If you narrow your focus, if you peer at the results of the fresh Iowa poll through a semi-closed gaze, perhaps under the gentle embrace of subdued lighting, you might just glimpse a shade of unfavorable news for Donald Trump's pursuit of the 2024 Republican nomination. However, if you cast a wide and objective glance under the bright sunlight, these new figures merely fortify the prevailing truth that has steered the nomination battle since Trump first faced indictment earlier this year: His lead stands substantial, seemingly impervious except to the kind of fanciful deus ex machina occurrences that have miraculously eluded Trump for a good eight years.
It's imperative to acknowledge that the Iowa poll in question transcends the ordinary. Orchestrated by the venerable J. Ann Selzer for the Des Moines Register, NBC News, and Mediacom, this poll is deemed the pinnacle of Iowa's polling standards. Selzer's acumen in gauging Iowa's electorate is renowned. Thus, when her poll proudly places Trump ahead of Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis in the nomination race by a margin exceeding 2-to-1, it carries significant weight.
The poll discloses that 42 percent of likely Republican caucus participants designate the former president as their foremost choice, in contrast to a mere 19 percent for DeSantis. (None of the other contenders manage to breach the double-digit barrier.) Over half of the caucus attendees consider Trump their primary or secondary option, a contrast to roughly 40 percent who extend the same courtesy to DeSantis. Evidently, many of those who position DeSantis as their secondary preference have, quite predictably, positioned Trump as their primary one.
To be fair, the likely caucusgoers harbor positive sentiments toward a number of candidates. Both Trump and DeSantis bask in favorability from at least half of the poll's respondents, as do Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. Admittedly, this stands as one of those instances where optimism prevails if you peer at it askance: Perhaps caucusgoers might pivot toward another candidate they hold in high regard.
Yet, take note of those who face the most unfavorable judgment: former Vice President Mike Pence and former Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie. Ironically, these two are positioned, whether willingly or not, in direct opposition to Trump. Christie is running in open defiance against the former president, while Pence, thanks to Trump's baseless claims that he shoulders the blame for Joe Biden's presidency, has been relegated to pariah status across much of the right-wing spectrum.
The notion that Trump loyalists might seamlessly transfer their allegiance to alternative candidates hinges on the assumption that support for Trump is malleable. On the whole, around 4 out of 10 potential caucusgoers confided to Selzer that they had reached a conclusion regarding their preferred candidates. Yet, among those who anointed Trump as their premier choice, a resounding two-thirds confirmed the resolute nature of their decision.
Keep in mind: 4 out of 10 respondents proclaimed Trump as their numero uno, indicating that a sizable contingent—about a quarter of the potential caucus crowd—stands firmly in Trump's corner. Furthermore, these resolute supporters comprise the 40 percent of potential caucusgoers who assert that their minds are irrevocably made up. Consequently, a mere fraction—around 2 out of 10—of supporters backing other contenders exhibit a comparable degree of steadfastness.
Trump's commanding lead in Iowa already outpaces the realm of his favorability. Scott and DeSantis represent his nearest challengers (though the term "nearest" is generously applied), both boasting a more favorable net perception than their peers. Nonetheless, Trump strides far ahead, despite mirroring DeSantis's net favorability figures and trailing Scott's.
Of significance is the glaring counterpoint to the hypothesis that other aspirants are equally admired and thereby pose a threat to Trump: Presently, they seem to pose an insubstantial challenge to him.
Admittedly, the tides could shift. Conceivably, an event might transpire that propels a substantial chunk of Trump's devotees to seek alternatives. Variations of this conjecture have echoed since 2015, although they have yet to crystallize. Perhaps the various indictments could prompt moments of introspection within Trump's bedrock support.
Plausible, but unlikely. A whopping two-thirds of probable caucusgoers maintain that Trump's transgressions don't amount to serious crimes. Indeed, Selzer's findings indicate that the support gap between Trump and DeSantis actually widened after the announcement of fresh charges in Georgia. Naturally, a margin of error factors into this interpretation.
What remains undeniable is that early Iowa polling has a habit of diverging notably from eventual outcomes. NBC's Steve Kornacki illustrated this point with a graphic on a Monday morning.
Leads held a few months prior to the caucus typically fizzle out by the time the caucuses themselves unfold, particularly in recent cycles. Instances from 2008, 2012, and 2016 underscore this pattern. Candidates who held the lead at this juncture in Des Moines Register polls ultimately settled for second place in the actual caucus.
However, it's pertinent to highlight that two out of those three candidates—Mitt Romney in 2012 and Trump in 2016—managed to secure the nomination despite this setback. Curiously, in the three most recent competitive caucuses, the victor in Iowa failed to clinch the party's ultimate nod. In times past, the Republican victor in Iowa customarily ascended to the role of the party's nominee, thereby endowing the state's position at the forefront of the process with immense electoral significance. Yet, this trend has waned over the past two decades in contested nomination battles.
Trump could conceivably stumble in Iowa, as he did seven years prior. Nevertheless, he could then proceed to seize the nomination, just as he did seven years ago. This recent poll, however, implies that an Iowa victory is probable for him—furthermore, his support appears more resilient against attrition compared to that of his contenders.
