Mitt Romney Sweeps New Hampshire

Romney earns decisive win in New Hampshire

January 11, 2012 RSS Feed Print

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — Mitt Romney cruised to a solid victory in the New Hampshire primary Tuesday night, picking up steam from his first-place finish in the lead-off Iowa caucuses and firmly establishing himself as the man to beat for the Republican presidential nomination.

[Vote: Will Mitt Romney's Record at Bain Capital Be His Downfall?]

"Tonight we made history," Romney told cheering supporters before pivoting to a stinging denunciation of President Barack Obama. "The middle class has been crushed ... our debt is too high and our opportunities too few," he declared — ignoring the rivals who had been assailing him for weeks and making clear he intends to be viewed as the party's nominee in waiting after only two contests.

His Republican rivals said otherwise, looking ahead to South Carolina on Jan. 21 as the place to stop the former Massachusetts governor. Already, several contenders and committees supporting them had put down heavy money to reserve time for television advertising there.

Even so, the order of finish — Ron Paul second, followed by Jon Huntsman, with Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum trailing — scrambled the field and prolonged the increasingly desperate competition to emerge as the true conservative rival to Romney.

With his victory, Romney became the first Republican to sweep the first two contests in competitive races since 1976. Based on partial returns, The Associated Press estimated that turnout would exceed the 2008 record by about 4 percent.

Romney fashioned his victory despite a sustained assault by rivals eager to undermine his claim as the contender best situated to beat Obama and help reduce the nation's painfully high unemployment. Gingrich led the way, suggesting at one point that Romney, a venture capitalist, was a corporate raider. The front-runner's defenders said the rhetoric was more suitable to a Democratic opponent than a conservative Republican.

Returns from 69 percent of New Hampshire precincts showed Romney with 38 percent of the vote, followed by Texas Rep Paul with 24 percent, former Utah Gov. Huntsman with 17 percent and former House Speaker Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Santorum with 10 percent each.

In interviews as they left their polling places, New Hampshire voters said the economy was the issue that mattered most to them, and a candidate's ability to defeat Obama outranked other qualities.

Romney had won in Iowa by a scant eight votes over Santorum, and gained barely a quarter of the vote there.

On Tuesday, he battled not only his rivals but also high expectations as the ballots were counted, particularly since his pursuers had virtually conceded New Hampshire, next-door to the state Romney governed for four years.

Seeking to undercut Romney's victory, Gingrich and others suggested in advance that anything below 40 percent or so would indicate weakness by the nomination front-runner.

They didn't mention that Sen. John McCain's winning percentage in the 2008 primary was 37 percent.

Romney's win was worth seven delegates to the Republican National Convention next summer. Paul earned three delegates and Huntsman two.

[See U.S. News Weekly, now available on iPad]

"Tonight we celebrate," Romney told his supporters. "Tomorrow we go back to work."

Unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, where unemployment is well below the national average, joblessness is far higher in South Carolina. That creates a different political environment for the race.

The state also has a reputation for primaries turning nasty, and it appeared that all of Romney's pursuers read the new Hampshire returns as reason enough to remain in the race.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who skipped New Hampshire to get a head start in South Carolina, said Tuesday's results showed "the race for a conservative alternative to Mitt Romney remains wide open."

"We're nibbling at his heels," Paul said of Romney.

Tags:
Associated Press,
New Hampshire primaries,
Mitt Romney

Reader Comments Read all comments (1)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

ROMNEY IS “NOT CAPITALISM.” HE IS WHAT GIVES CAPITALISM A BAD NAME

By Romney’s logic, putting Maddoff in prison would be an attack against capitalism. As a predator, vulture capitalist and speculator (the sort of thing that drove the American and world economy into the ditch in 2008), PINK SLIP ROMNEY had no vision or even goal to keep companies afloat, to endure. His idea is to clean up a company by laying off thousands of workers, employing some back at low wages and selling the company off or shipping the company overseas so he can have enough money to stuff into his cavernous pockets, his ears and nose and nose and take pictures about it as a sign of his success. Those individuals Romney laid off and their families don’t even have food to stuff into their mouth! Romney seems to be saying that criticizing his bad practices at Bain means criticizing capitalism. Arrogant rubbish! Look around for the seeds of trouble, and current social dissent (the OWS movement) a decimated middle class, a growing income gap, an uncaring “corporatocracy” that doesn’t really care about investing in America or about the general suffering, a club of elites and the rich who want to keep all their money and care little about social conscience and the founding ideals of equality and happiness. Many decades ago, celebrated anthropologist and social biologist Ashley Montague in his The Humanization of Man, reminds us about the negatives of capitalist individualism. He writes: “The idea of individualism is pathological . . . the idea itself will not kill us. What will kill us are the consequences of the idea, the acts which that idea leads.” He emphases that an individual who “attempts to live essential for himself” is “what will kill us” not the idea of capitalism. Such “an individual learns to argue that life is a struggle and those who have what it takes survive, and those who haven’t don’t.” They come to believe that they have to advance themselves by “doing unto others what will enable them to advance without consideration for the effects of their conduct upon anyone or anything else.” That is where most Congressional and Presidential candidates stand today. They talk down on the poor, though in fact so many of them live in privilege and have taken advantage of the system. Many of the poor they look down upon do two or more dirty, low wage jobs others wouldn’t do just to survive. In this, Romney, Gingrich (a corrupt man who milked the system) and Santorum have no grounds to preach work ethics to anyone. They all seem heartless. Romney in addition is ruthless. None of these individuals is fit to be the President of the United States at a time of high unemployment and suffering. What is most revealing is that even when the economy seems to be improving, none of them seems to like it—because they want things to be so bad so they can win the White House. Many Democrats now suspect Republicans are preparing to take over the Presidency by force and hubris with the Robert’s Supreme Court as their ally: the massive effort to disenfranchise minority voters, the poor, students, and the elderly; re-districting decisions; new issues the Supreme Court has decided to look into, and more. Shameful for a country that says it is an exemplary democracy!

Dr. Sam of CA 8:54AM January 11, 2012

advertisement

Latest Video