Whose bases matters more?

According to Gallup, the Republican presidential race is the “most volatile for the GOP since the advent of polling.”

The Gallup report says this is the first time since 1964 where the GOP front-runner spot has seen so many changes. Gallup counts four front-runners and seven lead changes since polling began in May with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, businessman Herman Cain, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Gov. Rick Perry all holding front-runner status at different stages in the contest.

A lot of people are calling the voters fickle because they have changed their minds so often.

But there is one constant, and I think that what they’re holding in Iowa can fairly be called the anti-Romney finals.

“Momentum” explains Santorum’s rapid rise to the top tier of the Iowa polls, because one fourth of the Iowa electorate is looking for little else than someone to beat Mitt Romney.

That’s fascinating in and of itself, and I’m not sure that fickle is the right word for this phenomenon.

If that 25% figure holds true for the entire country, that can translate into a lot of seemingly fickle results in other races. If that 25% could actually, finally settle on and unite around someone who stayed in the race and survived tough scrutiny, it could be big trouble for Romney.  I doubt it will be Santorum, though.

What also may be changing is the old rule that Republican candidates have to run to the right during the primary, then turn around and appeal to the center to win over the independents in the general election. At least, that’s what Holly Robichaud argues after citing the McCain example:

When Republicans select a moderate, the nominee cannot run to the middle to win over voters. Actually, the candidate has to do the opposite to make sure there is no base abandonment.

If she is right, then Mitt Romney will have pander to the Republican right wing in the general election. This guarantees that incumbent Obama will look like a centrist to the moderates and independents. (It won’t hurt that Obama remains under attack by the far left, either.)

I’m also wondering whether the old rule (of running to the right, then veering to the center) might also apply in reverse to the Democrats. It might. But I’m wondering whether Obama is uniquely privileged in not having to pander to the Democrats’ left wing base in the general election. I mean, he has already done much to throw them under the proverbial bus, but suppose he did something which really constituted thumbing his nose at them. This could endear him to independents and not cost him very many votes.  I’m not saying he will do it, but if that man can get away with dissing his base in a way that a Republican can’t, why, that’s unfair!

Really, if the old rule are not supposed to apply anymore, they ought to not apply equally.