Free Markets, Free People

Romney wins Iowa … or something

Ok, just being flip, but I’ve never really thought that much of the caucus process and still don’t.  All this excitement, work and rhetoric over approximately 225,000 votes.  Yes I understand the possibility of winnowing the field (think Newt will finally take the hint?).

So Romney won – by 8 votes out of about 225,000 total.  That’s not as surprising to me, frankly, than who came in second.  Very disappointing to the Paulbots, I’m sure.  But Rick Santorum?  Seriously?

And will Huntsman, Bachman, and Perry drop out or hang on through New Hampshire?  After all it’s not that long till NH and again, Iowa is a caucus state.   I don’t see any of the three doing significantly better there than Iowa, but still they may give it a shot.

Cain was beaten by “no preference”.  The only “candidate” missing, as far as I’m concerned, was “none of the above”.  My guess is NOTA had a shot at at least 2nd or 3rd, and who knows, with that field, might of pulled out a win.


Twitter: @McQandO

17 Responses to Romney wins Iowa … or something

  • You can’t really call it a victory since the delegates are assigned proportionally. It’s a tie.

  • Santorum is the new flavor.

    The way they’re rotating to the top of the pile every other couple weeks makes me doubt any of the numbers.
    Except, alas, Romney’s.

    • @looker

      Just speak up and say it out loud that Romney is not a choice. His numbers are consistent, but they are static. He’s the insiders choice, so the GOP rank and file have been getting filled with that “electable” nonsense. Come November, he’ll be doing worse than McCain did. He has a shallow affect and that shows up bigtime in the klieg lights of a full-on presidential campaign.

    • @looker Santorum is no friend of free markets. That is a “first principle” sorter for me.

  • I call it a thumping defeat for the two permanent Iowa candidates…Paul and Romney. Who, if you think about it, define the fringes of the pack.

  • John McAnus is said to be about to endorse Romney. The kiss of death…

  • Glad you cleared that up. Based on a quick glance at the photos, I had assumed the following results:

    First place: an animatronic Ken doll

    Second place: Cameron from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off

    Third place: a Muppet, one of the pair of grumpy old men that sit in the balcony

    Fourth place: the other grumpy old man Muppet

    Fifth place: J.R. Ewing from Dallas

    Sixth place: one of the Stepford Wives

    Seventh place: a department store mannequin

  • The worst thing about Romney is Romneycare. It takes Obamacare off the table as an issue. Romney is the most electable candidate… for Obama.
    I won’t vote for either one of those two.

  • This is going to be an interesting general election, one way or another. It seems that the GOP will put forth a candidate that either has some appeal to the middle, but not the base, or a candidate that appeals strongly to a segment of the base, but that the middle wouldn’t touch.
    Romney offers the best opportunity, since the base can hold their nose just to vote against Obama, but the middle won’t hold their nose and vote for a guy as far out on the edge as Santorum. Maybe Huntsman, who paid no attention to Iowa and put all of his eggs in New Hampshire, but then, isn’t Huntsman just Romney without the RomneyCare anchor (as far as the base in concerned)?

    • @CaptinSarcastic The problem for the GOP is that the base generally thinks government is big enough already (or too big) and they are tired of working hard to elect politicians that keep growing government.*

      G.W. Bush was the clearest recent example. Sure, he’s better than Al Gore… except that he grew government spending even faster than Clinton, put in new entitlements, federalized education, and increased government control over political speech (until the Supreme Court shot it down). Close to the opposite of what the base wanted.

      So it’s not clear to me how much of the base will hold their nose and support Romney. They sat on their hands for McCain. At best they might drag to the polls in reduced numbers and cast a vote against Obama, but they won’t be sending him money and trying to talk friends and family into voting for him.

      Romney might still win because Obama has the plenty of problems of his own. But I think the base has an intuition that a Romney election at best means treading water and at worst means the meltdown happens on his watch and the Republicans get blamed for it.

      (*)There’s a segment of the base that thinks government is way, way too big and the debt bomb is about to explode in our faces unless Medicare and SS are radically reformed and made to cost a lot less, but I think the majority of the base isn’t tuned in to that argument. They just have a more general intuition that government is too big, debt is a problem, and taxes are too high.

      • @Billy Hollis I think that is a fair analysis, but I think that it doesn’t matter who is elected, the status quo is too well protected by special interests to honestly address any of our big problems. SS and Medicare are protected by an active voting block, tax policy is protected by lobbyists and Congress critters who benefit from complexity. The financial and insurance sector are protected by massive lobbying dollars.
        I throw up the white flag of surrender to partisan politics and would gladly accept honest representative democracy that resulted in very conservative policies over the status quo.
        I am very confident that honest policies from either side of the ideological spectrum, unsullied by lobbying, would give us a better chance of recovering our greatness, and everything we do up and until then is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

        • @CaptinSarcastic @Billy I actually think Ron Paul is a vote against the status quo. He also truly stands for small government and got a third of the delegates from Iowa.

        • @Above Ground Pools @Billy Ron Paul doesn’t have a prayer, nor really does anyone who won’t “play ball”. This won’t be changed from the inside, it will have to be changed from outside of the system. Getting Congress critters to vote against their own interests would be the only thing more difficult than getting them to vote against the interests of their bagmen.

  • I’ve always liked Rick Santorum. I think he’s a solid man, though certainly not a perfect man. After him, I like Newt. Perry, who is my third preference, seems to be out of it.

    I will not support Romney, not even passively. He’s like a liberal game show host.

    Jonah Goldberg just commented over at NRO that all of the candidates constitute “settling.” I agreed with him up to a point. Santorum, Gingrich, Perry constitute settling. Romney is extortion. If I wanted to vote for someone like Romney in the primaries I could join the Democratic Party and vote for Hillary Clinton. But don’t tell me I have to support Hillary Clinton to stop four more years of Obama.

    • Also, the idea that Romney is the most electable is ludicrous. The Democrats will melt him like a wax figurine. And to paraphrase Harry Truman, give the people a choice between a fake and a fake and they’ll take the fake every time.