Google Search

Showing posts with label Hampshire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hampshire. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

How Past New Hampshire Primaries Turned Out (ContributorNetwork)

The second great contest of the 2012 election cycle is the New Hampshire primary, scheduled for Jan 10. At hazard are 12 delegates for the Republican national convention, which will be distributed proportionally.

Past results of the New Hampshire primary had often negated the results of the Iowa caucus, which generally take place a week before.

2008 New Hampshire Primary -- The Republicans.

According to the New York Times, the winner of the 2008 contest on the Republican side was John McCain, which was surprising as Mitt Romney, who was a favorite son of a sort due to his coming from next door Massachusetts, had been expected to win. McCain, who went on the win the nomination, got just over 37 percent of the vote and seven delegates, Romney got just over 32 percent of the votes and four delegates. Mike Huckabee, who had won the Iowa caucus, took just 12 percent of the votes and one delegate.

2008 New Hampshire Primary -- The Democrats

According to the New York Times, then-Senator Hillary Clinton barely edged out then-Sen. Barack Obama, the winner of that year's Iowa caucus, with 39 percent and 36 percent of the vote. Each got nine delegates. John Edwards, who had been a senator, a 2004 presidential and vice presidential candidate, won about 17 percent of the vote and four delegates. Obama would eventually win the nomination and then the presidency.

2004 New Hampshire Primary

Since George W. Bush was the incumbent president, only the Democrats had a seriously contested primary. According to CNN, Sen. John Kerry, who was from next door Massachusetts, won with 38 percent of the votes and took 13 delegates. Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean came in second with 26 percent of the vote and took nine delegates. Kerry would eventually win the nomination.

2000 New Hampshire Primary -- The Democrats

According to US Gov Info, then-Vice President Al Gore, the eventual nominee, won the primary with 50 percent of the votes and took 13 delegates. Bill Bradley came in second with 46 percent of the votes and took nine delegates. Gore would be the Democratic nominee that year.

2000 New Hampshire Primary -- The Republicans

According to US Gov Info, Sen. John McCain shocked the presumed front-runner, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush, by winning the primary with 49 percent of the vote, taking nine delegates. Bush came in second with 30 percent of the vote and six delegates. Steve Forbes came in third with 13 percent of the vote and taking two delegates. Despite the unexpected defeat in New Hampshire, Bush would rally back to win the Republican nomination and then the presidency by the narrowest of margins.


View the original article here

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

New Hampshire Creates Big Expectations, if Little Drama, as GOP Race Wears On (Time.com)

In a final, frantic day of campaigning before Tuesday's New Hampshire primary, the six Republican presidential hopefuls sought to calibrate expectations for a race from which Mitt Romney's healthy lead has sapped much of the late drama.

Romney's New Hampshire lead has held firm, forcing his rivals to jockey for position with each other as the former Massachusetts governor coasts toward what is likely to be a comfortable victory. The race has tightened slightly in its closing week, but Romney boasts a double-digit lead in every poll, with 33% in Monday's daily Suffolk University tracking survey, a 13-point lead over Ron Paul, his nearest competitor. Rivals seized Monday on Romney's comment that he "likes being able to fire people" -- which, taken out of context, dovetails neatly into attacks on his record running Bain Capital -- but the barrage of criticism is almost certainly too late to jeopardize his edge in the Granite State. Romney doesn't need to win in a "landslide," as South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, a Romney surrogate, said this week. But an unexpected nail-biter could dampen the case for his inevitability. (Read "Romney Unscathed in Twin New Hampshire Debates.")

Behind Romney sits Ron Paul, who appears to have an inside track for second place. Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign chairman, told TIME that a "strong second" was the worst-case scenario for the Texas congressman, whose loyal band of followers fanned out across the state Monday to enumerate the merits of their candidate outside opponents' public events. Consecutive strong finishes would vault him into South Carolina and beyond. Paul will skip Florida, scrambling instead to rack up delegates in caucus states where his organizational power will be unmatched except by Romney.

With the top two slots crystallizing, the three-way battle for third place will likely be where the action is Tuesday. Rick Santorum, whose shoe-leather campaign spurred him to a virtual draw in Iowa, admitted Monday that he won't duplicate the feat in New Hampshire. "I'd be ecstatic with second place," Santorum told reporters outside a diner in Derry Monday afternoon, with a cocked eyebrow that suggested he knew it wouldn't happen.

"Governor Romney basically lives here and has spent, as all candidates hve, a lot of money on television. We didn't have it," Santorum said. "Look, Ron Paul has run here about 17 times. To do as well as him, I'm not sure that's possible, but if we do, it would be a huge win for us."

The admission was a stark reversal from the hopeful note Santorum and his staff struck in the aftermath of Iowa. Santorum boasted that he had assembled an underrated organization in New Hampshire over the course of more than 30 visits, and aides, including campaign manager Mike Biundo, a New Hampshire native, said the former Pennsylvania Senator's piety and economic populism would play well in a Northeastern state that is nearly 40% Catholic. (See top 10 political fashion statements.)

But after boosting expectations in New Hampshire, Santorum risks failing to meet them. His super PAC didn't run television ads to compete with the Romney and Paul spots inundating the airwaves. Instead he relied solely on the same retail formula that paid dividends in Iowa but was never likely to erase a massive deficit in New Hampshire. "Obviously there's a short run up" between Iowa and New Hampshire he said, by way of acknowledging the blueprint wouldn't pay off in time, particularly since questioners at his marathon town halls have zeroed in on Santorum's stance on social issues and muddled his larger message. The result has been an awkward straddle, which saw Santorum spend Sunday in the Palmetto State and left him soft-pedaling expectations for New Hampshire after an initial burst of enthusiasm.

Though advisers argue otherwise, Santorum may have been better served jetting straight to South Carolina, which will play a crucial role in determining which candidate -- if any -- can unite social conservatives and Tea Partyers to foil Romney. A top Santorum adviser says the decision to play hard in New Hampshire was partly a function of the campaign's strained finances: it made sense, says the aide, to capitalize on the momentum and free media afforded by the pack of national press descending on the Granite State, particularly since Santorum lacked the money to run television ads widely. The campaign also felt that any candidate vying to be the GOP's national standard-bearer had to prove their mettle on inhospitable terrain rather than cherry-picking his battles.

In the race for third, the only candidate finishing strong is Jon Huntsman, whose long tour of New Hampshire has yielded teeming crowds and an uptick in the polls during the primary's last days. Having tethered his hopes to a strong finish here, Huntsman has been coy about defining what constitutes success, allowing only that he must "beat market expectations" but refusing to define them. Nate Silver's latest projections Monday night gave Huntsman 16.5% of the vote, behind only Romney and Paul. That would almost certainly be enough to propel Huntsman forward in the race even if he's unlikely to repeat such success elsewhere barring an injection of cash from his billionaire father. (Read "In Final New Hampshire Push, Huntsman Embraces Underdog Role.")

Also in the mix is Newt Gingrich, who's conceded that he's unlikely to stymie Romney or spring an upset in New Hampshire and is looking ahead on the calendar. After finishing fourth in Iowa, a similar showing would be enough, Gingrich said, to carry him into the Jan. 21 primary in South Carolina, where a super PAC allied with his campaign has bought more than $3 million in ad time to bludgeon Romney. "We'll win South Carolina," Gingrich told ABC News on Monday. "That's my must-win state."

The same is true for the wounded Rick Perry, who skipped campaigning in New Hampshire to head straight for the Palmetto State, which he likened to his Alamo. Santorum also sees the South Carolina primary, which one of his advisers told TIME would be a "bloody" battle, as critical to his goal of emerging as the primary alternative to Romney. "We have to finish really well there," he said Monday. Particularly since his hopes for finishing really well in New Hampshire have faded.

With reporting by Katy Steinmetz

See TIME's Top 10 Everything of 2011.

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


View the original article here

What You Missed While Not Watching the Weekend's New Hampshire GOP Debates (Time.com)

-6 minutes. At St. Anselm College, ABC News asks former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman to come on stage first. Texas Gov. Rick Perry peeks from behind the curtain instead, followed by the others. Huntsman is last out. Typical. This is not a good sign. Reality shows end with the big double-episode season finales, so the GOP has scheduled back-to-back debates the weekend before the New Hampshire primary, with a 10-hour delay in the middle. There is a long way to go.

0 minutes. The opening montage sets the scene: "Can anybody overcome former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney?" says the voiceover. This is the question of the day. "Tonight we put them all to the test."

2 minutes. But the test is really easy. The first question for Romney: "We just saw 200,000 new jobs created last month, and there are optimists who say this is the signal that this economy is finally turning around. Are you with those optimists?" This is like asking a veterinarian if puppies are cute. "I'm an optimist," says Romney, before pivoting to his stump speech. Barack Obama is bad, etc.

4 minutes. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum is prodded to repeat his claim that the country does not need a manager or CEO like Romney as President. Santorum does, saying he is better because he "managed major pieces of legislation through the House and through the Senate." Catch that? Santorum is a manager too, for just about the only institution less popular than corporations: Congress. Woo. Yipee. (See "What You Missed While Not Watching the Final Iowa Debate.")

5 minutes. Romney's tie is covered with a pattern of fish hooks. Not clear why. But he doesn't let Santorum snag him. Romney's response has the words "lead" or "leadership" seven times.

7 minutes. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich gets a turn to hook a Romney catch. He is asked about a video being hocked by a super PAC supporting him that calls Romney's business record "a story of greed." Gingrich won't attack. He says people should watch the video and read recent coverage critical of Romney in the New York Times. "If it's factually accurate, it raises questions." For the first time in 14 debates, Gingrich is not pretending to know more than everyone else. Suspicious.

8 minutes. Romney says that "net-net" his work at Bain Capital produced more jobs than it destroyed. Definitely a fishing theme here.

10 minutes. Huntsman gets to take the test. Another softball. "Should Republicans worry" about the attacks on Romney's business record? It's a perfect set up. But Huntsman can't swing. He reverts to the passive voice. "Well, it's part of his record, and therefore, it's going to be talked about," Huntsman says, before going on about his own "private sector experience."

12 minutes. This gives Romney another chance to repeat his stump speech about how he is good, the private sector is good, and Obama is bad. Debate prep must have been simple for Romney. Think Pavlov's dog. Whatever they say, you just repeat your stump speech. Bell rings, stump speech. Ding-a-ling. Ding-a-ling. Stump speech.

13 minutes. The moderators give up on hooking big fish Romney. They ask Texas Rep. Ron Paul to attack Santorum again for being "a corrupt corporate lobbyist, a Washington insider with a record of betrayal," which Paul has said before, and says again. So begins a five-minute spat between the two men, which does not matter.

15 minutes. Santorum is not wearing enough makeup. His forehead is shiny.

17 minutes. Perry is still running for President, and he weighs in with a well-constructed answer about his opposition to Washington and how he is separated from the rest of the field. It is exactly the kind of answer he needed to give ten debates ago, when huge numbers of people still wanted to believe in him. (See "What You Missed While Not Watching the GOP National-Security Debate.")

20 minutes. Huntsman is asked why he would be a better commander in chief than others on the stage. He says the word "gobbledygook." That is the only part of his answer that is memorable. The rest is a bunch of canned lines, like "Leadership matters to the American people."

21 minutes. Desperate to return to the test, the moderator asks, "Do you want to speak specifically about anybody on the stage?" "They can all speak for themselves," says Huntsman, who is now apparently running for a cabinet secretary post in the Romney administration.

22 minutes. "Governor Romney?" asks ABC's Diane Sawyer. Romney accurately points out that this is not really a question. So Sawyer asks him a question. But the question does not matter, because all Romney hears is the bell ringing. "Look," says Romney, "this is a failed presidency."

25 minutes. Perry is asked if it matters that he has served in the military, while others have not. The answer is basically yes. Then Paul and Gingrich start arguing about whether Gingrich is a "chicken hawk" for never having served. "The fact is, I never asked for deferment. I was married with a child. It was never a question," says Gingrich of the Vietnam War. "When I was drafted, I was married and had two kids, and I went," says Paul. "I wasn't eligible for the draft," Gingrich responds. Different ages. Different wars. Different rules.

30 minutes. Paul is asked about the old racist newsletter he used to publish. Paul says he didn't write the newsletter, and that he loves Martin Luther King, Jr. "He practiced the libertarian principle of peaceful resistance and peaceful civil disobedience, as did Rosa Parks," says Paul. Paul did vote to establish Martin Luther King Day. His newsletter called it "Hate whitey day."

32 minutes. With that, a commercial break. Remember. This is a double feature. A long way to go. If you pop the popcorn now, it will be stale at the end. So far, Romney's ding-a-ling strategy is dominant.

38 minutes. Clearly desperate, moderator George Stephanopoulos swings for the fences. He asks Romney if the Supreme Court should be able to ban adults from using contraception, given Romney's refusal to embrace the right to privacy that outlaws bans on abortions. It's a head scratcher, dating to a court case you probably never heard about. Romney realizes that this is not just any ringing bell. So he refuses to answer. "George, this is an unusual topic that you're raising," he says. Then Romney utters one of the coolest quotes from any of the debates. "Contraception. It's working just fine. Just leave it alone." Put it in a position paper. Enshrine it in the party platform. It even fits on a bumper sticker.

43 minutes. Working contraception somehow logically leads to same sex relationships. The candidates must deal. Gingrich says he would give the rights that "are most intimately human between friends" to gay couples, like hospital visitation. But no marriage. Huntsman says he likes civil unions, and is "glad we are off the contraception discussion." Santorum says he opposes gay couples adopting children, but that should be a state issue, unlike marriage which should be a federal issue. Santorum also says he wants to nullify the gay marriages that have occurred. Sawyer prompts Romney to address the subject "in human terms." He says gays should be able to have "a contractual relationship" short of marriage. For Romney, contracts are very human. (See "What You Missed While Not Watching the CNBC 'Oops' Republican Debate.")

51 minutes. Stephanopoulos breaks the gay spell by asking Paul if he will commit to supporting the GOP nominee, or run as a third party candidate. Paul says he has no plans, but his options are open.

54 minutes. Huntsman says he would draw down the troops in Afghanistan in his first year as President. Romney says he would listen to "the commanders on the ground" and bring the troops home as soon as possible. History is at work. Romney's father, George, who lost his 1968 campaign for President after he questioned the judgment of the commanders on the ground in Vietnam. Mitt won't make same mistake.

56 minutes. Huntsman notices, goes George Romney in a big way. "But we also deferred to the commanders on the ground in about 1967, during the Vietnam War, and we didn't get very good advice then." Romney lets it pass.

57 minutes. Gingrich says "fundamentally" for perhaps the first time tonight. He calls for "a fundamentally new strategy in the region," but he has no time to elaborate. Santorum says he would stay as long as it took. Perry says he would send U.S. troops back into Iraq right away. "We're going to see Iran, in my opinion, move back in at literally the speed of light," Perry says, endowing the Iranians with physics-defying abilities that would make a nuclear weapon irrelevant.

66 minutes. Break. Still way too early to pop popcorn. Remember. This one will literally take 14 hours to finish.

72 minutes. We're back. Romney says he wants to rebuild aging infrastructure, which sounds almost like he agrees with Obama. So he adds that he is against "President Obama's social welfare state."

75 minutes. Gingrich agrees. More talk of infrastructure. Then talk of taxation. No new ground. Moderators try and fail to get something started. Paul says stuff like "Restore America to our freedoms." Romney says stuff like, "The people that have been hurt in the Obama economy are the people in the middle-class." Huntsman says, "We've got to stimulate some confidence in the creative class of this country." Perry says, "They want Washington out of their hair." It's like those individually packaged, low-calorie snacks they market to overweight, middle-aged office workers -- looks like chocolate, tastes like Styrofoam.

85 minutes. Romney notices that everyone is falling asleep. He interprets this as a bell. "The real issue is the vision for this country," he says. "This election is about the soul of America." Give him a bone. This passes for passing the test.

87 minutes. Gingrich is jolted to life. He cites the Wall Street Journal editorial board and calls Romney timid and more like Obama. "I do think there's a difference between a bold Reagan conservative model and a more establishment model that is a little more cautious about taking the kind of changes we need." This falls short of memorable. (See "What You Missed While Not Watching the Las Vegas GOP Debate.")

88 minutes. Santorum tries to come to life. He agrees that Romney is not bold, then objects to Romney's use of the phrase "middle class." "There are no classes in America. We are a country that don't allow for titles. We don't put people in classes," he says. None of this is true. But at least Santorum is trying.

89 minutes. Romney puts everyone back under his fishy spell. "This is really a campaign about the direction of the country," he says. Ding-a-ling.

91 minutes. Huntsman gets a question about what he would do in China, and like at other debates, he responds by saying it's a really complicated issue. "It's nonsense to think you can slap a tariff on China the first day that you're in office, as Governor Romney would like to do," he adds.

92 minutes. For some reason the bell does not ring for Romney. So he hits back, which is dangerous. "I'm sorry, Governor, you were, the last two years, implementing the policies of this administration in China. The rest of us on this stage were doing our best to get Republicans elected across the country and stop the policies of this President from being put forward," he says.

93 minutes. Huntsman goes native, and responds in Mandarin Chinese to Romney. It is not a phrase that can be transcribed in English easily. It sounds like music, sung from a mouth full of eels. The crowd is stunned. It is as if Huntsman was suddenly taken over by the spirit, as if he spoke in tongues. He comes back though, says again that Romney is risking a trade war.

94 minutes. Romney says Huntsman is wrong, and the last thing China wants is a trade war. In English.

95 minutes. Cut to last commercial, pre-intermission.

100 minutes. The silly final question. Another softball. "It's Saturday night, again, as we meet, so if you weren't here running for President, Governor Perry, what would you be doing on a Saturday night?" "I'd probably be at the shooting range," says Perry, killing it. Then it goes downhill. "I'd be watching the college championship basketball game," says Gingrich. There is no such thing. "Football game," Gingrich corrects, but he is still wrong. That game will be played Monday. It is a train wreck, and Santorum piles on. "I'd be doing the same thing with my family. We'd be huddled around, and we'd be watching the championship game," he says, even though the game doesn't exist. Romney says, "I'm afraid it's football. I love it," but since the NFL is playing tonight, he may actually know what he is saying. Paul says, "I'd probably read an economic textbook." Lovable. Huntsman goes last, and panders big. "I'd be on the phone with my two boys in the United States Navy, because they're a constant reminder of what is great about this nation and awesome about the emerging generation in this country." Really, it's a pretty embarrassing way to go out for all involved.

104 minutes. That's it. So far, this has been a bust. None of it will make a difference. Romney's ding-a-ling training dominates. Now it is intermission time. See you in 616 minutes, when the next debate starts.

720 minutes. We're back, on a different network, in a different town, on a different date, with the same six guys at 9 a.m. As is his habit, NBC News' David Gregory is speaking in sentence fragments to introduce with punch. "Small state. Big impact on the race," he says. "The candidates, the issues and your questions." That last part is about Facebook, which has partnered with this part of the debate, promising that elusive silliness known as interactivity on a national scale. "Candidates, good morning," Gregory says. They all respond, in unison, "Good morning." Coffee seems to have done them good.

721 minutes. The last 617 minutes -- it's true no one sleeps on the campaign trail -- have been filled with pointed criticism of the non-Romney candidates for failing to leave a mark on the frontrunner. Gregory is here to give everyone another chance. "Speaker Gingrich, why shouldn't Governor Romney be the nominee of this party?"

722 minutes. Game on. "I think that a bold Reagan conservative, with a very strong economic plan, is a lot more likely to succeed in that campaign than a relatively timid, Massachusetts moderate who even the Wall Street Journal said had an economic plan so timid it resembled Obama," he says. Now Gingrich is saying it himself, not just pointing to what a newspaper said. Gregory doubles down: Is Romney electable? Now Gingrich loses his nerve. "No, I don't believe he's unelectable," he says, with a triple negatives. Then Gregory holds up a Gingrich campaign flier. "It says very clearly, 'Romney is not electable'" Gregory says. Gingrich is caught. "I think he will have a very hard time getting elected," he manages.

723 minutes. Romney gets his chance to respond. Ding-a-ling. "We created more jobs in Massachusetts than Barack Obama's created in the entire country," Romney says. It's a questionable statement. Millions of jobs have been created under Obama. It's just that more were lost in the beginning on Obama's term. Romney's figure is net-net, as he would say.

726 minutes. Santorum gets his chance to make up for last night. "We want someone, when the time gets tough -- and it will in this election -- we want someone who's going to stand up and fight for the conservative principles, not bail out and not run, and not run to the left of Ted Kennedy," Santorum says. Gregory points out that Santorum praised Romney's "conservative principles" in 2008. Santorum is caught.

728 minutes. Romney tries to respond. Santorum talks over him. Romney barks, "It's still. It's still my time." Finally, we have a real debate. They bicker for a while. Romney says he's not a Washington insider. And that he will run for reelection if he is elected President. Romney talks over his time.

729 minutes. This gives Gingrich an entry. "Mitt, I realize the red light doesn't mean anything to you, because you're the frontrunner," he says. The crowd delivers the first real applause of the night. Gingrich is feeling good. "Can we drop a little bit of the pious baloney?" Gingrich continues. "The fact is, you ran in '94 and lost. That's why you weren't serving in the Senate with Rick Santorum." This is true. But who ever thought that you could point this out with the words "pious baloney"?

731 minutes. Romney is swimming a little here. The Pavlovian training has failed him. He gets defensive. "Mr. Speaker, citizenship has always been on my mind and -- and I happened to see my dad run for governor when he was 54-years-old. He had good advice to me. He said, Mitt, never get involved in politics if you have to win an election to pay a mortgage," Romney says. At first this sounds like a strong statement. But it also suggests that only the wealthy should run for office. So it's a mistake.

732 minutes. Ron Paul comes to Romney's rescue, by talking about TARP and overseas spending and the horribleness of President Obama.

733 minutes. Perry piles on, but instead of going after Romney, he tries to swipe the entire stage. "I look from here down to Rick Santorum I see insiders," he says from one end of the stage.

734 minutes. Huntsman gets a question about spending. But he too has slept on last night's disappointment. He has a pre-packaged attack against Romney over the swipe about Huntsman serving in China for the Obama Administration. (See Minute 92.) "He criticized me while he was out raising money for serving my country in China, yes, under a Democrat, like my two sons are doing in the United States Navy. They're not asking who -- what political affiliation the President is," Huntsman says. "I want to be very clear with the people here in New Hampshire and this country: I will always put my country first." "Country First" is John McCain's old slogan. It has a good track record in New Hampshire.

735 minutes. Romney has totally forgotten about Pavlov, the dog, the bell, his game plan. He digs himself deeper. "I think we serve our country first by standing for people who believe in conservative principles and doing everything in our power to promote an agenda that does not include President Obama's agenda," says Romney. It's not a statement he really means, since it would basically prevent conservatives from joining the U.S. military to fight in Afghanistan under Obama.

736 minutes. Huntsman has his best moment in 15 debates: "This nation is divided, David, because of attitudes like that," he says to the moderator. Again the crowd erupts in un-Romney cheers. Romney does not respond. He needs to think about the bell.

738 minutes. A discussion commences about the various programs that should be cut to reduce spending. The candidates generally agree on entitlements. Perry gets to revisit his most famous flub, this time remembering the three departments -- commerce, energy and education -- he wants to eliminate. Santorum gets to talk about reducing food stamps.

743 minutes. Commercial break. Things are going well. Maybe all debates should be Sunday morning debates.

748 minutes. We're back. Gregory asks a trick question: "Who knows more about the American economy, Grover Norquist or Warren Buffet?" It's a trick because the right answer, Buffett, would offend conservatives. And the wrong answer, Norquist, would undermine Romney's businessman sales pitch. Romney reverts to the royal we. "I'm not sure that we're going to choose from the two of them," he says.

750 minutes. More miscellany. Huntsman says again he is interested in a balanced approach to deficit reduction, even though he raised his hand at his first debate months ago to suggest otherwise. Gingrich talks about Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid. Romney brags about the Democratic legislature he found a way to get along with in Massachusetts. Paul defends his record in Congress of hardly ever getting anything done. Then Paul and Santorum get into another one of their periodic spats. Huntsman says he will restore trust in the country. Perry repeats that Republicans spent to much money during the Bush years. It is as if all the past debates had been put into a blender and spit back out.

762 minutes. Second commercial break. Now would be a great time to pop that popcorn.

765 minutes. A question about reductions in federal subsidies for home heating oil. Huntsman says it's a real issue. Paul doesn't want the government giving anyone cheap oil. Romney splits the baby and says send the money that is left to the states to better use it.

770 minutes. Gay time. Romney is asked about his 1994 promise to be a "voice in the Republican Party to foster anti-discrimination efforts." Romney says he has appointed lots of gay people to positions in Massachusetts. Then Santorum gets a couple questions, including one about what he would do if his son said he was gay. "I would love him as much as I did the second before he said it," Santorum says. "And I would try to do everything I can to be as good a father to him as possible." Good answer.

772 minutes. The candidates are asked why labor unions are good, which is like asking a Chicago Bears fan to praise Aaron Rodgers. Romney says they train workers well. Santorum says they can bring communities together.

776 minutes. Commercial break. Hope the popcorn is ready. You are really a trooper. Democracy should not be this trying. But it is.

780 minutes. We are back. Why is it that most of what matters in a debate either happens in the first 15 minutes or the last five? That's a rhetorical question. But there is a right answer: They are too long.

781 minutes. Gingrich is asked about an absurd comment that Romney made: That young people will have jobs if he gets elected, but not if Obama wins reelection. "I think that's a statement of fact," Gingrich says.

782 minutes. This gives Romney a chance to respond, once again, to the bell. "I don't blame him for the recession and for the decline," Romney says of Obama. "What I blame him for is having it go on so long and going so deep and having a recovery that's been so tepid."

783 minutes. The candidates talk about natural gas, the EPA, the motto of New Hampshire, the prescription drug benefit, power plant emissions, and other things, without making any news, or breaking any new ground.

792 minutes. Final break.

795 minutes. Home stretch. Gregory asks Gingrich and Romney to talk about the Super PACs supporting them. They are both asked to disown the PACs efforts, and both decline. Romney gets twisted up. "With regards to their ads, I haven't seen them. And, as you know, under the law, I can't direct their ads," he says of his own PAC. The second part is true. The first part is almost certainly not. A few moments later, Romney lays out the factual details of the ad he claims to have never seen. This is sort of damning. But really, who is paying attention at this point. It's about 10:30 a.m. on a Sunday morning, at the end of the 15th GOP presidential debate. Anyone not being paid to keep up with this stuff, who is still keeping up with this stuff, should get a prize.

804 minutes. It's over. It's done. 804 minutes later. You are free. Until next week in South Carolina, when it all starts again. And there is no prize.

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


View the original article here

Romney waits on New Hampshire voters (AP)

MANCHESTER, N.H. – Mitt Romney is waiting to see whether months of campaigning will pay off in New Hampshire's GOP presidential primary, which his team has always said is a must-win contest for him.

While his rivals planned visits to polling places Tuesday, Romney had no public events scheduled.

"You're going to make a statement tomorrow. Let's take it to the next state after New Hampshire," Romney told a raucous overflow crowd at a Bedford rally on Monday night. "Give me the boost I need!"

Romney, the former governor of neighboring Massachusetts, has led in polls here for months — in recent days by 20 percentage points or more. He's been pushing for an overwhelming victory as he looks to South Carolina, a state where the conservative GOP base was uncomfortable with him in 2008, and pushes to wrap up the nomination fight as quickly as possible.

His campaign aides had been most concerned about complacency among supporters, and they launched an intensive get-out-the-vote effort over the weekend, backed by hundreds of volunteers and hundreds of thousands of phone calls.

But Romney's final day of campaigning Monday was marred by comments he made about firing people, leading to attacks from Democrats and his GOP rivals alike. Huntsman and rivals Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry all blasted him as being out of touch.

Romney and his rivals are in many ways already looking to the first-in-the-South contest a little more than a week from now. Gingrich allies are spending millions to run ads attacking Romney's time heading Bain Capital, a venture capital investing firm.


View the original article here

Saturday, January 7, 2012

History of Winners of the Republican New Hampshire Primary (ContributorNetwork)

The New Hampshire Primary first became the famous first in the nation contest with the 1952 contest. The Republican contest has selected eight nominees and four presidents since that year through the 2008 contest.

The results were, according to the Primary New Hampshire Site:

1952 - General Dwight Eisenhower

General Eisenhower won this contest with 50.4 percent of the vote against Robert Taft who took 38.7 percent. Eisenhower, who did no campaigning in the state, thanks to his being commanding general of NATO at the time, went on to win the nomination and the election.

1960 - Vice President Richard Nixon

Nixon took the contest with an overwhelming 89.3 percent of the vote. Nelson Rockefeller, then governor of New York, took 3.8 percent of the vote. Nixon went on to win the nomination but was defeated by then Senator John F. Kennedy narrowly in the general election.

1964 - Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge

Ambassador Lodge, then representing the United States in South Vietnam, was a surprise write in victor with 35.5 percent of the vote. Senator Barry Goldwater, Governor Nelson Rockefeller, and former Vice President Richard Nixon followed with 22.3 percent, 21 percent, and 16.8 percent of the vote respectively. Goldwater went on to win the nomination but was handily defeated by President Lyndon Johnson in the general election.

1968 - Nixon

Nixon won the primary decisively with 77.6 percent of the vote with Rockefeller winning 10.8 percent. Nixon went on to be the nominee and won the general election narrowly against then Vice President Hubert Humphrey.

1976 - President Gerald Ford

President Ford fought off a stiff challenge against then former Gov. Ronald Reagan, taking 49.4 percent of the vote against Reagan's 48 percent. Ford went on to be the nominee, but lost narrowly against Jimmy Carter.

1980 - Former California Gov. Ronald Reagan

Reagan won this time around with 49.6 percent of the vote. George W. Bush, Senator Howard Baker, and Rep. John Anderson followed with 22.7 percent, 12.1 percent, and 9.8 percent respectively. Reagan went on to win the nomination and the general election.

1988 - Vice President George H. W. Bush

Bush won the primary this time around with 37.8 percent. Senator Bob Dole, Rep, Jack Kemp, and Pete DuPont followed with 38.6 percent, 12.7 percent, and 10.7 percent respectively. Bush went on to win the nomination and the general election against Mass Gov. Michael Dukakis.

1992 - Bush

Bush fought off a stiff challenge from Pat Buchanan, taking 53.2 percent of the vote against Buchanan's 36.5 percent of the vote. Bush won the nomination but was defeated for reelection at the hands of then Gov. Bill Clinton.

1996 - Patrick Buchanan

Buchanan won the primary this time around with 27.3 percent of the vote. He was followed by Dole, Lamar Alexander, and Steve Forbes with 26.2 percent, 22.6 percent, and 12.2 percent of the vote respectively. Dole went on to win the nomination but was beaten by President Clinton in the general election.

2000 - Senator John McCain

McCain shocked then Gov. George W. Bush by winning with 49 percent of the vote. Bush took 30.2 percent. Bush went on to win the nomination and the general election against then Vice President Al Gore.

2008 - McCain

McCain won the contest the second time around with 37.1 percent of the vote. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee followed with 31.6 percent and 11.2 percent. McCain won the nomination but lost against then Senator Barack Obama.


View the original article here

Friday, January 6, 2012

Santorum comes under closer scrutiny in New Hampshire (Reuters)

MANCHESTER/NORTHFIELD, New Hampshire (Reuters) – Republican presidential upstart Rick Santorum found himself under increasing scrutiny on Thursday as front-runner Mitt Romney tried to chip away at his credibility ahead of the key New Hampshire primary.

Santorum's surge in Iowa, which held its nominating contest on Tuesday, was so quick that his record as a U.S. senator and strong conservative views against abortion and gay marriage escaped close attention from his 2012 presidential rivals and the media.

His entry into New Hampshire was rocky. College students booed him at New England College over his position against gay marriage and he was forced to explain a remark he made in Iowa that appeared to single out blacks as recipients of federal assistance.

A Suffolk University tracking poll showed Romney on cruise control in New Hampshire ahead of its primary next Tuesday but that Santorum had risen to a distant third. It gave Romney 41 percent support, Ron Paul 18 percent and Santorum 8 percent, and Romney spent the day campaigning in South Carolina.

After finishing a close second to Romney in Iowa and bursting into the limelight, Santorum is under the microscope, drawing fire from Senator John McCain, a Romney supporter who clashed often with Santorum over government spending when they were Senate colleagues.

McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, is a sharp critic of spending items called earmarks that typically escape the scrutiny that accompanies U.S. budget legislation, to the dismay of conservatives.

"He was an avid earmarker and a staunch defender of porkbarrel spending," McCain told Reuters. "I just don't think he can portray himself as a fiscal conservative. We all know that earmarking is a 'gateway drug' to corruption."

Santorum's efforts to obtain taxpayer funds for spending projects for his home state of Pennsylvania have long been an issue. McCain specifically cited the $500,000 that Santorum engineered for a polar bear exhibit at the Pittsburgh zoo as an example of wasteful spending.

"The polar bears are living well," McCain said wryly. "That's the good news."

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

Santorum has fought back against accusations of profligate spending, saying he wanted to make sure his taxpayers got their "fair share" of money back. He says he will fight for deep spending cuts if elected next November.

Santorum is hoping to recreate his Iowa magic in New Hampshire, which holds the second contest to determine a Republican challenger to Democratic President Barack Obama.

He wants to finish strong enough to generate momentum going into South Carolina, where a conservative like him has a better chance.

"Obviously Mitt Romney is at 40 percent in the polls, the chances in five days to make up a 35 or 40 point lead is going to be pretty limited but we expect to make a run and to move up in those polls," Santorum told reporters in Manchester.

The NAACP civil rights organization complained about a remark Santorum made in Iowa in which he appeared to say, "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money."

Santorum insisted to Fox News that he had "blurred" the word and did not actually say blacks.

"Senator Santorum's targeting of African Americans is inaccurate and outrageous, and lifts up old race-based stereotypes about public assistance," NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous said.

Romney's big lead gives him great expectations in New Hampshire, perhaps more than he can reasonably expect to fulfill in a state that is unpredictable and can provide crucial momentum to the second-place finisher.

McCain said he believed the race will tighten in New Hampshire and doubted Romney will end up with 40 percent support or more.

"It's important for the Romney campaign and all of us who are supporting him not to raise expectations," said McCain, who surprised George W. Bush here in 2000. "So much of this is the expectations game. I think he'll win New Hampshire well but I can't imagine any candidate winning with 43 percent of the vote."

Keeping Obama in their sights, the Republicans blasted Obama for bypassing Congress to fill politically sensitive posts.

Obama upset Republicans by making four recess appointments - naming Richard Cordray to run the new Consumer Financial Protection Board and filling three vacancies on the National Labor Relations Board.

Ron Paul called Obama's move a clear disregard of the U.S. Constitution.

"The president must be called to account for his actions," Paul said in a statement, adding that Congress may need to take action to rein in Obama's "flagrant contempt" for the rules.

(Additional reporting by Ros Krasny and Scott Malone)


View the original article here

Monday, December 5, 2011

Mitt Romney flexes New Hampshire muscle (Reuters)

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (Reuters) – Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney flexed his campaign's organizational muscle in the key early voting state of New Hampshire on Saturday, unleashing hundreds of volunteers to knock on doors and make phone calls on his behalf.

The former Massachusetts governor also criticized the attorney general, calling for Eric Holder to resign or be fired over "Fast and Furious," the botched law enforcement action aimed at disrupting gun-trafficking networks on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Standing before a poster reading "Earn It," Romney said his campaign had already placed 200,000 phone calls in the state of 1.3 million people, and planned to call an additional 12,000 potential voters on Saturday.

Romney has held a wide lead in most polls of likely Republican voters in New Hampshire, which holds the first primary of the 2012 presidential contest on January 10. Republican hopefuls are vying to challenge President Barack Obama in the November 2012 election.

But in a survey taken last Monday, former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich pulled to within 10 percentage points of Romney following an important newspaper endorsement.

Gingrich recently added advisers in New Hampshire, but his grass-roots apparatus there pales next to that of Romney, whose volunteers aimed to "knock on 5,000 doors ... and put together 10,000 yard signs" on Saturday alone.

Romney continued to draw contrasts with Gingrich, who has soared to the top of many national Republican polls.

Gingrich could benefit from the suspension of businessman Herman Cain's campaign on Saturday after weeks of allegations of sexual impropriety against the former pizza magnate.

Romney, who has had an uneasy relationship with the conservative Tea Party movement that had been at the core of Cain's support, made an appeal for the group's backing by highlighting his background in the private sector.

"Speaker Gingrich is a fine person but he's spent his life in Washington," said Romney. "That doesn't exactly line up with the Tea Partiers. I think when things are said and done, I'll have good support from the Tea Party and hopefully the majority of their support."

DEMANDS HOLDER QUIT OR BE FIRED

Romney went on the attack against Holder after the White House released documents on Friday showing how some Justice Department officials had given false denials about involvement in the "Fast and Furious" endeavor.

"I think it's now increasingly clear that he misled Congress. It's time for Attorney General Holder to leave office, either to resign or be removed by the president," Romney said in an interview with Fox News.

Other Republican presidential hopefuls, including Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, have also called for Holder to quit.

Fast and Furious was a sting operation designed to stem illegal weapons traffic into Mexico. But many of the guns bought by straw purchasers in Arizona have been used for violent crimes.

The debacle came to light after a U.S. Border Patrol agent was killed in a shootout with illegal immigrants on the border. Two of the weapons at the scene were tied to the operation, although it was not clear if they fired the fatal shot.

Holder has expressed regret over the botched operation, but said he knew about it only after the controversy erupted.

(Reporting by Jason McLure; Editing by Ros Krasny and Peter Cooney)


View the original article here

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Romney picks up important New Hampshire endorsement (Reuters)

LITTLETON, New Hampshire (Reuters) – Republican Mitt Romney, looking to close the deal in the early primary state of New Hampshire, picked up an important endorsement on Sunday from U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte.

Ayotte was elected in 2010 from New Hampshire as part of big Republican gains in Congress, and is the top Republican elected official in the state. Her campaign had support from, among others, former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

Romney has won nearly every major Republican endorsement in New Hampshire so far, and has led in Republican polls in the state by a wide margin for almost two years.

On Friday, though, a survey by Magellan Strategies showed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich drawing within two percentage points of Romney.

New Hampshire holds its 2012 Republican primary election on January 10. The vote is regarded as one that Romney must not just win, but win convincingly.

The former Massachusetts governor has stepped up his campaigning in the state, where he owns a house. On Sunday he and Ayotte appeared at a rally in Nashua, her home town.

Ayotte was one of Palin's "Mama Grizzlies" in 2010, and is a former state attorney general.

In a statement, Ayotte cited Romney's experience as a businessman and governor, and his "excellent presidential debate performances" in her decision to endorse him.

Romney has also been endorsed by major New Hampshire figures like former Republican governor John Sununu and former U.S. Senator Judd Gregg.

(Reporting by Jason McLure, editing by Ros Krasny and David Bailey)


View the original article here

Saturday, June 18, 2011

New Hampshire GOP Debate: The End of the Two Party System? (ContributorNetwork)

COMMENTARY | The political system in America is often defended by the establishment organizations of the parties, the corporations, the media, and the political action organizations such as unions and special interest groups and lobbies. Much of the defense is centered on the idea that there are two America's and two completely different ideas about how we are to be governed.

Moreover, many high-minded educational institutions proclaim this is good for the parties, good for America and good for Americans. As the Brookings Institute writes: "Because both parties are more cohesive, they are also more disciplined. If you are a member of Congress and you basically agree with your party's position on most salient issues, why defect to the other side on key votes?"

We saw that discipline Monday night on stage. Even when prodded by John King of CNN, Tim Pawlenty would not succumb to the temptation to disparage fellow contender, Mitt Romney, on his state health care plan. However, it is a false discipline. The assertion of the defense of partisanship is that the philosophy of the people within the leadership of each party is cohesive and that it is only in application that we they have differences. However, the candidates in this field are greatly divided not only in application, but most definitely in philosophy.

In this field, the Republicans have a candidate seeking complete laissez faire philosophy, calling for an end to the Federal Reserve and a fundamental transformation of our foreign policy. They also have, at the other end of the spectrum, a candidate who is a social, military and economic statist who believes the president and the executive branch can solve every problem this country currently faces while defining, prescribing, and enforcing the social behavior of every citizen. The other candidates' philosophies reside somewhere in between. Yet, these philosophies were barely revealed and were hardly debated.

Accepted is the assertion that partisanship and branding are here to stay. What is not accepted is that there should only be two distinct party brands or even philosophies. Also, not accepted is that the American people only wish to choose between those two brands. If it is true, then it is the only product in any free marketplace in which people only want a choice between two. That would be a truly unique case. There are at least three and possibly four.

Furthermore, it is not healthy for a political system to be driven to a false dual partisanship that does not reveal the true governing philosophies of the people seeking office. The GOP debate in New Hampshire increased the likelihood of a meaningful future third political party in America -- likely taking shape in the 2014 midterm congressional and state races. The people of America are center-right. Provided the remaining debates and primary elections go according to this script, the Republicans will likely put a liberal Republican on the ticket.

This will ensure President Barack Obama winds a second term and will solidify the desire of the American people to form a third party. The three parties' philosophies are likely to be defined as economic statists (Democrats), social statists (Republicans), and constitutional libertarians (Constitution/Libertarians). A fourth party could form which are the social and economic statists, though it is likely to have the least representation.

Perhaps it is soon time that the American people will demand philosophy of governance be on the ballot in plain view for a transparent choice fully accountable to the consequences of the governance. Without the system of false dichotomies, every election season, the people of this republic will have truly disciplined parties holding to their brands which can then debate amongst themselves the practical application of the philosophy. Perhaps this decade will see the American people begin to live up to the expectations of our founding fathers.


View the original article here