Monday, February 06, 2012 3:08:21 PM
Mitt Romney and Republicans lose Nevada
Romney speaks after Nevada caucuses
Pictured above: everyone in Nevada excited about Romney. Literally.
So how can Mitt Romneybot win his first majority vote in the nomination contest, and still come out a loser? Let's do some math.
Romney won 50.1 percent of 32,894 votes cast.
There are 471,292 registered Republicans in Nevada.
That means that Romney garnered the support of 3.5 percent of them. Not exactly lighting it up, is he?
It wasn't just Romney who generated no excitement in Nevada. The entire GOP field was a disaster.
Mitt Romney’s easy victory in Nevada’s Republican presidential caucuses might, in the long run, be less important than the fact that a surprising number of Republicans who could have participated Saturday chose to stay home.
Republicans’ disappointing turnout foreshadows difficulty energizing GOP voters in Nevada, a key swing state in November’s general election.
Turnout was unlikely to match 2008, when 44,000 Republicans participated in Nevada’s caucuses.
Only 33,000 votes cast during what is still a competitive primary process is just brutal for a state party decimated in recent years by the likes of Sharrrrrron Angle and Sue "Chicken Lady" Lowden. Their incompetence is stark, like letting an unpopular Sen. Harry Reid survive in the blowout 2010 GOP wave year. And now, they can't even muster up a base level of enthusiasm for their presidential field.
Take out Ron Paul's 6,175 votes and the GOP's results look even worse. The Paulbots won't be flocking to Romney come November. Nevada won't be as close as people think it will be.
If you want to know what real excitement looks like, take a gander at Democratic turnout in 2008: 116,000.
Indeed, the only thing funnier than the lack of give-a-fuck from Nevada Republicans is the spin from the party leadership:
Buell blamed Saturday’s low turnout on the difficult caucus process and the sour experience voters had in 2008, when there were fewer caucus locations, long lines and a lack of volunteers.
He also blamed nice weather and the Super Bowl — people were skiing or stocking up on food for the big game.
Check out the next line, a beautiful smackdown from the writer penning the piece:
Low turnout is usually blamed on bad weather.
Yeah, it wasn't the weather. Or the Super Bowl that took place the next day. It was Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul. And to be fair, would you be excited if you were a Republican, and those were your options?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/06/1062249/-Mitt-Romney-and-Republicans-loseNevada?via=blog_1
Romney speaks after Nevada caucuses
Pictured above: everyone in Nevada excited about Romney. Literally.
So how can Mitt Romneybot win his first majority vote in the nomination contest, and still come out a loser? Let's do some math.
Romney won 50.1 percent of 32,894 votes cast.
There are 471,292 registered Republicans in Nevada.
That means that Romney garnered the support of 3.5 percent of them. Not exactly lighting it up, is he?
It wasn't just Romney who generated no excitement in Nevada. The entire GOP field was a disaster.
Mitt Romney’s easy victory in Nevada’s Republican presidential caucuses might, in the long run, be less important than the fact that a surprising number of Republicans who could have participated Saturday chose to stay home.
Republicans’ disappointing turnout foreshadows difficulty energizing GOP voters in Nevada, a key swing state in November’s general election.
Turnout was unlikely to match 2008, when 44,000 Republicans participated in Nevada’s caucuses.
Only 33,000 votes cast during what is still a competitive primary process is just brutal for a state party decimated in recent years by the likes of Sharrrrrron Angle and Sue "Chicken Lady" Lowden. Their incompetence is stark, like letting an unpopular Sen. Harry Reid survive in the blowout 2010 GOP wave year. And now, they can't even muster up a base level of enthusiasm for their presidential field.
Take out Ron Paul's 6,175 votes and the GOP's results look even worse. The Paulbots won't be flocking to Romney come November. Nevada won't be as close as people think it will be.
If you want to know what real excitement looks like, take a gander at Democratic turnout in 2008: 116,000.
Indeed, the only thing funnier than the lack of give-a-fuck from Nevada Republicans is the spin from the party leadership:
Buell blamed Saturday’s low turnout on the difficult caucus process and the sour experience voters had in 2008, when there were fewer caucus locations, long lines and a lack of volunteers.
He also blamed nice weather and the Super Bowl — people were skiing or stocking up on food for the big game.
Check out the next line, a beautiful smackdown from the writer penning the piece:
Low turnout is usually blamed on bad weather.
Yeah, it wasn't the weather. Or the Super Bowl that took place the next day. It was Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul. And to be fair, would you be excited if you were a Republican, and those were your options?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/06/1062249/-Mitt-Romney-and-Republicans-loseNevada?via=blog_1
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
