New Hampshire is good, home territory for Romney and he’s worked it hard. It showed. The exit polls tell the tale of strength across-the-board: Romney won men and women; he won everyone over age 40; he won all education groups; he won everyone make $30,000 and up; he won Republicans by an impressive 49 percent; he won moderates, somewhat conservatives, and very conservatives; he won voters who support and who are neutral on the Tea Party; he won Born Again’s and Non-Born Again’s; he won Catholics and protestants; he won voters who think leaders should compromise and voters who think leaders should stick by their principles; he won in urban, suburban, and rural areas.
He may lose Coos county to Ron Paul, if he does, I propose we rename the county "Kooks county".
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAhhh, that doesn't quite work. Coos is pronounced "KOH-aaahhhsss."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe FOX All-Star Panel, comprised of Hayes, Kristol, Williams, were utterly embarrassing.
They just suffered a loss in credibility. Even Wallace referenced how Rove and Trippi were shaking their heads in disagreement off the camera. Rove the professional absolutely rebuked in a very polite manner the misguided denial.
Even if Mr. Lowry offers a big dose of sarcasm, cynicism like the post above, this was a huge moment tonight.
* Romney just did what no non-Incumbant has ever done, won Iowa and NH.
This is a massive victory.
Stunning...
Congratulations Mr. Romney, another huge step to the Nomination and the White House.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSadly, Mark Steyn just hurt his own credibility, foolishly reiterating the mistaken concept Mr. Romney is a "weak" Candidate. It is a sad moment for Mr. Steyn, I am still a fan, but he even revealed he truly doesn't understand Bain, Private Equity, etc., and I find this remarkable for a conservative pundit. But he should know weak Candidates-Frontrunners don't win Iowa and NH.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLove Billy Kristol. that political paragon, whose claim to fame is that he worked for Dan "potatoe" Qualye.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney is going to win in South Carolina in almost the same impressive fashion!
Rich Lowry, Mark Steyn and Jonah Goldberg can sit in their Ivory Towers and condescend about how "Romney is a weak frontrunner" but the actual voters are proving these out of touch losers, (and make no mistake that is what they are: envious, nerds who never got over the handsome jocks bullying them in High School), but real voters on the ground are proving the media spin to be so much BS.
I can't wait to see what Rich Lpwry has to write when Romney wraps this nomination up fairly quickly.
No doubt it will make all his cocktail buddies smile those geeky insular smiles, as if they are so much more clever and urbane then the rest of us...but, no matter what snark Rich chooses to deliver upon Romney's impressive and easy victory, we all know that it will pain Santorum's erstwhile champion to admit that Mitt Romney won without any help from Fox News or National Review.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePretty brutal, not inaccurate though. Lowry is a good guy who thinks and writes sensibly and that was I bit over the top I think.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusea bit*
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFunny, Ryan, but I was a football lineman myself and I'd be happy to take on the MittBots anytime, anywhere.
Full contact, though---forget the wussy touch or flag stuff you brie-eaters play.
Now go watch "Desperate Housewives". The men have talking to do.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI thought it was interesting that CNN's focus group of undecided voters did not have a huge number of voters saying that they had made up their mind in favor of Mitt Romney.
Romney just does not excite Republicans. Also, surprisingly, New Hampshire, unlike Iowa, did not eliminate any candidates. Given that, I don't think the race mattered very much. There aren't actually many delegates at stake in New Hampshire.
This is shaping up to be a long primary, given the weakness of the Republican field and the inability of any candidate, besides Ron Paul who isn't serious, to inspire.
I am thinking that Huntsman and Perry may drop out after South Carolina. Then the two candidates left to be the anti-Romney will be Gingrich and Santorum. (Of course, Paul's campaign isn't even serious, even though it is performing well, Paul seems to be more in the campaign to change minds than to win.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSomeone is spinning like a Hamster in a wheel...
*News Flash*: Romney excites plenty of Republicans, and he will defeat Obama!
Count on it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs DEMOCRAT of longstanding, I will support and vote for ROMNEY!!!!
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Romney just does not excite Republicans."
In a Republican primary:
"Romney won men and women; he won everyone over age 40; he won all education groups; he won everyone make $30,000 and up; he won Republicans by an impressive 49 percent; he won moderates, somewhat conservatives, and very conservatives; he won voters who support and who are neutral on the Tea Party; he won Born Again’s and Non-Born Again’s; he won Catholics and protestants; he won voters who think leaders should compromise and voters who think leaders should stick by their principles; he won in urban, suburban, and rural areas."
By contrast...Hunstman won the Democrats, people who strongly oppose the TEA Party, people satisfied with the Obama administration, people who are dissatisfied with the GOP field.
Santorum won the anti-abortion vote, and Ron Paul won everything else that wasn't won by Romney.
If we were in High School, and I dated 11 out of 14 members of the school's Varsity cheerleaders, you dated three, another guy dated a chick in the Math Club, and a fourth guy was able to get one date with a girl from another school, would you come to the conclusion that out of that group of guys, dating me was not something that the school's Varsity cheerleaders found to be an exciting possibility?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe're talking about a co-ed high school...right?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAccording to Mr. Lowry's analysis, Romney seems to be a coalition candidate, where that coalition is determined to cut across ideological lines, overcome the damages caused by the bitter internecine barriers witnessed over the last several election cycles, and focus on the primary goal: to defeat Obama.
Onward.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere's little doubt that Romney is the only man with a national campaign organization...and will be the nominee... and republican voter turnout is less than '08...and anyone who thinks a man who can't win more than 40% of his home state is the most electable in November is not thinking clearly.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe fact that exit polls show that people most concerned about electability are voting for Romney points to an understated trend: that over and above all is else people are motivated to vote against Obama. Any argument that says that a Romney win for the nomination will suppress voter turnout is completely misguiding and is spoken by partisans who most likely are more concerned about social issues than economics, and are unhappy that a severe social conservative or evangelical is not the standard bearer.
Further more, I am glad to hear that commentators across the conservative spectrum are beginning to nail Gingrich/Perry/Santorum/Huntsman to the wall for their egregiously anti-capitalist rants lately - this point was so subtly stated tonight by Gov. Pawlenty on Hannity when he stated that system where government provided a cradle to grave security net and a guaranteed job was the hallmark of the communist Soviet Union.
I hope more people public remind people of this, and I would even go so far to label Gingrich a marxist sympathizer and Perry a dimwitted fool following in his lead, for this is the very essence of the Tea Party fight over the last 3 years - a fight against socialism, and a system where the only winners are government cronies and apparatchiks. The fact that these shameful politicians are attacking the free market so freely, all in the interest of serving their own bloated egos is beyond shameful and I think Reagan himself would be disgraced by it.
I agree with the commenters above who are pointing out the whining cynicism of Steyn (who I still enjoy), Hayes, Kristol - they need to come to the party and realize that Romney truly has what it takes to unite a wide faction against the marxist in office now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe attack on capitalism shows an incompetence we've seen repeatedly among many members of the Republican field. Perry is the most annoying. Every time he speaks he sounds like he knows very little, and I cringe for fear of him having an oops moment. Sometimes it seems like whatever they do, the other Republican candidates end up helping Romney. Now, amazingly, they attack him from the Left! They are hopeless!
Evidence for months from polls does seem to indicate that Romney is by far the most electable, though polls a year in advance of the election are not terribly reliable.
I'll certainly vote for Romney over Obama, though Romney's robotic quality makes me nervous. Sometimes I get the feeling there's nobody in there, and he's really just a wind-up Bloomingdale's manikin controlled by some evil genius in an underground laboratory in the Arctic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs Gingrich and Santorum begin to sound more like democrats, maybe Romney will begin to sound more like a small government republican.
I can always hope, can't I?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou know, for 2008 I wrote in MITT ROMNEY (P) and CONDI RICE (VP). Seeing Mitt slowly, gradually, and competently win the field in 2012, is making me smile quite a bit. He is not perfect. There are no perfect candidates this cycle. But I am coming to believe he is "the answer" and I look forward to seeing him take on Team Obama. By then Mitt should be blooded and battle-tested. Ready to face the most well-financed incumbent in history. Obama, the guy Goldman-Sachs is putting all their dinero on.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse