-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Byron York is reporting that the final count may show that Mitt Romney actually lost the Iowa caucuses to Rick Santorum, though that result is far from certain. The two are effectively tied. Would Romney falling behind Santorum in that vote count, however slightly, change the entire race?
Certainly it would contribute to the sense many conservatives have that the fix is in. The problem is that any such revelation would come as Romney is starting to pull away among Republican voters, both nationally and in many primary states. In order to really change things, the GOP primary electorate would have to decide Santorum was robbed and flock to him in large enough numbers to finally resolve the Gingrich-Santorum deadlock.
Remember that many considered Santorum the effective winner of Iowa going into the New Hampshire primary. The talking point that Romney’s early state strength made him inevitable didn’t really start to take off until after New Hampshire. Santorum wasn’t able to use his Iowa showing to pull away from Newt Gingrich or close the gap with Romney. Moreover, the voters most likely to feel that Romney is being foisted on them by the Republican establishment are already in the Gingrich, Santorum, or Rick Perry camps.
Though if it turns out that he hasn’t run the table in the early states, Romney might be wise to reconsider skipping some debates.
View all comments (11) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/17/what-if-mitt-romney-lost-iowa
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Casey Abell| 1.17.12 @ 1:59PM
Are there any hanging chads? This could be fun!
Guys, give it a rest. Even on an anti-Romney site, this looks pretty silly. Nobody cares about a handful of votes in Iowa any more.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 1.17.12 @ 2:07PM
If Romney did lose Iowa, then as of this Saturday, Romney might be only 1 for 3!! Santorum might be 1 for 3 then too, and if Gingrich has a shot at any primary, South Carolina's it, so he might be 1 for 3 by Saturday too!! Then is Romney really the frontrunner? Yeah,... No, he's not!! So I hope he loses this Saturday, because by sometime later this afternoon, Romney's going to have lost the Iowa Caucus, and will be only 1 for 2!! Sorry Mitt, but you're not the guy, you flipfloppermotherfather!!
PattyMor| 1.17.12 @ 2:19PM
Anyway a 6 vote count lead was really pretty pathetic for a candidate running for the office for 5 years and spending beaucoup bucks to eke out a win. Kinda like voting in limp spaghetti and looking for some way to make it stick.
somnolence| 1.17.12 @ 2:47PM
You conveniently forget that although he may have been campaigning for 5 years a couple of months ago Romney was trailing badly in Iowa. Looks like he more than made up for it due to the carelessness and egotism of the other candidates.
Dan| 1.17.12 @ 10:36PM
"[C]arelessness and egotism of the other candidates?"
I don't know what race you saw, but the rest of us watched Romney's Super Pac take a candidate that was going nowhere fast and enable him to win, NOT by increasing his share of the vote, but by politically smearing and kneecapping his most serious opponent.
bill| 1.17.12 @ 2:55PM
Romney will lose SC to Gingrich, Rick Perry will be in the 2nd place.
somnolence| 1.17.12 @ 3:01PM
Bill, just keep on dreaming. Romney will win by 7-10 points in SC easily.
ncatty| 1.17.12 @ 3:26PM
If it continues to be Romney against a 4 person field then he will be the nominee. I know Paul won't get out, but now is the time to make some VP and cabinet deals to get two of the other three to drop out.
Clint| 1.17.12 @ 4:45PM
That Cat, Mittens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1wPrsEP2nc
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On Mittens' Tail.
Dai Alanye | 1.17.12 @ 5:56PM
Romney's eight votes in Iowa shouldn't have been important but the media types are adicted to reporting winners according to the score, so innumerable mentions were made of Romney's win and far fewer to Rick Santorum's moral victory. Should the count change it will get some mention, but I'm sure an asterisk will be added that will somehow give the moral victory to Romney.
But that's merely my prediction, and I'm some kind of skeptic.
Dan| 1.17.12 @ 10:34PM
Political momentum has a shelf life.
Santorum's Iowa performance, victorious or otherwise, has now grown quite stale, ----------------- and has become irrelevant to the future of the race.