Sunday, January 29, 2012

The Immigration Conundrum


The Letter 'I' usually refers to Iran or Israel in an American Presidential Race. But in this election race, it's been immigration, and how to handle the millions of undocumented immigrants who reside in the U.S. illegally, that has tripped up Republican presidential candidates seeking their party's nomination.


The leading Republican contenders are being forced to balance hawkish posturing on immigration in the Republican primary against maintaining their electability against President Obama, whose campaign is all-too-happy to highlight the GOP candidates’ effort to outflank each other.

It’s been Mitt Romney who has used immigration the most against fellow candidates, particularly Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, each of whom Romney has portrayed as soft on illegal immigration.

In Thursday's GOP debate, Romney defended his tough views on immigration and blasted Gingrich's efforts to label him as anti-immigrant. But Romney's defense was primarily focused on his support for legal immigration. When it comes to those crossing the border illegally, Romney's position remains one of enforcement-only.

Throughout the presidential campaign, he has run to the right of the GOP field: decrying the possibility of amnesty and services that benefit illegal immigrants; calling for a veto of the Dream Act, a measure that would provide citizenship to illegal immigrants who have served in the military or attend college; spoken of a "high-tech fence" along the Mexican border; and now has floated unusual the proposal that illegal immigrants should "self-deport."

Obama's Track record on Immigration

Obama's track record on immigration has hardly been what it promised to be. Since taking office, enforcement of immigration laws has significantly ramped up. In all, more than 1.1 million illegal residents have been deported since Obama took office, the highest level of deportations in 60 years. Last year alone, 400,000 illegal immigrants were sent home -- a record high. In fact, Obama is on pace to deport more illegal immigrants in one term than the previous president did in two.

While Obama recently raised the issue of immigration reform in his State of the Union address, he has had little success in crafting a legislative path to reform . Rather, the instrumental effect of his policies has been to make life much more difficult for illegal immigrants.

Still, none of this has stopped the remaining Republican candidates from falling over themselves to blast the president's soft stance. Each of them have pledged that if they are elected president, the border will be more secure, enforcement will be stepped up, and citizenship for illegal immigrants will not be part of the equation.


Mohit Dayal

Saturday, January 28, 2012

The Presidential Debate - Florida


Newt Gingrich might have charged into Florida this week with a head of steam, hoping to capitalize on his victory in South Carolina and attack competitor Mitt Romney on immigration and his somewhat exotic personal finances, but things are looking grim for him.


Newt Gingrich seemed to falter at a debate on Thursday night when pressed by both Romney and moderator Wolf Blitzer to defend his attacks regarding Mitt Romney's Swiss Accounts.

On the other hand, Romney delivered his most aggressive debate performance of the campaign in Jacksonville on Thursday, rebuking Gingrich for criticizing his wealth. The former Massachusetts governor called it “repulsive” that Gingrich accused him of being “anti-immigrant.” Romney also mocked Gingrich’s proposal to colonize the moon.

Thanks to his weak performances and some seemingly off-topic policy proposals -- more on that in a moment -- Gingrich is losing some momentum ahead of Tuesday's key Florida primary. The latest RealClearPolitics average has Romney back in the lead by 7 percent.


Mohit Dayal

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

And then there were three…


Newt shows his critics "the finger" :)

What a week this has been !!!! A huge week indeed !!!! Mitt Romney, considered the Republican frontrunner for the Presidential Elections, was trounced convincingly by a man who failed to come in the top-3 in the last two primaries held at Iowa and New Hampshire. Newt Gingrich vanquished Mitt Romney by nearly 13 percentage points. The final scores as as follows:

2012
Candidate
Percentage of Votes
Newt Gingrich
40.4%
Mitt Romney
27.8%
Rick Santorum
17%
Ron Paul
13%

And the delegate count (after modifying the Iowa delegate count to include the latest results) is as follows:

2012
Candidate
IA
NH
SC
Total
Newt Gingrich
0
0
23
23
Mitt Romney
12
7
0
19
Rick Santorum
13
0
0
13
Ron Paul
0
3
0
3
Jon Huntsman*
0
2
0
2

*Jon Huntsman is not in the race anymore, but his delegates will still be tabulated as he had won them before his withdrawal

So we now have three different winners for the first three states – which is the first time it has happened in any of the Primaries !!!!

The Voting Pattern:

The voting pattern says a lot about what holds in the future for Newt Gingrich, the winner of the South Carolina. According to the New York Times’ Exit Poll, 44% of the Evangelican Christians *65% of the electorate) voted for Newt Gingrich. Significantly, 33% of the non-Evangelicans also voted for Newt Gingrich, just below 38% for Mitt Romney. Nearly 45% of the Tea-Party supporters also voted for Newt.

But what’s striking is that nearly 45% of the electorate wants to select a candidate who can defeat Barack Obama, and more than 51% of such people voted for Newt. Neatly 55% of the electorate made up their minds to vote only in the last few days before the polls, and of these 55%, nearly 44% of the people voted for Newt – that’s nearly a quarter of the total electorate which made up its mind at the last minute!!!! This can also be seen from the fact that nearly 31% of the Independent electorate voted for Gingrich, more than they did for Ron Paul !!!!

So is this the surge that Gingrich was looking for?

Newt Gingrich was looking down and out. He was behind Rick Santorum in both Iowa and New Hampshire, and was chided for asking Rick to withdraw his nomination so ensure he wins the anti-Romney bid! But then came Florida and Newt didn’t just win – he trounced almost every one of his opponents! But then, this win changes everything, well may be not everything. But the question now being asked is: “Could Gingrich actually win the GOP presidential nomination?” The latest Gallup's national daily tracking poll shows a virtual-tie between Gingrich and Romney nation-wide. Romney's lead over Gingrich has now narrowed to a single percentage point (29 to 28 percent), as shown by these polls.

But there is one other detail that we forgot to consider – the Tea Party movement. South Carolina is considered a hotbed of Tea Party support. Four of the state's freshmen congressmen and first-time Governor Nikki Haley were elected in 2010 based, in part, on their strong associations with the movement. More than a third of voters - 34 percent - in the South Carolina Republican primary strongly support the Tea Party movement. 
Meanwhile, President Obama reacts to Newt Gingrich's SC Win :D
Another detail which played a huge role in this win – the debates! Nearly two-thirds of South Carolina Republican primary voters - 65 percent - said the recent debates were one of the most important factors in deciding whom to support, with 13 percent saying it was the single most important factor. Of those voters who said the debates were one of the most important factors in their decision, a whopping 50 percent cast a ballot for Gingrich.

This is certainly a boost to Newt’s campaign and Mitt Romney is in for a fight if he wants to secure his nomination as early as possible. The latest Ramussen polls show Gingrich in a solid lead over Mitt Romney. But there are three things worth noting:

1. Nine percent (9%) of the voters are yet undecided.
3. Till mid-December, Florida heavily favoured Newt Gingrich over Mitt Romney, and now Gingrich leads the polls once again. This is a swing state, and votes can go either way.

The Huffington Post writes about this love-hate relationship that the Republican voters have with Mitt Romney.

Most Republicans have been reluctant to embrace Romney, even though most also consider him their most viable candidate, because they would prefer to find a more conservative champion… The issue is not that Republicans are flatly opposed to Romney. A CBS News/New York Times survey conducted just after the New Hampshire primary found that only 10 percent of Republicans nationwide could not support Romney, but only 28 percent were ready to support him "enthusiastically." The rest could back Romney only "with reservations" or "because he is the Republican party nominee" (59 percent).

Last heard, Mitt Romney did well in the first debate at Florida, while Newt Gingrich stumbled. Mitt Romney also released his tax records, which actually reveal nothing more than what they ere expected to reveal. It was the debate that helped Newt spice up his campaign. Let’s see how long he lasts in this race.

Note: Voting in the South Carolina Republican Primary is limited to registered Republicans only, meaning the electorate might be composed of the more conservative voters that fueled Gingrich's win in South Carolina. Gingrich is hoping that twin victories in South Carolina and Florida would decimate the aura of inevitability Romney built around his campaign.

Varun Reddy.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Analysis of the 2nd SC Presidential Debate...


Since this was the first debate I’d seen for the 2012 campaign, it was a good experience. I had not seen Michelle Bachmann or Rick Perry speak in a debate, but I did see them speak on TV during and after the Iowa caucuses, and they were not impressive from any angle. I was hoping for something better in this debate, something that would prove that one of these candidates had it in him to beat the incumbent President on D-day.

This state could well be the game-
changer in this election !!
The debate was far from striking. Only two candidates, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, spoke with enough calm and conviction that befits a President. Rick Santorum looked utterly helpless; his personality is not made for debates and speeches I guess. Newt Gingrich made a fiery start, but could not sustain the momentum throughout the debate. Here are the pros and cons of each candidate, based on what I’d seen in the debate, and on what I’ve read about them before:

Mitt Romney:

Pros:
Ø  Skilled at debates, knows how to turn every point into his favour (as was evident in this debate)
Ø  Has served as a Governor of a predominantly Democrat state (Massachusetts) and was highly praised for his leadership
Ø  Enjoys a front-runner status after coming 2nd in the 2008 primaries
Ø  Has a pan-American appeal; leads National polls conducted by various sources
Ø  Might be able to attract moderate votes using his past-record

Cons:
Ø  Perceived as a Wall-Street President, because of his previous work at Bain Capital
Ø  Not that appealing to the traditional conservative base
Ø  Has not yet released his taxes, raising unnecessary suspicions

Rick Santorum:

Pros:
Ø  He is very conservative, and has a solid conservative background. His mild-natured personality can be appealing to the traditional conservative base
Ø  He has been a long-serving senator and hence has a record to talk about
Ø  He is quite young and does not portray a negative attitude
Ø  He has won the Iowa caucuses (by a very close margin though)

Cons:
Ø  He cannot attract the moderates and the independents, if he wins the Republican nomination. Obama would have a easy time defeating him
Ø  His mild-natured face doesn’t make him look good when he tries to speak forcefully
Ø  He lacks conviction, and thinks that his conservative credentials are enough to win

Newt Gingrich:

Pros:
Ø  Enjoys good support among members of his own party
Ø  Can expect endorsements from many political quarters once he wins a few states
Ø  Solid Republican Track record in the Congress; Former Speaker and Current Chief Whip
Ø  Pan-American appeal

Cons:                                                       
Ø  Although he is appealing to the conservative base, he has a weak family history to show (2 divorces) which might play a big role if he is nominated to face Obama
Ø  He has not put on a good showing so far (4th in Iowa and New Hampshire) and desperately needs a win to get the desired momentum
Ø  His record can be easily attacked as he has been a Washington-guy for most of his life
Ø  Temperamental and annoying (totally personal opinion)

Ron Paul:

Pros:
Ø  Consistent track record – with no change in ideals and position over many years
Ø  Long-serving member of the US Congress
Ø  Strong grassroots campaign (similar to that of Obama in the 2008 elections)
Ø  Huge fan following among the youth in spite of his age
Ø  Legally sound, uses the constitution as the basis of all his arguments
Ø  Will be able to attract the independent voters to a great extent, which could be a game changer in case he is nominated (or as a VP candidate)

Cons:
Ø  A Libertarian Radical who wants to shake up the system
Ø  Lacks appeal among the traditional conservative base
Ø  Lacks appeal among core-Republican voters as his ideas are less Republican and more Libertarian in nature
Ø  Age could be a major issue if he is nominated as a Republican Candidate, even though is as fit as a fiddle (Age was a major issue in 2008)
Ø  Has a limited yet consistent Pan-American appeal

I tried to add as many pros and cons as I could, to make the post seen as fair as possible. As the race is just two states old, the next state will play a vital role in deciding who goes on and who quits. Two states, two people quit. Hoping for another good news after South Carolina :)

Varun Reddy.

Friday, January 20, 2012

The 2nd South Carolina Republican Presidential Debate


One of them will contest B.H. Obama
in November, 2012 :)

The 2nd South Carolina Republican Presidential Debate was the first Presidential Debate that I happened to see live on TV. Since CNN is the only channel that airs these debates on my cable network, I have to be content with watching these debates only on CNN. The schedule for the Presidential Debates is given in detail at the following link. The link also gives you the video footage of the past Presidential Debates, in case one is interested in them.

The debate was quite interesting. For one, it consisted of just 4 candidates, meaning more time was given for each candidate to speak and air his views. The debate also saw a lot of infighting among the candidates, although in a controlled manner. I will try to give a recap of the debate, as it happened, below. Please note: I was typing while the candidates were speaking J Hard to do that in the Delhi cold when you cannot afford a heater in your hall-room J Here is my analysis of the debate:

The fiery start: ABC News had aired an interview of Newt Gingrich’s former wife, wherein she said that in 1999, Newt Gingrich told her “accept an open relationship”. CNN asked him about this, and Gingrich took it as a personal attack, and lashed out at the CNN cast and crew. He vehemently denied the charges, and said that this was not a topic to start a Presidential Debate with. Paul joined says that while talking about corporate influence in Govt. they forget the influence they have in the Media. It was ABC news that had released the Newt story, but since CNN decided to mention it too, Newt lashed out at CNN staff and anchor too.

On the question of how to rebuild the economy, there was the usual rhetoric, with a mention about Gingrich’s earlier attack on Romney’s record at Bain Capital. Romney was given a chance to explain his claim of how he helped create 120k jobs.

On support for veterans, Romney mentioned what was done in his own state, Ron Paul spoke well on what is wrong with the military now, Gingrich put some good points, and Santorum piggy-backed the rest of the candidates’ points.

On Obamacare, Romney wanted to totally repeal it and give people a chance to have their own insurance, and wanted Healthcare to be run like a market. Gingrich supported Romney’s stand and also attacked Obama. Santorum mentioned Rommneycare and put forth “facts” about the premiums from the state of M.A. and tells Romney that Obama will attack him on those points. He also took on Newt Gingrich in a similar way. Romney responded that the costs in M.A. were higher even before the law came into effect, and that 92% already had insurance. Santorum responded that most of the 92% had Medicare / Medicaid – to which Romney replied that Medicaid is a federal mandate and a joint program funded by both the state and the centre, and that he wanted to give entire power to the states.

Newt Gingrich then talked about his being the Chief Whip of the house who opposed the Obamacare to the core and got the core support from his party. Santorum then said that Newt supported the core basis of it for 10 years. Newt admitted that he was wrong, and that he finally figured it out. Rick asked if it took him 10 years to figure that out. Meanwhile, Ron Paul finally gets to speak – he mentions his credentials as a doctor. He said Rick Santorum supported prescription drug programs which actually expands Government control. He said we must divert money from overseas spending to Medical support for those who need it. He also said that Government cannot take care of everyone and everybody; it can only take care of those who really need it.

Rick Santorum says it is worrisome that Newt Gingrich is suggesting that he get out of the race, even though Newt came below him in both the races so far. Newt talked about his history and on how he helped build the party etc. Santorum attacked him back saying he did work for himself and not for the country. Newt defends his record here. Mitt Romney says he is outside Washington unlike the 3 people on the stage that spent their lives in Washington. He knows how the economy works. Now here, Newt made a blunder saying that it was he, as a legislator, who made the rules under which Mitt Romney worked and made profits. Romney says, “You were speaker for 4 years, I was a businessman for 25 years”, which got a huge uproar from the crowd.

On releasing tax records, Paul doesn’t want to show his tax records because he is quite embarrassed about it, as it would be very less compared to that of the other candidates. Romney said he will release it in April, and that the Democrats will attack him on that. The CNN moderator asked why not release the past records at least. Mitt said he wants a single attack and single discussion, not repeated attacks, and hence will release once this years’ records are done. Newt has released his taxes already. Rick Santorum said he does his own taxes, and that all records are at his home, and that he will release his taxes once he is home(a very poor PJ). Romney says he is not going to apologise for being a successful man, and that he did not inherit his parent’s money.

On productivity: Nothing interesting per se.

On SOPA: Newt favours freedom, says it’s a wrong thing to do to curb freedom. Romney said that SOPA would totally disrupt the internet, and to use other laws to curb piracy. Rick said he won’t support the law, but also cautions the Internet is not a free zone and that he would not support piracy. SOPA goes too far, but IP rights should be respected. Ron Paul mentioned he was first Republican to sign a petition along with the Democrats to repeal this law.

If you had to change one thing and do it again, what would you do?

Newt sticks to the Internet point. Mitt jokes about getting 25 votes in Iowa. He then says that anyone on the stage can be better president than what Obama is. Santorum won’t change anything as he is happy so far. Paul will continue to do what he has always done, but says he would want to speak slower and with more conviction.

On Illegal Aliens:

Newt: First control the border. Get a bill by 2014. Favours English as the official language of the Govt. Modernize visas as it’s easy to get them illegally. Wants easier deportation laws. Put enormous economic sanction on companies that hire them. Won’t deport people who are living in USA for a long long time.

Mitt: Similar to what Newt says. No preferential pathway. Go home and apply for citizenship like everyone else (same line as Newt). Legally of course. They will be given some time to put their affairs in place before going back home.

Rick: I am an immigrant. Immigration is at the heart of the country. But illegal immigration is bad. Romney said a few years ago that they should be given a path to citizenship. So did Newt. That’s like Obama-speak. Respect and obey laws. We cant treat non-Americans and Americans differently.

Mitt: My position is the same as what it was 4 years ago. We are a party of legal immigration.

Ron Paul: I am not soft on the issue of illegal immigration too. But look at the incentives for people to come. Even Americans don’t want to take up a low paying job. We need more resources for legal immigration. Quit defending other’s borders and take care of our own borders.

Abortion issue:

Newt: Talks about Romney’s past and on how after he became pro-life he supported abortion in Romneycare.

Mitt: Romneycare has no mention of Abortion, it was MA courts that did it. We don’t ask people about their pro-life credentials before making them judges. I was a pro-life Governor and a pro-life individual. I don’t like people questioning my integrity.

Rick: I have not just whispered pro life, I have done it on the road as well. He said Newt said keep social issues outside 2010 elections.

Romney: It’s not easy to be profile, I admire Rick Santorum. Romney mentioned all the laws that he vetoed. He said it was tough. He said M.A. pro-life association supported my Governor campaign / Appreciated Ricks record and hopes he reciprocate.

Paul was missed and people wanted him to speak! He said the Law won’t correct the morality of the people, which is basic problem. You need the Government out of that business.

Rick: Paul, you are indirectly referring to me. Paul has right to life voting record of 50%.

Paul (to Rick): You are overly sensitive I wasn’t even thinking about you. Abortion is a violent act. Every other violent act is under state! And don’t say I am not pro life because of the way I opposed laws and how I want the laws to be.

Last Question – Make your case for SC:

Paul: You are known for your respect for Liberty. Liberty benefits every state. Everyone is talking about the debt now. I want to cut a trillion dollars from budget first. Make sure I bring back money.

Newt: Thanks everyone there, includes CNN. Imperative to defeat Barack Obama, calls him most dangerous president of our lifetime. Also we need to have a victory in senate and house. We need a deep change in Washington.

Mitt: Agrees with Ron Paul and Newt. Talks about founding fathers etc. Says Obama is changing the very nature of America. Making us a entitlement society. We need to return to principles on which country is founded. Restore values. Keep America shining.

Rick: I am a total conservative who knows important issues of the day, am the best to take on Obama. I have defeated a democratic incumbent. I come from working class, not just with a plan but also with a character. You don’t need to settle for a moderate.

Varun Reddy.

Perry drops out, and Iowa's changed results,,,


We just wish he doesn't come
back in 2016 - Good riddance!
1) Barely 12 hours before the 2nd South Carolina Republican Presidential Debate, Rick Perry withdrew his campaign and announced his support for Newt Gingrich. This news is surely a boost to Newt Gingrich’s sagging campaign, which has failed to pick up any momentum in the first two states of Iowa and New Hampshire, both states where he has fared below the other conservative candidate Rick Santorum.

2) The Iowa results have changed, thanks to a recount. Now Rick Santorum leads Mitt Romney in Iowa by 34 votes, but 8 precincts have not yet reported their recount results. So the Republican Committee had declared the result as a tie. But in the latest news, the Party has officially declared Rick Santorum as the winner of the Iowa Caucuses.

Varun Reddy.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Huntsman withdraws his campaign, endorses Romney...


Hi friends

Jon Huntsman, one of the top-6 Republican candidates, announced his decision to withdraw from the Presidential Race, a few days ago. He did not campaign in Iowa, and had staked virtually everything on making a strong showing in New Hampshire. The breakout moment that eluded him, and his poor showing (a 3rd place) did not do good to enhance his image as a candidate likely to beat President Obama.
Jon Huntsman for 2016?
 Let's pray he makes a comeback!

“The race has degenerated into an onslaught of negative and personal attacks not worthy of the American people,” Huntsman said at a press conference in Myrtle Beach, S.C. “I call on each campaign to cease attacking each other and instead talk directly to the American people about how our conservative ideas will create American jobs.” His withdrawal from the race came the morning after he received an endorsement from The State, the largest newspaper in South Carolina. They called Mr Huntsman and Mr Romney the "two sensible, experienced grown-ups in the race'', but said the former ambassador was "more principled" and offered "a significantly more important message''.

And so he did. When he was criticized by Romney himself for working for the Obama Administration as the Ambassador to China, he replied "Yes, under a Democrat. Like my two sons are doing in the United States Navy. They're not asking what political affiliation the president is.I will always put my country first." - the last two words became the campaign slogan for Jon. Unfortunately, that does not resonate well with the Republican Base.

A brief look at his profile shows that Jon Huntsman was a very different Republican Candidate, one of the good guys, one of the sane guys. In the 1990s, he became the youngest head of a US diplomatic mission for a century when he was appointed ambassador in Singapore. He was attacked for reasons that did not relate to his policy. He was called a “stooge” of the Obama administration and “The Manchurian Candidate” because of his being a former ambassador to China, a position to which he was appointed by none other than President Obama. An ambassador to every country works for the parent country, not any given administration. All federal employees owe their loyalty to the people, not the guy who hires or appoints them (who after all is there on our behalf). This stint also showed him as one of the most sensible candidates (in the last 2-3 elections) on U.S. foreign policy, including toward Asia. While Newt Gingrich imagined the Palestinians to be an “invented people” and Rick Santorum wanted to bomb Iran as soon as possible, Huntsman took a more moderate approach, which perhaps proved to be his undoing. He was criticised for adopting children from India and China, and bringing them up in their original religions. As the Diplomat put it quite clearly, “It was probably this refusal to pander to the Republican base that meant he failed to gain any traction in the primaries”. Perhaps the race had one Mormon too many.

The Atlantic blames the conservative media and Jon’s own campaign strategies for Huntsman’s withdrawal. He, quite simply, was a pragmatist. Although he stood out from the rest of the Republican presidential pack as an intelligent voice of reason, diplomacy and international expertise, these were simply the wrong times for him to have stood for the President of the USA. As the Diplomat put it, his withdrawal cuts serious by half. Jon Huntsman was popular enough with independents and even with some liberals. Had he been nominated, he would have given President Obama some serious competition, thanks to his record.

What next?
  
His exit from the race leaves five candidates remaining: Rick Santorum, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich as the three main candidates chasing Romney's lead, and Rick Perry trailing in the polls. Polls show that even South Carolina's (whose primary is scheduled for the 21st of this month) conservative vote has not yet settled on one particular candidate (just like the ones in Iowa and New Hampshire).

Gingrich, Santorum and Perry have all suggested that Romney's campaign is benefiting from the fractured social conservative support base. With the departure of Jon Huntsman, the “Anybody-But-Mitt” movement looks more toothless right now. And with Santorum, Perry and Gingrich refusing to budge, it would take some real miracle to stop Mitt Romney’s nomination.

Note: There is a very interesting article that came in the BBC News titled “Are the Republican candidates all crazy?”, a question that does come to mind when you think about Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry in detail. One of the reasons mentioned was that most of the serious candidates were ducking the fight in 2012, not willing to inherit an economy that would take years to recover. Perhaps it was wrong time for Huntsman too, he would have made a fine President I guess. I wanted to write about this too, but then the article serves its purpose well enough hence sharing it.

Varun Reddy.

Sunday, January 15, 2012

Romney Wins New Hampshire !!!

Hi friends

As most of you must now be aware of, Mitt Romney has won the New Hampshire primaries, and with a much wider margin as compared to his win at Iowa. Here are the results:

2012
2008
Candidate
Percentage of Votes
Candidate
Percentage of Votes
Mitt Romney
39.3%
John McCain
37%
Ron Paul
22.9%
Mitt Romney
31%
Jon Huntsman
16.9%
Mike Huckabee
11%
Rick Santorum
9.38%
Rudy Giuliani
9%
Newt Gingrich
9.41%
Ron Paul
8%
Rick Perry
0.7%
Fred Thompson
1%

Huntsman put everything at stake
on NH, and came a distant 3rd
Mitt Romney winning the election was not a surprise at all – he was expected to do so. But the margin with which he won the election reflects the mood of the electorate. Compared to the results of 2008, Mitt Romney has increased his shared by just 9% - much less than what he was expected to do this year. However, the biggest surprise has been that of Ron Paul – coming 2nd with 22.9% of the votes. Jon Huntsman, who did not participate in the Iowa caucuses, managed to come in 3rd, in spite of winning the endorsement of many of the state’s newspapers as being a “candidate whose views are solidly conservative”.

The way it’s been going so far in the first two elections, it is clear that Mitt Romney has struggled to rally the majority of Republicans behind his candidacy. What the results left unclear, however, is who might emerge as the conservative alternative to Romney. However, if the conservative vote continues to be divided between Huntsman, Gingrich and Santorum, then Mr. Romney could find his march to the nomination almost guaranteed.

Mitt Romney’s New Hampshire win makes him the first non-incumbent Republican to win the first two contests in the modern nominating calendar.

Delegate Tally:

The delegate tally of the Iowa Caucuses is not yet final. However, we will consider the date of the Associated Press, the oldest news agency in the USA, as the one being most accurate. Since New Hampshire has a proportional-delegate primary, the state's 12 national delegates will be allocated proportionally among the candidates with more than 10% of the votes.

2012
Candidate
Iowa
New Hampshire
Mitt Romney
13
7
Ron Paul
0
3
Jon Huntsman
0
2
Newt Gingrich
0
0
Rick Santorum
12
0
Rick Perry
0
0

According to the Associated Press, the Iowa Republican system “puts a premium on getting the most votes in individual congressional districts. If a candidate's supporters can control a congressional district convention, they can choose national delegates and slate committee members who support their candidate.” Hencet Romney and Santorum, who each won two of Iowa's congressional districts, would win 13 and 12 delegates, respectively, assuming there are no changes in their support as the campaign continues. Although Paul ran a close third in the voting, he “was shut out of delegates because he didn't win any of Iowa's four congressional districts.” This projection by the AP is also used by the New York Times.

Voting Pattern:

The exit polls showed that nearly half the electorate in New Hampshire’s Republican primary defined themselves as independent (47 percent), while 48 percent said they were Republicans. Ron Paul won the independent vote with 31%, Mitt Romney took 27% and Jon Huntsman took 23% of their votes. Of the 13 percent of voters that said they’d never voted in a Republican primary before today, Ron Paul carried 37% of them.

Next Stop: South Carolina

The state of South Carolina could well be a testing state for Mitt Romney. Although many polls show him as a clear frontrunner there, a poor or moderate showing there would give his opponents enough fuel to attack him in the later stages of the election. However, a win could be helpful enough to seal the deal. Watch this space for more.

Varun Reddy.