A number of those who have commented on various posts have mentioned the OBOPE Zogby Poll released on Thursday, which showed Herman Cain surging to 38%. I found it interesting for other reasons as well.

As you will see if you click on the link, the sampling took place on 30 June, 11 and 25 July, 29 August, 12 and 26 September, and 5 October. Mitt Romney started out with the support of 14% of the prospective Republican primary voters polled, rose to 17%, dropped to 12% when Rick Perry entered the race, and rose again to 18% when Perry proved to be tongue-tied. Ron Paul has been steady throughout with support varying from 11 to 13%. Newt Gingrich has ranged from 2 to 6%. Rick Santorum started out with 7%, dropped to 3%, rose to 5%, has fallen steadily in recent weeks, and now commands the support of 1% of the prospective primary voters. Jon Huntsman’s support is steady. He has support from about 4% of those polled. And Gary Johnson has run the gamut from 1% to 1%.

There are three dramatic stories evident in the data.

Back in June Michele Bachmann had the support of 34% of those polled. Since then, she has lost ground steadily, and she now commands the support of 3% of the prospective primary voters. Her support dropped like a stone when Rick Perry entered the race, but it did not recover when she savaged him in the debates. She, in fact, appears to have done herself as much damage as she did the frontrunner at that time, and the same may be true for Santorum.

When Rick Perry entered the race, his support surged to 41% almost immediately. At the same time, support Romney fell 5%; for Cain, 10%; for Bachmann, 16%; for Santorum, 2%; and for Not Sure, 7%. Briefly, until he stumbled in the debates, Perry took the wind out of nearly everone’s sails (Ron Paul being the exception).

Then, Perry committed hari kari on national television three times in a row, and Herman Cain jumped from 12% to 28% to 38%.

To make sense of this data, we have to ask what Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Herman Cain have in common. The answer is, I think, twofold.

First, they are not libertarian utopians – like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson – persuaded that, if we were to cut our defense appropriations in half, adopt a posture of isolationism, legalize marijuana, and puff many a magic drag in, all would be well, everyone would be mellow, peace would break out, and we would henceforth be unmolested.

And, second, not one of the three is the proud father of the individual mandate that lies at the heart of Romneycare (and, of course, Obamacare). Moreover, none of them is a Republican Al Gore intent on proceeding down the well-worn path towards Reinventing Government on the presumption that, if the fat is eliminated and government is made more efficient, all will be well.

All three are, in fact, constitutional conservatives – dedicated to restoring limited government in this country.

Here is the upshot. There is within the Republican Party a very large floating constituency of constitutional conservatives – some 34 to 41% of the prospective primary voters – and they are desperately looking for a plausible conservative candidate. And to this number, one can, I suspect, add the remaining support of Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum: another 16% of the prospective primary voters.

I would like to think that Herman Cain can prosper where Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum have foundered. But, of course, if wishes were horses, beggars like me would ride. I suspect that Bachmann and Santorum – the Republican ankle-biters – will take him down in the next debate. Watch them. I guarantee that they will try. Neither of them can stomach the possibility that someone else might emerge as the champion of the constitutional conservative cause.

I am left with a question. Is it not odd that, in a time when the country is increasingly open to the suggestion that the administrative entitlements state is on its last legs and that the moment has come for rolling back its encroachment on the prerogatives of the states and the rights of individuals, there is not one seasoned Republican officeholder capable of articulating the argument for limited government who is willing to step forward, shoulder the burden, seize the opportunity, and take the bull by the horns. What has this country become? Greatness beckons, and no one genuinely qualified rises to the occasion!

Paul Ryan! Mitch Daniels! Your phones are still ringing. If you do not answer, I am virtually certain that we will be left with the last man standing – and given the intensity of Republican dissatisfaction with that option, I would not be surprised were he to lose in November, 2012.

Is there anyone apart, from his co-religionists, thrilled at the prospect that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee? When members of Ricochet say that they would vote for a syphilitic camel over Barack Obama, do they not have Romney in mind? Come November, 2012, how many of our fellow Americans will be willing to swallow a syphilitic camel in a good cause?

I, for one, will be willing – but I shudder to contemplate the consequences.