Momentum

                To gain the party’s nomination, a candidate must to all intents and purposes appear like a winner. Said candidate must also generate a bandwagon effect behind their campaign. By the time a candidate has built up a momentum, that race may well be over. In 2012, Mitt Romney built up a sufficient level of momentum behind his campaign despite a challenge from the right (namely Ron Paul from the libertarian side of the political spectrum and Rick Santorum from the social conservative wing of the GOP). In 2008, the contest for the Democrat nomination was a closely fought affair between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. To the surprise of many pundits, it was Obama who generated the ‘big mo.’ His victory in the Iowa caucus was a key moment in deciding the race in his favor. Obama proved beyond doubt that a black candidate could reach out towards white predominately rural voters.

                In the context of the ‘big mo,’ it is often advantageous for a candidate to win the New Hampshire primary and the Iowa caucus. As the opening contests, they do set the tone for the early stages of the campaign. This may in turn lead towards a greater number of activists, increased media/public interest and a significant boost to their campaign funds. Nonetheless, gaining victory in either of these states does not necessarily guarantee that party’s nomination. In 2008, Mike Huckabee won in Iowa and yet failed to gain the GOP nomination. Similarly, Rick Santorum bagged Iowa in 2012 and yet it was Mitt Romney who secured the nomination. In both cases, the winner in Iowa was more in tune with the party but lost out to a more moderate candidate. This may well be the case in 2016 ...

Inevitably, parties have a rational interest in choosing a candidate most likely to gain victory in the contest for the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. This tends to result in a candidate emerging from nearer the center of the political spectrum rather than a right-wing Republican or a left-wing Democrat. When parties chose a candidate that opponents could label as extreme, the chances of victory are greatly reduced. Perhaps the two most obvious historical examples relate to Barry Goldwater in 1964 (a hawkish conservative who was defeated by a landslide for LBJ) and George McGovern in 1972 (a left-wing Democrat who lost to Nixon in 49 of the 50 states).

                The qualities needed to win that party’s nomination, and the subsequent presidential election; differ to some extent. In order to win the former, it is necessary to present oneself as ideologically in tune with the party itself. To reference Mitt Romney himself, a Republican must be “severely conservative” in order to gain the post. Romney eventually persuaded enough of the party faithful that he shared their instincts, although one of his Republican opponents dubbed him the “Massachusetts moderate.” 

                 It is often the case that a candidate will gain early momentum by offering a message that connects with their party (notably Howard Dean in 2004), only for that candidate to slip away from the race due to their perceived extremism. Voters in America tend to reject candidates they consider to be overtly ‘ideological.’ A skillful politician heading for the White House must invariably trim their sails in order to secure victory come November. The trick is to avoid being trapped by any comments/commitments made during the primary season that might deter moderates during the presidential campaign. As with most countries, voters traditionally congregate around the center of the political spectrum.