Visual source: Newseum
Dan Balz/ WaPo:
But Romney’s lackluster percentage underscored the absence of enthusiasm among many Republicans for the candidate long seen as the party’s likeliest nominee. Despite being the nominal front-runner for the past year and judged overwhelmingly by Iowa Republicans as having the best chance of defeating President Obama in November, Romney did no better Tuesday than he did four years ago.
The results did little to damage Romney’s prospects of winning the nomination, though. He is well-funded, and he has a strong campaign team, a sharp focus on Obama and the economy, and a willingness to go after anyone he sees as a threat.
Philip Rucker/ WaPo:
Romney leaves Iowa with same problems he had in 2008
There was a dark side to Mitt Romney’s close finish in the Iowa caucuses.
After first approaching Iowa with reservation and then scrambling hard in the final weeks to win, he leaves here with about the same share of votes he snagged four years ago in the Republican presidential caucuses.
“It’s been a great victory for us here,” Romney told supporters , adding: “We’ve got some work ahead.”
But his Iowa showing — finishing just eight votes ahead of former senator Rick Santorum (Pa.) — highlighted the big problems that still dog Romney: suspicions about his avowed conservatism, struggles to connect with voters and an inability to rally more Republicans around his candidacy.
TPM:
Santorum’s performance in Iowa gave him a boost with New Hampshire voters, according to a poll conducted by CNN on Tuesday night. The network found that the number of New Hampshire Republican voters who said they’d support Santorum went from 5 percent in late December to 10 percent last night.
WaPo's: Behind the Numbers:
The three candidates at the top of the Iowa Republican caucus results have distinct constituencies, ones that echo broader divisions within the GOP.
Romney’s single best group in a caucus-night poll of voters consisted of those who prioritize beating President Obama over other candidate qualities. In the preliminary numbers, he won nearly half of all such voters, more than double the number selecting any other candidate. Romney also fared relatively well among moderates and liberals, even as he slipped among the most conservative caucus-goers compared with his performance four years ago in the state. The former Massachusetts governor also topped his competitors among those saying the economy was their top voting issue.
(In case you missed it, check out how Romney and Paul performed compared to 2008)
“Very conservative” caucus-goers broke for Santorum, according to the poll. The former senator is the newest darling of the tea party political movement, picking up 30 percent of strong tea party backers, with four other candidates in the teens. Santorum does best among those voters prioritizing abortion as an issue and “strong moral character” as a candidate attribute. The senator surged in the closing days of the campaign, and won a plurality of those saying they made their final decision Tuesday.
ABC:
While scoring heavily among caucus-goers most concerned with electability, Romney failed to improve on his 2008 showing in Iowa, did poorly with very conservative and evangelical voters, and flagged among those focused on the “true conservative” or the candidate with the strongest “moral character.” He won Republican pragmatists, but not conservative true believers. Rick Santorum took advantage of Romney’s weak spots, winning evangelical and very conservative voters, and those focused on moral character, as well as late-deciders. One question is how well Santorum plays in states with fewer evangelicals participating; they accounted for a broad 58 percent in Iowa. Another is how well he withstands the new found scrutiny his showing is sure to bring.
Garry South (before the final tally) at Politico's Arena:
It's just another striking example of how intrinsically weak a candidate Mitt Romney is. He spent $10 million in Iowa in 2008 but finished second to a flash-in-the-pan Mike Huckabee, who spent barely anything. Now, after four straight years of non-stop campaigning and parading around like the frontrunner, he finishes second in Iowa again to another Cinderella candidate, who spent almost nothing. It's also likely that Romney will actually finish with fewer actual votes in the Iowa caucuses this time than he did in 2008. And in the process, now he's also incurred the undying wrath of wrathful Newt Gingrich, who the same as endorsed Santorum tonight and said he was going to on the attack to kill Romney. Mitt, do you get the drift? People just don't like you! Meantime, sleep tight, Obama.
Joshua A. Tucker/The Arena:
Yes it is a disappointing showing, but yes he is still the front runner. No Santorum can not win a protracted fight.
But the most interesting question still remains when Mitt Romney is going to break out of the 20s in a state that is not one of his “home” states. Despite the self-destruction of all of his rivals to date, three-quarters of Republicans still refuse to endorse him. It is very difficult to see anyone else getting the Republican nomination at this point, but it is also difficult to see someone who three-quarters of his party time after time rejects being a successful candidate for president.
A bit of pundit satire from
Jonathan Bines:
Top 20 David Brooks False Equivalencies of 2011
#3 The Democrats talk and look like a conventional liberal party (some liberals, who represent, at most, 30 percent of the country, are disappointed because President Obama hasn't ushered in a Huffington Post paradise). Meanwhile, many Republicans flock to Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich because they are more interested in having a leader who can take on the mainstream news media than in having one who can plausibly govern. (The Two Moons: 11/21)
Republicans vote based on their perception of the candidate's ability to propound Republican dogma. Therefore, the Democrats must be in thrall to an equal and opposite dogma, represented here by the image of a "Huffington Post paradise." Exactly what kind of paradise that might be is immaterial, although it is an interesting topic of speculation.
Ummmm... :
CNN has become famous (or infamous) for hauling out a bevy of touchscreens, magic walls, computer simulations and -- in its most notorious move -- even holograms of its own reporters. On Tuesday night, Wolf Blitzer proudly unveiled the network's newest way to explain how a caucus actually works: a group of small, faceless CGI blobs that Cooper called "Weebles" in a reference to the egg-shaped children's toys.
Cooper seemed two seconds away from rolling his eyes at any moment. As Blitzer finished up his tour of the blobs and their movements, he said, "If you miss any of this you can see it later on 'The Daily Show' with Jon Stewart when he ruthlessly mocks you."
"Pretty cool, don't you think?" Blitzer said.
"Uh...yes!" Cooper said hesitatingly. "I hope the Weebles are going to show up throughout the evening."