This piece is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME's insightful politics newsletter. Don't miss out on stories like this – subscribe here to have them delivered to your inbox. As the quadrennial ritual unfolds and presidential hopefuls intensify their efforts in Iowa, a familiar concern grips the strategists huddled at the Des Moines Marriott's bar: Has their candidate peaked too soon, or is there enough runway for a successful takeoff? The upcoming Jan. 15 caucuses seem poised to disappoint many, continuing the trend where candidates either soar to unexpected heights like Mike Huckabee in 2008 or Rick Santorum four years later, or, conversely, flame out swiftly like Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry. While surges can be imagined, orchestrating a genuine late-breaking momentum, the coveted "Big Mo'," proves elusive. Even if achieved, historical data since 1976 reveals that only four winners of competitive Iowa GOP caucuses went on to secure the Republican nomination.
In the current electoral landscape, Republican campaigns have collectively poured nearly $105 million into ads in Iowa, constituting a third of the total political ad spending for this cycle among presidential hopefuls nationwide. Yet, amid this barrage of advertising, the spotlight has narrowed onto a singular candidate: Nikki Haley. From initially polling in low single-digits in Iowa, she has emerged as a legitimate second-place contender. Haley's strategic aim is clear – to position herself as the most credible alternative to a potential third nomination for Donald Trump, with an eye on a robust performance in New Hampshire, where she has been gaining momentum since late summer. The subsequent South Carolina primary, where her status as a former Governor holds significant sway, further adds to her strategic advantage.
As the final two weeks unfold in what has become the most expensive contest in Iowa caucus history, Nikki Haley stands as the unequivocal queen of the local airwaves, where an overwhelming barrage of almost 350,000 cumulative political ads inundates the public consciousness. A staggering $4.6 million in advertising has been slated by Haley and her supporters ahead of the caucuses, a formidable figure that dwarfs the Trump campaign's nearly $1 million in booked ads, compounded by the silence of his super PACs. The declining bubble of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, with approximately $1.7 million in ads scheduled through both his campaign and competing super PACs, adds to the intricate dynamics.
In contrast, tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy has halted his remaining Iowa ad buys after $1.8 million in spending failed to yield desired results, labeling the expenditure as "idiotic." Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, not finding Iowa conducive to his East Coast brashness, is redirecting his efforts to New Hampshire, banking on a more receptive audience than eight years ago when he finished sixth.
Reflecting on the broader context, the escalating financial investment in Iowa is evident, especially when compared to the last caucus with a single competitive race four years ago. The Democrats alone spent a staggering $70 million on ads in 2016, doubling the amount from the competitive 2016 caucuses. There's a looming possibility that total ad spending for the White House race alone could surpass $2.7 billion nationally by Election Day, with a projected national sum reaching an astronomical $10.2 billion across all races. While Iowa has traditionally been perceived as a realm where personal interactions and grassroots efforts hold sway, the escalating financial stakes hint at a changing landscape, challenging the notion that a conservative message alone can break through without substantial financial backing.
Certainly, Nikki Haley's late-stage dominance in ad spending may not be a game-changer at its core. Despite outshining most contenders in states where she prevails, she remains substantially behind Trump, maintaining a 30-point deficit in Iowa and South Carolina polling, and over 20 points in New Hampshire. In Nevada, where she struggles to gain traction, her focus appears limited, with attention pivoting toward the critical battlegrounds between New Hampshire and her home state's decisive showdown in South Carolina.
Iowa's idiosyncratic caucus system, demanding public declarations of support at specific times and places, complicates polling accuracy. Nonetheless, historical data from the Des Moines Register suggests that no contender with a double-digit lead at this stage has ever lost the caucuses. Meanwhile, Trump faces criticism primarily from former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who stands alone in his willingness to directly confront the former president. Notably, only 3% of negative ads in Iowa throughout the election cycle have targeted Trump, revealing a general reluctance to challenge him among fellow candidates.
The strategic choices of Haley and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis become apparent in their muted criticism of Trump. Christie's anti-Trump approach, which failed to qualify him for the upcoming debate in Des Moines, serves as a cautionary tale—going after the party heavyweight requires precision. Haley and DeSantis, both with ties to the Trump administration, seem cautious about adopting a confrontational stance, considering the potential pitfalls of Christie's unsuccessful strategy. The upcoming debate in Des Moines will see DeSantis and Haley engage one-on-one, as Trump and another candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy, opt for separate alternative programs, further underscoring the nuanced dynamics at play.
As the clock ticks down for both Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis in the crucial Iowa caucuses, their heavy investment in the state, known for rewarding those who actively participate, appears to be a calculated gamble. The challenge ahead is formidable, given the limited two-week window to bridge the substantial gaps, as indicated by current polling data. However, the potential impact of their ongoing media skirmish on the airwaves could prove decisive if the polls once again prove to be unreliable.
Yet, the airwaves are saturated with ads from supporters of Haley and DeSantis, both East Coast Governors endeavoring to convince heartland caucusgoers that they better align with their values than the thrice-married New York billionaire, though such comparisons are seldom articulated so directly. Insults like "Tricky Nikki" and "too lame to lead, too weak to win" are exchanged in this war of words between the two candidates, contrasting sharply with their differences with Biden. While neither candidate is likely to overtake Trump through this combative approach, securing a ticket out of Des Moines and into Manchester, New Hampshire, emerges as a significant prize justifying the substantial investments made in the state.
However, there's a palpable sense of déjà vu reminiscent of the 2016 elections, where potential alternatives to Trump spent considerable time deliberating on who should be the last contender standing. Winners, at a certain point, understand the need to rise above the fray and sustain momentum. This strategic insight is crucial, and the seasoned political minds at the Des Moines Marriott bar are well aware of the importance of punching through rather than engaging in lateral swipes. The risk, if not heeded, is that such tactics could inadvertently pave the way for Trump to secure the nomination and once again hold the nuclear launch codes. In the intricate game of political strategy, the quest for decisive momentum remains the ultimate pursuit.
In conclusion, the high-stakes battle between Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis in the Iowa caucuses unfolds as a calculated gamble, with both candidates racing against time to bridge significant gaps in the polls. The airwaves are inundated with ads from their respective supporters, creating a media battleground where the potential impact remains uncertain. While insults fly between the two East Coast Governors, drawing sharp contrasts with Trump, the risk of engaging in a gutter chase is apparent.
The prospect of a ticket out of Des Moines and into New Hampshire looms as a considerable prize, justifying the substantial investments made in the state. However, the unfolding dynamics bear echoes of the 2016 elections, where potential alternatives to Trump found themselves caught in prolonged deliberations on who should be the last contender standing. The seasoned political strategists at the Des Moines Marriott bar understand the pivotal importance of sustaining momentum and punching through rather than engaging in lateral swipes.
As the clock ticks, winners in the political arena know how to navigate the complexities, rise above the fray, and secure lasting momentum. The risk, if not managed strategically, is that such tactics could inadvertently play into Trump's hands, allowing him to secure the nomination once more. In the intricate game of political strategy, decisive momentum remains the ultimate pursuit, and the choices made in the coming weeks may shape the trajectory of the Republican race.