More Questions Than Answers in GOP Straw Poll

Questions outnumbered answers for most of the Republican presidential contenders Sunday, one day after a hotly contested straw poll of GOP activists tested the field here in Iowa.

With Texas Gov. George W. Bush defending his front-runner status by finishing first, Steve Forbes placing a respectable second and Elizabeth Hanford Dole running a surprisingly competitive third, campaign strategists agreed that the results in the nonbinding straw poll did not reshape the basic dynamics in the GOP contest.

But the extravagant contest, which attracted nearly 24,000 voters to nearby Ames even though no delegates were at stake, did spotlight the strengths and weaknesses in each campaign--and offer clues to how the race may evolve. In one breath, the straw poll gave the other campaigns new hope that Bush may not be as unstoppable as he has appeared--but it also demonstrated the difficulties any of them will face in toppling him.

“There are strong competing messages,” one of the GOP candidates said in an interview Sunday. “The fact is that 25,000 people wouldn’t show up if they didn’t want there to be a race. The problem is: Who’s going to provide the contest against Bush?”

Two names that appeared increasingly unlikely to fill that role were former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander and former Vice President Dan Quayle, who finished far behind the leaders in sixth and eighth places respectively. Quayle insisted in Sunday television talk show interviews that he would remain in the race--though other campaigns predicted that his poor finish would squeeze his already anemic fund-raising to near the choking point.

By contrast, Alexander, who had bet his financially strapped campaign on a strong showing in Ames, planned a news conference for today in Nashville, when he was expected to announce his withdrawal from the race.

A thoughtful and exceptionally dogged candidate, Alexander was unable to establish a clear niche in the field (especially after Bush emerged to dominate the center-right terrain he had targeted) or escape the perception that he was used goods after his loss in the 1996 primaries. Alexander’s likely departure underscores the pressure that Bush’s advantage in the polls, endorsements and fund-raising has placed on the other candidates.

Bush did nothing to alleviate that pressure with his victory Saturday night. After campaigning in the state for only the first time in June, Bush won more votes in the straw poll than any Republican ever; Bush’s 2,497-vote margin of victory over Forbes was nearly as large as the total number of votes won by co-leaders Bob Dole and Phil Gramm in 1995. “We came to the state on June 12, 1999. Some of these candidates have been here since June 12, 1909,” crowed Karl Rove, Bush’s chief strategist, on Sunday.

Yet, other campaigns took heart from the fact that Bush’s 10.5-percentage-point margin of victory over Forbes was not nearly as commanding as his lead in most polls. And the tepid audience response to Bush’s address Saturday raised questions about whether his message of “compassionate conservatism” is tilted too heavily toward centrist general election voters, rather than the party activists who dominate the primaries.

“He gave a speech as if he were already president,” said Tony Fabrizio, the chief strategist for Elizabeth Hanford Dole. “I thought it was cocky--when it’s the first major candidate speech and you’re talking as if you’re already taking the oath. There wasn’t a lot of red meat in it.”

Questions loomed for Forbes too. The millionaire publisher met his goal of finishing second overall and ahead of the other conservatives. But Forbes didn’t separate himself from the rest of the field chasing Bush as much as Forbes’ supporters hoped--or that his massive expenditures (including a nearly $1-million television buy) might have predicted. Dole finished closer to Forbes than Forbes did to Bush.

Those results led operatives in the other campaigns to question whether Forbes faced a ceiling of voters willing to consider him a viable nominee--no matter how many times they saw his ads on television. Bush advisors archly pointed out that Forbes will never enjoy such unchallenged air superiority again: Bush bought no television or radio for the Ames contest but will undoubtedly match Forbes dollar for dollar (at least) in advertising during the primaries next winter.

Forbes’ showing raised a second question: whether his strategy of trying to unify the right against Bush offered enough long-term prospects for growth. With a message tilting steadily rightward (especially on social issues), Forbes is increasingly targeting his campaign toward the most conservative voters--even though in most states, the number of Republican primary voters who call themselves moderate or only somewhat conservative is much larger than those who consider themselves “very conservative.”

“I don’t think there are enough votes available to Forbes on the side of the party he’s chosen to run in,” said GOP strategist Rich Galen.

Complicating Forbes’ problem was that activists Gary Bauer and Patrick J. Buchanan both ran respectably enough in Ames--finishing fourth and fifth respectively--to sustain their campaigns. That promises to further splinter the conservative vote Forbes hopes to unite.

Buchanan’s future in the race--indeed in the party--was less clear than Bauer’s. In appearances Sunday on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press” and CBS-TV’s “Face the Nation,” Buchanan refused to close the door on bolting the GOP and joining the Reform Party.

“I’m going right now down this road” toward pursuing the GOP nomination, Buchanan said on “Face the Nation.” Then he pointedly added: “I don’t know exactly where I’m going to be in August of 2000.”

For the conservative contenders, the best news Saturday may have been that Dole ran well enough to invigorate her campaign. That means she may be able to attract more centrist voters who might otherwise prefer Bush.

At a rally in her campaign headquarters here Sunday, Dole unabashedly portrayed her third-place showing as “a great victory.”

In some ways it was. Dole demonstrated a formidable ability to generate enthusiasm among women; her campaign estimated that women provided two-thirds of her votes.

But it is difficult to build a campaign on third-place finishes--even surprising ones. In 1996, third-place showings in both the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary gave Alexander a bit of a boost--but not enough to truly make him a viable contender. The question for Dole is whether this result will be enough to significantly boost her modest fund-raising, or to convince GOP voters in large numbers to give her a second look.

“There is no win, place and show in these things,” said Tom Rath, a top Alexander advisor. “You can only afford to come in third a couple times.”

Questions surfaced even for the one major candidate who skipped the contest: Arizona Sen. John McCain. On “Face the Nation,” McCain all but announced that he would skip the Iowa caucus itself next January to focus on New Hampshire and South Carolina--making public what his advisors have privately acknowledged for months. “I may not want to be a part of that” caucus, McCain said.

Yet the vast turnout for the straw poll--and the huge press attention it attracted--suggests the spotlight on the Iowa caucus could be even more intense than usual next year. That could leave McCain eclipsed by the top finishers here in the days before the New Hampshire primary.

The viability of McCain’s strategy remained just as uncertain after Ames as before. Which made it typical for an event that--despite torrents of spin and commentary--raised more questions than it resolved. After all was said and done in Ames, much more was said than done.