odd statistic of the day!! This primary season is going to be very very expensive for the republicans.

You can’t have this both ways, Jesse.

Reality check on South Carolina: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/sc/south_carolina_republican_presidential_primary-1590.html

The polls for Romney look terrible at best in both states with weak second-place showings. Organization my eye.

You’re also redefining what the term “ceiling” means. Romney’s numbers have essentially stayed flat for at least six months. Paul’s have been continually improving. How has Paul hit a ceiling when his numbers actually move?

Romney not only has the support of nearly everyone that people were hoping would run themselves and from previous Republican presidents, but his “dismal showing” in Iowa hasn’t hurt him any on the betting website Intrade.com where he is running at 75% today to win the nomination.

More to the point, however, is that he is the only candidate that has a clear path to victory. He has a campaign structure in every state now and, by all reports, his campaign is the most organized of any of the candidates.

And once again, I’m baffled at how you think that Romney’s supposed “support ceiling” is a negative for him, but a positive for Paul who has never had that high a percentage at all. Would it not be argued that Ron Paul has an even lower support ceiling?

That Romney has been stuck at 25%-ish support is incontrovertible fact. It’s been that way for months now, even as other candidates have entered, surged, and dropped out of the race. If that’s not a support ceiling, then what is?

–”He’s been more-or-less campaigning constantly since at least 2007, spent a crapton of money, and won by just 8 votes over a guy who can’t come up with a campaign message beyond “I hate gay sex and abortions”. To have such a dismal showing in a state where ground game matters should be considered an unmitigated disaster.–

In 2008, Romney campaigned heavily in Iowa, spending tons of his own money, only to finish 3rd in the caucus. It really damaged his campaign then. Considering that, his initial strategy this time was to skip Iowa and concentrate on other early states like New Hampshire and Florida. He only started campaigning in earnest in Iowa a few months ago when it looked like he had a shot of winning there (without, again, any real organization there up to that point).

On the other hand, Santorum has been practically living in Iowa for the last year trying to drum up support. It’s unfair to characterize his message as simply being against homosexuality and abortions, but it should come as no surprise that he finished well in Iowa, and good for him. He has no realistic strategy going forward, however.

Considering that Santorum has been campaigning there nonstop and Romney has only been campaigning there for a relatively short time, the fact that Romney finished as well as he did is more than encouraging for his campaign.

–Consider that Romney has been stuck at a 25%-ish ceiling for most of the race and is counting on a crowded field to split up the Not Romney vote.–

Nonsense. It’s a primary with multiple candidates. No one has had a majority of support. No one has had more than 25% support for more than a month. But this is particularly puzzling coming from a Ron Paul supporter. This particular argument is worse against Paul, who would be THRILLED to get 25% support at all.

As it becomes clear that Santorum has no way forward and as Gingrich and Perry inevitably drop out (though I expect Perry to have one more surge of support), Republican voters will solidify behind Romney, just as has happened with the nominee in every primary election.

I was kind of hoping there’d be more people left in the race to split the vote in Paul’s favor. Darn Herman Cain for not thinking with his brain.