"Voters make Obama the real loser in Iowa"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 05, 2012 1:35 AM GMT
    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/20220104voters_make_obama_the_real_loser_in_iowa/

    Iowa may not have given Mitt Romney the clear victory he was hoping for, but it proved to be no field of dreams for his likely election opponent — President Obama.

    The virtual dead heat in the Heartland was no game-changer, and it did nothing to slow Romney’s likely march to the nomination — and that’s not good news for the White House.

    While the surprising Rick Santorum came close to an upset, the end result was more of a muddle than a mandate, with none of Romney’s conservative rivals gaining a huge momentum boost.

    More troubling news for Obama: The GOP turnout in Iowa was projected to be larger than in 2008, despite perceived dissatisfaction with the candidates. Independents also came out in large numbers, and Sen. John McCain will endorse Romney in New Hampshire, further cementing his hold on the state.

    Democrats point out that the former Massachusetts governor finished with the same percentage in Iowa that he got four years ago, and was running even with someone given almost no chance a few weeks ago, Santorum.

    But if Romney gets a double-digit win in New Hampshire, which is no sure thing, he is positioned to outlast his rivals as the race heads South.

    The results from the Hawkeye State mean while there isn’t much enthusiasm yet for a Republican nominee, there is still plenty of motivation for Republicans to keep Obama from winning a second term in November.

    Romney is not likely to lock up the nomination soon, just because most conservatives still want someone else. The next contest is South Carolina, where Romney has struggled.

    But even if a conservative challenger such as Santorum or even Newt Gingrich emerges, Romney is likely to put away the former Pennsylvania senator and the rest of the field some time in February.

    That means Romney will have a one-on-one contest against a weak incumbent president for about eight months, giving him time to raise plenty of cash and make amends with the conservative base.

    The bad news for Romney is he has a long way to go with that base, considering three quarters of Iowa caucus-goers rejected him, and even many in New Hampshire and other states are lukewarm. Look for Romney to talk a lot about his conservative credentials after New Hampshire.

    But the real battle in November is for the middle, and that’s where Romney could be the strongest. Mitt already holds a lead against Obama in national polling, and even a generic GOP candidate is running about even.

    So even if the GOP race drags on for a while, Obama will still be a vulnerable incumbent heading into the general election. And barring a collapse, Romney will likely be there waiting for him.

    So while the White House might have gotten a chuckle out of the GOP prat-falling and shape-shifting over the last few months, the real joke is this: Obama is in trouble even against a weak field.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 05, 2012 2:38 AM GMT
    This is the picture and capition tweeted by this columnist last night:

    AiVmg1xCIAAGhLR.jpg

    "Very lonely here at Romney paraphernalia booth in Manchester. Not exactly selling out"

    [url]https://twitter.com/#!/joebattenfeld[/url]

    If it weren't for the "horse race" of the election, these columnists might have to do some work. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 05, 2012 2:51 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidThis is the picture and capition tweeted by this columnist last night:

    AiVmg1xCIAAGhLR.jpg

    "Very lonely here at Romney paraphernalia booth in Manchester. Not exactly selling out"

    [url]https://twitter.com/#!/joebattenfeld[/url]

    If it weren't for the "horse race" of the election, these columnists might have to do some work. icon_lol.gif


    And yet you seem to have missed his point - that "So while the White House might have gotten a chuckle out of the GOP prat-falling and shape-shifting over the last few months, the real joke is this: Obama is in trouble even against a weak field."
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Jan 05, 2012 3:06 AM GMT
    The Iowa Republicans were so fired up against Obama they managed a stunning turnout rate of... 5.4%.
    Wow, I can see they're really electrified.

    r-IOWA-CAUCUS-large570.jpgicon_rolleyes.gif
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/iowa-caucus-results_n_1184479.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 05, 2012 3:57 AM GMT
    KissTheSky saidThe Iowa Republicans were so fired up against Obama they managed a stunning turnout rate of... 5.4%.
    Wow, I can see they're really electrified.

    r-IOWA-CAUCUS-large570.jpgicon_rolleyes.gif
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/iowa-caucus-results_n_1184479.html



    And yet the polling suggests the same. More turned out to vote than expected - of registered Republicans. The reason Obama won in 2008 was in large part because of the enthusiasm he carried while old people stayed home. In 2012 it looks like the situation will be reversed. Obama's base is not enthusiastic about him while it is Republicans who have the momentum.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 05, 2012 4:06 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    KissTheSky saidThe Iowa Republicans were so fired up against Obama they managed a stunning turnout rate of... 5.4%.
    Wow, I can see they're really electrified.

    r-IOWA-CAUCUS-large570.jpgicon_rolleyes.gif
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/iowa-caucus-results_n_1184479.html



    And yet the polling suggests the same. More turned out to vote than expected - of registered Republicans. The reason Obama won in 2008 was in large part because of the enthusiasm he carried while old people stayed home. In 2012 it looks like the situation will be reversed. Obama's base is not enthusiastic about him while it is Republicans who have the momentum.


    Are you on drugs? Romney got fewer votes in the Iowa caucus then he did in 2008. Meanwhile, Obama is sounding all the right notes to reinvigorate his base and even in the conservative press there are reports that evangelicals are not interested in Romney.

    And, yes, the youth vote came out for Obama in 2008 and didn't in 2010 but there's no indication that they won't in 2012. In fact, the Obama campaign is much further ahead in the ground game for this election than last and the last two Republicans who were not clear front runners at this stage in the game (Dole and McCain) lost.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jan 05, 2012 5:10 AM GMT
    Let's review.

    Only 25% of Iowans chose "Mittens."

    And, the only reason he did THAT well was that his competition was made up of out and proud racists, homophobes, and lunatics, one of whom ALSO got 25% of the vote.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 05, 2012 6:54 AM GMT
    62% of Iowans voted for ‘other’ in 2008 …. than Obama
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jan 05, 2012 11:18 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree said62% of Iowans voted for ‘other’ in 2008 …. than Obama


    Umm ... Dude?

    Like 100% of Obama WON in 2008
    So those 62% of Iowans didn't mean crack sh*t did they icon_wink.gif
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jan 06, 2012 6:21 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree said62% of Iowans voted for ‘other’ in 2008 …. than Obama





    GOSH, if that's the case, HOW DID OBAMA WIN IOWA ????????????????????
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 06, 2012 8:06 AM GMT
    Webster666 said
    freedomisntfree said62% of Iowans voted for ‘other’ in 2008 …. than Obama





    GOSH, if that's the case, HOW DID OBAMA WIN IOWA ????????????????????


    100%
    - 62%
    = 38%

    got it now?
  • hotkj2002

    Posts: 64

    Jan 06, 2012 8:37 AM GMT
    Romney got less votes than he did in 2008. And the entire republican turn out for the primaries was just about the same as it was in 2008. And that is with population growth and etc. These numbers indicate that the excitement for the Republicans i'snt as great as one might think. Atleast not in Iowa. If anything this is a slight victory for Obama. But of course the real victory will come in November.
  • hotkj2002

    Posts: 64

    Jan 06, 2012 8:41 AM GMT
    Obama got 54% of the vote in Iowa and McCain got 45% of the vote in 2008 according to CNN.