Rick Perry vs Newt Gingrich

As polling is looking increasingly likely that Rick Santorum will place in the top three in Iowa, one of the most important aspects of the race to watch in the final days is actually farther down the list from the frontrunners.

As I have mentioned in my recent article- discussing the atmosphere that a strong Gingrich campaign brings to a Ron Paul candidacy- only two candidates have the real significant strength (at this moment) to wage a significant campaign against Paul and Romney past Iowa and New Hampshire, especially absent a major drop out and/or defection from one of the other current candidates. Those two candidates are Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry. Perry 'cause he has the money, and Gingrich 'cause he has the national polling numbers.

Neither of these two candidates is likely to drop out after Iowa, as long as their showing isn't stunningly abysmal- like getting much less than 10% of the vote. For perspective, 15-20% would represent a good showing.

Therefore a key aspect to watch this coming Tuesday will be which of the two candidates, Gingrich or Perry, does better, and by how much. In recent conversations with friends I've been fairly bullish on Perry recently, expecting him to offer a surprise showing for the current expectations (but probably not a top three finish). With all the negative attacks against him, Gingrich seems to be continuing his downward slide, so if Perry can beat Gingrich and even perform near Santorum's level, he may be able to re-assert himself as the 'establishment' (meaning that the national party leaders could easily get behind him) conservative alternative to Romney.

Expectations for Perry in NH are all but nothing, so he'll move directly on to South Carolina after Iowa. Of course then he'll have to convince voters that he's a better choice than Santorum, going forward. If Santorum, whose campaign has indicated an interest in competing in New Hampshire, fails to garner a solid finish there, Perry's argument may be made for him. South Carolina should have some natural regional play for Perry.

But what about Gingrich? Previous polling has indicated that his most solid bases of support are the 3rd and 4th contests; South Carolina and Florida respectively. If he finishes close to- or ahead of- Perry in Iowa, Gingrich's campaign could attempt to make a comeback with a respectable placement in New Hampshire. All he needs is a win (or close to it) in South Carolina to put him back on track. Of course, like I just pointed out, this is also true of Perry.

There is something to be said for the lack of establishment enthusiasm for Gingrich; it's probable that a good Perry showing in Iowa would do more for Perry than if his place was switched with Gingrich. Perry is seen as having less baggage than Gingrich, and seen as being a solid campaigner (if not debater- although his recent performances have been adequate). This also has to do with expectations: Gingrich, until recently, was expected to win the Iowa caucuses; Perry has been weak in polling for weeks now. 

If neither of the two manages to put in a surprise showing, Romney may have a nearly unobstructed path to the nomination. It's hard to see Bachmann or Santorum managing to upset Romney in the long run like Perry or Gingrich could, mainly because Gingrich and Perry are likely to be persistent for at least the next few contests, regardless of their placement. However, if Bachmann or Santorum ended up in 5th or 6th place, I don't know how well their campaigns could continue functioning. (This is a rhetorical example, since Santorum at least is likely to place in the top three)

Ultimately, what I am trying to say is this: The outcome of the lower tier placement in the Iowa caucuses will matter just as much as the top tier finalists for the long term outlook of the Republican nomination. And the contrast between the placements of Perry and Gingrich, particularly if it is stark, is likely to be very telling.