Bachmann wins Iowa, could someone beat Romney in NH?

[Jacobtm]

Romney is not competing in Iowa. Bachmann leads in all recent polls. Let`s say she wins, and Romney doesn`t even finish well, coming in 3rd or even 4th.

In NH, would anyone be equipped to pounce on that weakness and beat Romney, or is the best that the anti-Romney crowd can hope for a very weak win by Romney?

[Zarn]

Bachmann winning would be the best scenario for Romney going into NH, outside of himself winning Iowa. NH would so frightened of the idea of Bachmann being the nominee, they will throw their support behind Romney. This won't take Paul out of the race, so Bachmann will have to contend with him as well (over fi-cons who can't stomach Romney).

His worse case scenario is Ron Paul winning Iowa. It takes Bachmann out of the race in the numbers game.

[useful idiot]

Romney will win NH. She's not going anywhere, everyone knows it regardless of the results in IA, and neither Pawlenty or Huntsman is positioned to beat him in NH.

I think Perry winning Iowa would affect Romney far more than Bachmann. If Perry wins IA then I think he's got the nomination, and NH won't matter, because he can use it as a springboard for winning SC.

[Yelnoc]

If Romney is perceived as weak and momentum-less because his front runner status has been crushed, it becomes possible for Huntsman to come from behind to win New Hampshire.  I think he's the only person who could conceivably upset Romney.

As useful idiot said, Perry winning Iowa would be a bad deal indeed for Romney because Perry can skip New Hampshire and win South Carolina.  And then, unless Florida is stubborn enough to put its primary right next to South Carolina, Romney would be completely out of it.  The most interesting scenario, IMO, is Bachmann winning Iowa, Romney (or Huntsman) winning New Hampshire, and then Perry winning South Carolina.

[Gustaf]

I suspect Iowa matters very little for New Hampshire. When was the last time they voted the same way in a (contested) GOP primary?

McCain was blown away in Iowa both in 2000 and 2008 and still had no trouble taking NH, for instance.

[angus]

I suspect Iowa matters very little for New Hampshire. When was the last time they voted the same way in a (contested) GOP primary?

McCain was blown away in Iowa both in 2000 and 2008 and still had no trouble taking NH, for instance.

I agree.  And the same goes for the Democrat primaries.  It's not like the primary voters of Iowa and New Hampshire get on the phone and talk to each other about how they'll vote.  Iowans are very independent about how they'll vote.  They expect to meet candidates up close, multiple times, and ask lots of questions.  The same goes for New Hampshire.  And their preferences aren't always the same.  

The Romney voters in NH will vote for Romney no matter the outcome in IA.  And the anti-Romney crowd in NH is not a monolith.  They will split.  It's a safe bet that Romney wins NH by a handy margin, but that someone else, probably Iowa native Michele Bachmann, will win here.

[Bull Moose Base]

I don't think Romney has decided yet whether or not to compete in Iowa.

[King]

I don't think Romney will lose NH.  Unlike McCain in 2008, the anti-Romney in this race will likely be a terrifying prospect for most NH voters.

1. Romney
2. Anti-Romney
3. Paul

Should be the NH finish no matter what.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Bachmann winning would be the best scenario for Romney going into NH, outside of himself winning Iowa. NH would so frightened of the idea of Bachmann being the nominee, they will throw their support behind Romney. This won't take Paul out of the race, so Bachmann will have to contend with him as well (over fi-cons who can't stomach Romney).

His worse case scenario is Ron Paul winning Iowa. It takes Bachmann out of the race in the numbers game.

Indeed. Bachmann would scare most of the New Hampshire voters, and a victory in Iowa would make the perception "Bachmann vs Romney", in which Romney would win easily. Other candidates would probably be pushed to the side (unless Paul specifically targeted New Hampshire over Iowa, in which case it might be Bachmann vs Romney vs Paul)

Meanwhile, if Paul won Iowa, then Romney would be in trouble since Paul doesn't alienate the fiscal cons the way Bachmann does but still has the ability to attract the "Anti-Romney" crowd.

However, I suspect Bachmann is another placebo anti-Romney, like Trump and Cain before her. If she screws up like the previous two, either someone else will temporarily take the spot (probably Perry, though he is widely hated unlike her and probably would last for a shorter period of time and/or fall apart in more dramatic fashion) or there will be a vacuum that will be sucked up by the second tier and Paul (depending on who is campaigning best, it is possible that Paul could actually become the Anti-Romney, resulting in the combination of ARom voters and Paul's loyal base letting him pretty much breeze to victory).

The way I see it, there are a couple of possible matchups in the primaries when they come around:

Bachmann v Romney (Bachmann wins Iowa)
Anti-Romney v Romney v Paul (Romney loses Iowa, loses a portion of his strength due to decay/exposure for flip flopping, the Anti-Romney and Paul each become the main competitors)
Romney v Paul (Paul wins Iowa, no one else rises to take the Anti-Romney position)
Vacuum with possible advantage to Huntsman and Paul (Romney's campaign collapses because of some screw up on Romney's part, making the "anti-Romney" position disappear and resulting in chaos, though probably with Huntsman picking up Romney's moderate voters and Paul pulling through with his strong base and taking the rest).
Anti-Romney v Romney

[milhouse24]

I'm just not sure how seriously Perry will take the primaries.  He doesn't have a team, he has no volunteers.  Sure he can pull a Fred Thompson in SC and not finish 1st, but actually hurt Bachmann in SC by splitting her conservative voters - and give the SC winning to Romney. 

However, SC has a strong military voter presence, so Romney placing is no guarantee either, unlike McCain.  I'm just surprised no Veterans have declared.

[useful idiot]

I'm just not sure how seriously Perry will take the primaries.  He doesn't have a team, he has no volunteers.  Sure he can pull a Fred Thompson in SC and not finish 1st, but actually hurt Bachmann in SC by splitting her conservative voters - and give the SC winning to Romney. 

However, SC has a strong military voter presence, so Romney placing is no guarantee either, unlike McCain.  I'm just surprised no Veterans have declared.

If Perry were to declare I believe he'd be the only one with any military experience (5 years as an officer in the Air Force).

Regardless, I don't think that would help him in SC, certainly not as much as his "Southern" governor cred.

[nhmagic]

She doesn't scare this New Hampshire voter and a lot of New Hampshire republicans have kept an open mind to her...Now, the liberals up here, they are terrified of her.  I caught a couple of liberals in the place I work at talking about her: how shes smart and then proceeded to say that if we dont have everyone we can working against her we won't beat her.