Iowa Presidential Caucus

[Wraith]

Don't have 100% of the results in yet, but MSNBC is calling it for Santorum, with Romney a close second. Source. So far, CNN and Fox are both not calling the winner yet, but are willing to put Ron Paul in third.

It's too bad, if Santorum hadn't done as well as he did, this primary could have quickly been over in Romney's favor. I still think Romney's going to win - Santorum's main strength was his Iowa numbers - but this means it could drag on a bit longer than it otherwise would have.

Even if Romney doesn't take Iowa, New Hampshire's probably more important, and polls show him with a big lead there.

[wiggin]

Romney's performance in Iowa is nothing short of amazing - he was dismal in 2008 and frankly had discounted Iowa entirely until a few months ago when it looked like he might be competitive. He'll have a very strong finish in NH, which might give him a chance at taking out Gingrich for SC given his poor performance so far. I think that it's obviously too early to know yet, but Romney still looks to be in great shape.

Also, the 'winner' doesn't matter as much, as I believe delegates are distributed by votes, which means that Romney and Santorum have effectively the same number of delegates (Paul might also have the same, probably not); the bigger issue is momentum, and given the low expectations for Romney's showing in Iowa (and the very high chance he'll seriously trounce in NH), I'm inclined to think he's in a decent position.

We'll have to see how Perry and Gingrich fare in the next few contests before we write them off, though I think Perry's definitely past his sell-by date.

edit: I'm still discounting Santorum's votes as a fluke - we'll have to see what happens later, but I don't see him as a serious contender. Obviously Paul isn't, so no need to even mention him.

[Wraith]

Also, the 'winner' doesn't matter as much, as I believe delegates are distributed by votes, which means that Romney and Santorum have effectively the same number of delegates (Paul might also have the same); the bigger issue is momentum, and given the low expectations for Romney's showing in Iowa (and the very high chance he'll seriously trounce in NH), I'm inclined to think he's in a decent position.

I have little doubt about Romney's eventual victory, but there seems to have been a general feeling that if he took Iowa and completely owned New Hampshire as much as he's expected to, it'd kill the momentum on the other candidates so much that the primaries would essentially be over.

edit: I'm still discounting Santorum's votes as a fluke - we'll have to see what happens later, but I don't see him as a serious contender. Obviously Paul isn't, so no need to even mention him.

He's just the latest in the musical chairs game of the 'not-Romney' side of the Republican primaries. Although he had the best timing of the bunch, just like everybody else who held that chair, voters will tire of him quickly and move on. He's not a serious threat to Romney.

[wiggin]

Hmm. I just don't think Romney ever had a serious chance to trounce in Iowa - he doesn't work well with evangelical social conservatives, who make up a large proportion of caucus-goers in the Iowa GOP. He spent a boatload of money and time there in 2008 only to disappoint with a distant second to Huckabee (not surprising he was popular in Iowa), but this time he's neck-and-neck with the social conservative favorite, Santorum, even when a lot of his traditionally strong counties (mostly in the eastern portion of the state) saw a big gain in Paul supporters, probably cannibalizing some of Romney's votes - and it has NOT been a campaign priority for him. This is a very strong finish for Romney, and Iowa has always been a bit of an outlier. I have no doubt Santorum will be a distant memory in NH.

The primaries aren't decided in one or two contests, except for eliminating the very bottom (Bachmann and the like; probably Huntsman in another few weeks). It'll take some serious weight in delegates before Romney is the sole candidate, even if he won Iowa completely.

I think the interesting race will be SC. If Gingrich can recover by then (I'm sure he's going to be a non-factor in NH), it will be very interesting to see how he and Romney stack up. If Romney beats Gingrich in SC, then that means something and will give him some serious momentum going into FL, which has some serious weight in delegates. If not, then we'll be in for a bit of a slog.

edit: Wow, the difference is down to 30-odd ballots with a few thousand left to count. Crazy close.

[Wraith]

Hmm. I just don't think Romney ever had a serious chance to trounce in Iowa - he doesn't work well with evangelical social conservatives, who make up a large proportion of caucus-goers in the Iowa GOP.

I don't think he ever could have trounced there (~50% of the voters self-identify as "very conservative", and Romeny's strength is with everyone left of that) but the difficulties he faces in Iowa are I think why winning there would have been such a huge victory from him. He almost had it, but oh well. In the long run, it's not that important.

I think the interesting race will be SC. If Gingrich can recover by then (I'm sure he's going to be a non-factor in NH), it will be very interesting to see how he and Romney stack up. If Romney beats Gingrich in SC, then that means something and will give him some serious momentum. If not, then we'll be in for a bit of a slog.

Maybe, I just checked and Gingrich is doing better than I thought he was. I'm sure Obama's rooting for him.

edit: "Perry returning to Texas to reassess his election campaign." Prelude to concession?

[wiggin]

It's a very interesting dynamic you bring up. By far the majority of the votes cast in Iowa went to either Romney or two nobodies who don't have a chance at the nomination. On the one hand, it means Romney's main rival, Gingrich, placed dismally low, which should be marginally good for his campaign. On the other hand, it suggests that votes for Paul and Santorum were more protest votes or exasperation at the poor choices than real strategic votes. That continues the long-term trend of deep GOP dissatisfaction with Romney as a candidate, but a lack of adequate alternatives. So, maybe good, maybe bad.

SC is really key here. Gingrich has been leading there for a long time, and as the primaries move into the south Romney will be more and more challenged to take him on directly. Gingrich is no slouch at rhetoric or debates, which means Romney can't just wait for him to self-destruct like Perry or Cain. So they might really duke it out until Super Tuesday, and it might not even be clear by then. Probably good news for Barack Obama, if it falls out like that. Then again, voters might ditch Gingrich just like every other fad. Hard to know.

[Wraith]

CNN has 99% reporting, and has Romney winning by one vote. That's impressively close.



edit: Also, McCain is on his way to New Hampshire to endorse Romney.

[Nessus]

Michele

[Wraith]

Sorry, Nessus. Maybe she could be Veep, and then assassinate Romney. There's still hope!

[Nessus]

Sorry, Nessus. Maybe she could be Veep, and then assassinate Romney. There's still hope!

She was the anti-thesis of hope. In her, I saw the endless rows of men and women with shaved heads, those figures who had long since passed hope. Those figures whose faces cried out for only death. She was the figurehead for all those rows upon rows of people, people like wooden logs. She would have created them. All those people.

Now I must wait some more. Which is fine, as time is all I have. But I know that those faces without hope will show up, one day. I do not know which side of the barbed wire I will be, then. With Michele, I would have been on the outside. Maybe that is why I liked her so?

But I do not think so. It does not truly matter which side of the barbed wire I am on. Usually, the barbed wire is electrified. They would permit me the freedom to touch it. The only freedom those people so akin to wooden logs were permitted. For me, for her sake? Is that not enough?

I will wait. There is nothing humanity so loves as those faces, the faces of men and women as wooden logs. I think that is what humanity truly desires.

[wiggin]

Looks like Romney won, probably by 14 8 votes (not that it matters; they'll get the same number of delegates, no?). What's crazy is that Buddy Roemer actually got more votes than the difference between Romney and Santorum here. Crazy. (h/t to 538 for that comparison)

[Ziggy Stardust]

1% of republicans have a smidgen of intelligence. Not too shabby.

I salute 744 men and women

[Ominous Gamer]

1% of republicans have a smidgen of intelligence. Not too shabby.

I salute 744 men and women

poor Huntsman

[wiggin]

Actually, Ziggy, if you looked at Huntsman's positions in detail you probably wouldn't like him much, either. I do agree in principle, though, that's he is one of the more reasonable candidates out there.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I don't like any of 'em. On either side. But if I had to pick one ...

[Loki]

Yeah, who knew that someone who made little attempt to campaign in Iowa, has no name recognition, no charisma, and who's the ideological equivalent to someone who does have charisma and name recognition would do so poorly.

[Lebanese Dragon]

At this point I would want a Ron Paul Victory, I think he's the best candidate, even though some of his policies I am skepticial of; however, I am reassured that there is no way he can change the government ot the degree he wants, but him trying I think would be an improvement. For example, reducing some foreign aid, and some military prescence, and pushing for fewer regulations. That's cool... The GOP even dislikes Ron Paul which makes me like him more, it means he's not completely accepting their stuff up his arse. If Obama were to lose, I think I'd want Ron Paul to be president.

[Wraith]

The GOP even dislikes Ron Paul which makes me like him more

Always the best reason to support a candidate or position! Much easier too. Examining things on their own is so much more work than simple partisanship.

[Lebanese Dragon]

The GOP even dislikes Ron Paul which makes me like him more

Always the best reason to support a candidate or position! Much easier too. Examining things on their own is so much more work than simple partisanship.

You totally misunderstood that comment. What the comment means is the GOP has special interest groups and investors that prop it up as a poltical party, if you want to call it a political party. The fact they're using their time and money to discredit or attack Ron Paul (asking him question like "why are you even here?" "are you even a republican?" shows me he's not just following them, he's actually espousing stuff HE beleives. This is what makes me like him. he actually beleives the stuff he says. I don't think most candidates do. That was the intention of the comment.

I view the GOP as just a conglomeration of special interest group, I don't view them as a politcal party anymore.

When every candidate says I don't believe in gay marriage, and when every candidate says Global Warming is fake... Your a joke of a party, your in it for money. That's not to say historically republicans were always bad, just currently. Maybe times will change, and i'll hate democrats more, who knows.

Anyway that was the reason for the comment. It wasn't a "oh if the republicans want it then I don't" kind of comment.

You seem to be something of a bipolar partisan, Lebbie.

I don't really believe in being partisan, at least i didn't at first. At first I thought "hey lets vote for the best candidate based on their views." That seemed logical to me. Then I realized this view was naive. My first assumption was wrong, namely that there are candidates to choose from. That assumption was false. Hence choosing the best candidate no longer makes sense. Since candidates need/are vying for GOP funds.. I'm really voting for the GOP party. I'm not voting for romney or perry, they'll do much of the exact same things. I think the thrust of what they'll do will be the same.. we're really voting for "a finess/a style if you will" this person will come off better to our rival countries. This person has better social skills. This person may come up with better ideas. But largely 9.5/10 things they do is party line. You look at how these people are voting it just doesn't make any sense. People who think for themselves even if they share some core idealogies should have DIFFERING votes, and stances. There should be way more PRO gay marriage republicans. But noo they're going for the fundies funds. Who am I electing a president or Christian fundamentalists? That's just one string, and you can get by with one.. but when you have a million strings. Then you're no longer a unique candidate, instead they're all just puppets. Puppets with faces.

Ron Paul though, I'm sure he has his strings but he's not a puppet. This is what makes him so attractive. Also yes Cain was a bit crazy, but he also had that quality... of speaking his politically incorrect mind. A beautiful quality, an important one.

[Enoch the Red]

At this point I would want a Ron Paul Victory, I think he's the best candidate, even though some of his policies I am skepticial of; however, I am reassured that there is no way he can change the government ot the degree he wants, but him trying I think would be an improvement. For example, reducing some foreign aid, and some military prescence, and pushing for fewer regulations. That's cool... The GOP even dislikes Ron Paul which makes me like him more, it means he's not completely accepting their stuff up his arse. If Obama were to lose, I think I'd want Ron Paul to be president.

You seem to be something of a bipolar partisan, Lebbie.

[wiggin]

Are you insane?

[Loki]

This is the same guy who earlier supported Cain. It takes an incredibly intelligent left-winger to support a Republican candidate just because that candidate is hated by the Republican establishment...for being too right-wing.

[GGT]

Santorum got lucky with the timing. It was his turn to be on top of the heap before falling off. If he'd been vetted by the press after his "surge", his crazier opinions (like birth control being 'unnatural' and states being allowed to ban it---plus his biblical/Catholic DOMA and homophobia) he'd be down there with Bachmann.

[LittleFuzzy]

Santorum got lucky with the timing. It was his turn to be on top of the heap before falling off. If he'd been vetted by the press after his "surge", his crazier opinions (like birth control being 'unnatural' and states being allowed to ban it---plus his biblical/Catholic DOMA and homophobia) he'd be down there with Bachmann.

Sure. Eventually though, the core conservatives are going to winnow out enough candidates so they'll have to settle on one rather than cycling through all of them on repeat. As Loki says, one of the main questions is whether they will manage this before its too late for them to stop Romney. Another is if whether the person they settle on is someone who can Romney at all when the time comes. Santorum certainly isn't, IMO. My prediction is that things will come down to Romney and Gingrich after the South Carolina and Florida primaries.

[Nessus]

Sure. Eventually though, the core conservatives are going to winnow out enough candidates so they'll have to settle on one rather than cycling through all of them on repeat. As Loki says, one of the main questions is whether they will manage this before its too late for them to stop Romney. Another is if whether the person they settle on is someone who can Romney at all when the time comes. Santorum certainly isn't, IMO. My prediction is that things will come down to Romney and Gingrich after the South Carolina and Florida primaries.

What is so astounding that none of this makes you least of all afraid.

[LittleFuzzy]

What is so astounding that none of this makes you least of all afraid.

Yeah. Go figure that the thought there are human beings who are as capable of thinking and interests as I am who may do something as terrible, powerful, and influential as vote doesn't really faze me. What I don't get is how any of that scares you. Neither Gingrich nor Romney would likely be a shitty President. Obama hasn't been and I think the increase in unfunded expenditures we've seen under him *piled atop the ones from Bush Jr which are what I hated most about his Presidency* are as bad anything we'd likely see from either of them. Of course I also don't particularly think anyone in the GOP race is going to beat Obama even under the current economic conditions.

[Nessus]

Yeah. Go figure that the thought there are human beings who are as capable of thinking and interests as I am who may do something as terrible, powerful, and influential as vote doesn't really faze me. What I don't get is how any of that scares you. Neither Gingrich nor Romney would likely be a shitty President. Obama hasn't been and I think the increase in unfunded expenditures we've seen under him *piled atop the ones from Bush Jr which are what I hated most about his Presidency* are as bad anything we'd likely see from either of them. Of course I also don't particularly think anyone in the GOP race is going to beat Obama even under the current economic conditions.

I am happy that you feel this way.

[RandBlade]

his crazier opinions (like birth control being 'unnatural' ...

???

Birth control is 'unnatural'. Which is good as natural isn't good all or necessarily even most of the time, but why that's crazy is beyond me?

Ah, using the old Ignorance strategy to dismiss an Opinion. That's part of punditry and propaganda. Paul had no chance of gaining support five years ago. Written off as appealing to the "lunatic fringe", a phenomenal fluke dismissed as a temporary trend. Funny how he's gained more supporters since then, huh. Just more ignorant people?

Even I find Paul extreme for a right-winger, and I consider myself to be an extreme right-winger.

I think a lot of people who support Paul would hate many of his policies. I also think Paul has shown no chance of gaining any serious level of support either five year ago or now. I think there is as much chance of a snowball surviving in hell [which doesn't even exist] as there is of Paul winning the nomination let alone the Presidency. It'd be a tremendous shock if he even won a Primary.

Right now although I supported Obama last time I am [as usual for my US Presidential picks it seems] disappointed in him. I would be supporting Romney right now if I was an American, and the more I hear of his business background the more I think he is exactly what the US and the world economy needs.

[ImAnOgre]

???

Birth control is 'unnatural'. Which is good as natural isn't good all or necessarily even most of the time, but why that's crazy is beyond me?
Even I find Paul extreme for a right-winger, and I consider myself to be an extreme right-winger.

I think a lot of people who support Paul would hate many of his policies. I also think Paul has shown no chance of gaining any serious level of support either five year ago or now. I think there is as much chance of a snowball surviving in hell [which doesn't even exist] as there is of Paul winning the nomination let alone the Presidency. It'd be a tremendous shock if he even won a Primary.

Right now although I supported Obama last time I am [as usual for my US Presidential picks it seems] disappointed in him. I would be supporting Romney right now if I was an American, and the more I hear of his business background the more I think he is exactly what the US and the world economy needs.

How could someone extremely right wing support Obama?

[Loki]

The longer the fundies remain divided, the higher the chance Romney wins the primary.