks an awful lot like a candidate who will, at best, diminish the Iowa Caucuses by paying little attention to the state. However, it’s also possible that he could just skip Iowa altogether.
Bush’s chief strategist, Mike Murphy, has referred to the caucuses as a “racket” in the past. Yet, it’s not Murphy’s critical words towards the Iowa caucuses that should concern Iowans, it’s his track record with candidates who skip Iowa. Murphy headed John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign. That year McCain only appeared in Iowa to participate in an NBC News debate in Des Moines.
The problem for Bush in Iowa is that, besides Kochel, he doesn’t have any sort of foothold in Iowa. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has spent the past four years building relationships that are now beginning to pay off as he plans a presidential campaign. Other candidates like Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry have all run before, and thus have solid foundations on which they can build campaigns.
It may be hard to believe, but Bush has the lightest footprint in Iowa when it comes to the people who either are working for a candidate or are currently helping a candidate navigate the early goings of an Iowa caucus campaign. Dr. Ben Carson and businesswoman Carly Fiorina each have put together impressive ground games in the state. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has the existing network left over from his father’s two presidential runs. Jeb Bush basically has nothing, and the establishment types seem to be more eager to back Christie since they have met before, rather than Bush, who they have yet to even see step foot in their state.
Everything indicates that Bush may just bypass Iowa to campaign in the much more moderate friendly New Hampshire. It makes a lot of sense on paper, but such a move would be incredibly risky. The strategy worked for Romney because all the candidates who he was competing with in Iowa were not a good fit in New Hampshire. That’s not the case this time.
Christie, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, and Paul each will appeal to New Hampshire voters. Should one of them win Iowa, Bush may need to score a big victory in New Hampshire in order to remain competitive.
People talk about Bush as if he’s a strong national figure who is the clear frontrunner in the race. The polling data simply doesn’t support that claim. I believe that Bush is the frontrunner based on his fundraising ability, universal name ID, and family ties. But that makes him the weakest frontrunner in history.
As pundits and campaign consultants look at the 2016 map and realize the difficult road that Bush has in front of him, they will likely conclude that Bush can and should skip Iowa and focus on New Hampshire. With a robust and diverse field of 2016 candidates, Bush may regret making such a decision.
Skipping Iowa worked for McCain in 2008, but his campaign did try to organize the state that year. One could also say that skipping Iowa for most of the 2012 race worked for Romney, but his strategy that year only worked because Iowans felt like they knew him well from all the time he campaigned across the state four years earlier.
While Bush has a famous last name, he’s not the same type of candidate that McCain and Romney were in the past two presidential campaigns. If Bush is serious about running for president, he will need to come here and show voters that he’s a serious candidate worth their vote. I really think Bush would be well served by campaigning in Iowa, but only time will tell whether his new political team agrees.
------------------
Personally unless Christie doesn't run, Jeb isn't going to get away with the McCain strategy of basically skipping Iowa and banking on NH. I don't know how he's going to win anyway by the time Walker, Christie, Perry, Jindal, and Fiorina take chunks of his likely support from him.
