Romney Dominates Nevada Caucus; Entrance Polls Tidbits

Well, the final results aren’t final yet . . . but it’s clear that Romney won this important swing state’s caucus, and won it big. (Update . . . Romney did get just over 50%, but the entrance poll results have just been revised this morning, so much of what you see quoted below is somewhat off from what the linked poll says NOW. Sorry, I’m not going back and re-calculating things at this point).

He’s got 43% of the vote with 43% of precincts reporting, but the results of Clark County (Las Vegas) as not coming in as fast as expected. Don’t fret though Romney fans, Mitt will win a majority of the votes and I’m guessing he’ll be somewhere between 52-55% of the total vote when all is said and done. If things track as closely as they are in the entrance polls, Clark County should go for Mitt by over 60% (and they’ve nailed the non-Clark County…rest of NV…percentage at 43%, exactly how the real results have turned out)

Debunking the “Romney won Nevada because of the Mormon factor” myth:

Yes, Mitt dominated among LDS voters with 90% choosing Romney, BUT (and it’s a very big “but”), EVEN IF NOT A SINGLE MORMON WENT TO VOTE, ROMNEY WOULD HAVE WON THE STATE WITH A 42%-26% margin over Gingrich.  Romney won Catholics 52%-19% over Newt and “White Evangelical/Born Again” by a solid margin of 46%-26% over the former Speaker.

Debunking the “See, the poor won’t vote for Romney” myth:

On CNN’s coverage tonight, the anchors/pundits seemed to be getting as much mileage as possible out of the fact that the only economic demographic that Romney did NOT win was those that make $30,000 or less (which were only 10% of the voters in NV last night).  They were trying to tie this to Romney’s “I’m not concerned about the very poor” comment and even went on to conclude that this “underscores the fact that blue-collar workers, who you can’t win without their support, do not see that this is a guy that will fight for them.”  SERIOUSLY?!?!?  I realize that these pundits aren’t statisticians, but it’s pretty straightforward to figure out why he didn’t win this demographic.  First off, he hardly “lost” this demographic.  Paul and Newt both got 31%, and Mitt got 30%, a virtual 3 way tie for first.  Secondly, the age of the voter is VERY determinative of income when looking at your youngest age group especially.  Voters aged 18-29 were only 8% of the vote (quite similar to the 10% in that income of $30K or less), and Paul won that group 40% to 39% over Romney.  Paul has been wining the young college-aged voters in almost every state . . . it’s his base and he’s definitely turning out this group of folks that do not typically vote in a GOP primary.  Good for Paul. But these college kids are a HUGE portion of the “makes less than $30,000 year” group, and I don’t think anyone would consider college kids “the very poor,” they are just in a temporary low-income stage of their lives.

“Strong Moral Character;” Mitt good, Newt Very Very Bad:

In perhaps the most revealing entrance poll finding, those that felt a candidate having “Strong Moral Character” was their number one trait they sought in a President, Mitt got 54% of the vote … Newt got 1% of those voters.  No, that is not a typo, ONE PERCENT (Paul got 32% and Santorum got 13%).  Looks like Nevada voters are pretty good judges of character, eh?  THIS IS WHY YOU’RE LOSING NEWT!! YOU BLAME MITT FOR YOUR LAGGING VOTE TALLIES, BUT YOU NEED TO LOOK IN THE MIRROR BUDDY!

Debunking the “Strong Conservatives and Tea Party voters don’t like Romney” myth:

Like New Hampshire and Florida, Romney, once again, won self-identified conservatives and supporters of the Tea Party in Nevada.  This time though, he won A MAJORITY of these groups.  Romney beat Newt 54%-21% among conservative voters and 50%-23% among Tea Party supporters.  Yet I still see pundit after pundit say that Romney still has a lot of work to do to appeal to conservatives (while they “obviously” love Newt).  CAN THEY NOT READ A POLL?!?  Among “very conservative” voters he Mitt still won 49%-24% over Newt, and even beat him 39%-30% among those “strongly supportive of Tea Party.”  Some narratives are hard to kill, but when a state in the Northeast (NH), Southeast (FL), and West (NV) all show Romney winning conservatives and Tea Party supporters I think it’s proof positive against that media meme. The real take-away/new-media-narrative should be that Newt has work to do to appeal to as many conservatives as Romney has been.

Odds and Ends:

The Economy was the number one (even by a majority) issue on voters minds, and Romney carried these voters by 62%.  By an even larger margin, the candidate quality of “Can Defeat Obama” was number one, and Romney absolutely dominated here with 73% of the vote.  WOW!  “Right Experience” was the top quality to only 15% of voters, but Romney cleaned up here too with 55% (Rick Santorum pulled in a whopping 1% here).   Romney also continues to dominate the Suburbs winning with 69% there; historically this is a key demographic for winning a general election.

Turnout Issue:

Newt and some liberals keeps saying that Mitt’s trying to suppress turnout in order to win.  When we look at the field compared to 2008, however, I don’t think it’s any surprise that turnout is lower.  Last time around there was much more diversity, and much more famous personalities in the field.  You had a Pro-Choice candidate with strong personal appeal/popularity in Rudy Giuliani, War Hero John McCain, popular actor Fred Thompson, and folksy former pastor Mike Huckabee in addition to Mitt and Paul all in the race this far into the process.  Substituting character-challenged Gingrich and personality/experience-challenged Rick Santorum in place of Giuliani, McCain, Thompson, and Huckabee is beyond even comparing apples and oranges. They all had more money and organization that either Newt or Rick too and that is how turnout is driven. Like all of Newt’s complaints/excuses, this one rings hollow as well.


Mitt Romney doesn’t care about poor people? WRONG!

In the 24 hour news cycle, the story of the day has been Mitt’s comments to CNN in the early morning after his Florida win. While I think even the most ardent Romney fan would admit that this could and should have (and will be) phrased more adeptly, the liberals have taken and run with the partial quote that he’s “not concerned with the very poor” … It looks worse in print that in the context of the interview:

Mitt cares deeply about the poor, and his actions speak louder than words. How many “journalists” have bothered to mention that Mitt has given over $7,000,000 (SEVEN FREAKING MILLION!) to charitable organizations in just the last two years? Records from before then show the Romney’s consistent giving millions upon millions to organizations that care for the poor. By contrast, Joe Biden gave only $3690 to charity in an entire decade … that’s PROOF of someone that doesn’t care about the poor. From 2001-4, the Obamas made nearly a million dollars, but donated LESS THAN 1% of that income to charity.

Or what about when Mitt gave cash out of his pocket to the lady in South Carolina who said God guided her to follow Romney’s campaign bus to find help to keep her lights on? The EXACT SAME CNN REPORTER (Soledad) even reported about that a couple of weeks ago … does she have no memory?

Mitt doesn’t care about poor people? Demonstrably false and easy to debunk (and this is without even delving into fact that Mitt, as a Mormon Bishop for several years, dedicated much of his time to caring for the poor in a very “hands on” fashion). If Obama and team push this theme it will come back to bite them. Mitt’s done more to care for the poor than any snarky reporter or any of his political rivals.

Recall Vic’s post from a couple days back that highlighted Romney’s life of service and included the following YouTube:

Additionally, Brit Hume on Fox News today adroitly argued that anyone who wants to “make hay” or be offended by this out-of-context quote wouldn’t be voting for a GOP candidate anyways. I’d have to agree.

Northwest Endorsements for Romney: OR Rep Walden, WA Secty of State Reed, Former Rep Nethercutt + Video

Autumn washes over the misty landscape at Tumalo Falls near Bend, Oregon. Elected officials from the northwest have endorsed Gov Mitt Romney: Congressman Greg Walden (R-Oregon), Washington Secty of State Repub Sam Reed, and Congressman George Nethercutt (R-WA). 10/14/11 (Photo/Mike Putnam)

Out of the northwest, Romney endorsements roll…


Boston, MA – Mitt Romney today announced the support of Oregon Congressman Greg Walden.

I am proud to have Congressman Greg Walden supporting my campaign,” said Mitt Romney. “With his help, I look forward to defeating President Obama. It is time to get Americans back to work.”

Congressman Greg Walden (R-OR)

Announcing his support, Congressman Walden said, “Today, I am announcing my endorsement and full support for Governor Mitt Romney in his campaign for president. As the senior elected Republican in Oregon, I would not normally wade into a primary, but these are not normal times. I personally know several of the other candidates and have great respect for their willingness to run and for the integrity and honesty they bring to the debate. But the country under President Obama has become more divided and the people are worse off. Governor Romney is best qualified to run, win and govern effectively.”

“As an Oregonian, I want a president I can partner with to help restore jobs in our timbered communities, enhance our farm economy and stop the over-the-top proposed federal rules that will ship our jobs overseas,” said Walden. “I want a president who is serious about fixing the tax code in a way that will grow our economy. And I want a president who will work with Congress to get America’s fiscal house in order, not one that’s just looking for a political fight. I look forward to working closely with Governor Romney and his team on natural resource policy and telecommunications policy, both of which I’m deeply involved with in Congress. We have the opportunity to make this America’s greatest century. And I look forward to doing my part to elect a president who can lead our country’s renewal and growth.”

Background On Congressman Walden:

Congressman Greg Walden Has Represented Oregon’s 2nd Congressional District In The U.S. House Of Representatives Since 1999. He serves as chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology and is also Chairman of the House Republican Leadership. Prior to entering Congress, Walden owned a small business with his wife.


Boston, MA – Mitt Romney today announced the support of Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed and former Congressman George Nethercutt.

Secty of State Sam Reed, WA state

I am honored to have the support of Sam Reed and George Nethercutt,” said Mitt Romney. “They are committed public servants who share my vision for getting our country back to work. I am glad to have them behind my campaign and my efforts to defeat President Obama in 2012.”

Announcing his support, Sam Reed said, “Washington voters are looking for a leader who will get our fiscal house in order and put unemployed Americans back to work. In this field of candidates, Mitt Romney stands out as not only the most experienced, but also our best chance to take back the White House.”

“President Obama’s fiscal recklessness has failed to get millions of Americans back to work,” said George Nethercutt. “Our country needs a leader who will offer solutions, not empty rhetoric. Mitt Romney understands how the economy works and how to create jobs. He has the experience to prove it. I am proud to support him.”

(emphasis added )

Background On Sam Reed And George Nethercutt:

Congressman George Nethercutt (R-WA)

Sam Reed Has Served As Washington’s Secretary Of State Since 2000. Previously, he was elected Thurston County Auditor. He also served as Assistant Secretary of State and Director of the Urban Affairs Commission and the Constitutional Reform Commission. From 2005 to 2007, Reed was an advisor to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

George Nethercutt Represented Washington’s 5th Congressional District In The U.S. House Of Representatives From 1995 To 2005. He served on the House Committee on Appropriations. In 2005, President George W. Bush appointed Nethercutt as U.S. Chairman of the Permanent Joint Board on Defense-U.S./Canada. Prior to entering Congress, he worked in the U.S. Senate and practiced law. The founder and chairman of the George Nethercutt Foundation, he is active with several community service organizations.

We’re loving the endorsements!

► Jayde Wyatt