No Contest in New Hampshire?

A new poll on the 2012 presidential race suggests fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) may not have to break a sweat when it comes to winning in the early New Hampshire Republican primary.

The poll, conducted by GOP firm Magellan Strategies, finds Romney with 39 percent of the vote, followed by Sarah Palin at 16, Mike Huckabee at 10, and Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, and Haley Barbour trailing the pack in single-digits. A 23-point advantage far outweighs the margins posted by John McCain, one of the most beloved Republican figures in this state, in his 2000 and 2008 victories in the state.

What's key about Romney's advantage here is that Pawlenty, potentially the only other moderate Republican in this thing, doesn't appear to be getting any traction at all. For Romney, this is terrific, as the center-right vote is not getting splintered and he's able to run-up the necessary margin among moderates to claim a comfortably victory. In all fairness, of course, Pawlenty is still a virtual unknown, but he has made several visits to New Hampshire and his name recognition has increased with time. Thus, he should be posting a much better showing than low single-digits.

While Romney can surely take some solace in this poll, the key word there is just that - "some."

For one, it's no surprise that Romney is ahead rather comfortably. This is hardly a state where the likes of the religious right, Palin and Huckabee, have a realistic shot of breaking 20 percent a piece, let alone winning outright. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me much if certain candidates opted to basically skip New Hampshire altogether and instead focus on Iowa, the first caucus state of the season, and South Carolina, the state which might well decide the whole contest.

Indeed, that's just the thing - New Hampshire will hardly be the kingmaker in the 2012 GOP primaries.

Yes, John McCain's 2008 victory was key in catapulting him to front-runner status, but it wasn't until the South Carolina showdown that McCain became all but unstoppable. Had McCain lost in South Carolina, as he had in 2000 vs. George W. Bush, he might well have found himself in a dead heat against Mike Huckabee.

Same goes for Romney. His victory in New Hampshire would be deemed even less a surprise than McCain's 2008 victory, and, thus, his "bounce" out of the state would be very slight. In order to conquer true juggernaut status, he too will need to prove his strength in South Carolina, a state which was hardly favorable to him in the last presidential cycle. No, I suppose Romney doesn't need to outright win there, but, if he were to, it would probably make him as unstoppable as McCain was.

Imagine this scenario - Huckabee wins Iowa and South Carolina, while Romney claims victory in New Hampshire, Michigan, Nevada, and Florida. At this pre-Super Tuesday point, Romney is probably deemed the slight front-runner, and he probably comes out of Super Tuesday a more daunting leader. If, however, Huckabee was to take Florida, it would probably be a dead heat post-Super Tuesday, leading into another key showdown come Ohio and Texas. Let's say Romney wins Ohio, Huckabee Texas. Then, comes Pennsylvania, where Romney eeks-out victory, and Huckabee exits shorly after that.

And, all the while, a certain President Barack Obama is sitting in the oval office with the greatest grin on his face - he'll face a battered, bloodied, bruised Mitt Romney in the general election.

(Photo courtesy of Zimbio.)