Romney Narrowly Wins First GOP Contest, but Obama Has Advantage in Iowa

Romney Narrowly Wins First GOP Contest, but Obama Has Advantage in Iowa

Romney Narrowly Wins First GOP Contest, but Obama Has Advantage in Iowa

Despite all the attention on the Republicans, President Obama was the real winner in Iowa last night.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

In the end, Mitt Romney won Iowa by a staggeringly close eight votes and will likely be the GOP presidential nominee. But we already knew that heading into last night. How Romney gets the nomination, and what shape he’s in when he faces off against Barack Obama, will be the real story of the GOP race. Based on his performance last night, Romney’s showing in Iowa doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in his campaign.

Romney has outspent Rick Santorum by a margin of 17-1 so far (not including upwards of $3 million in pro-Romney Super PAC advertising in Iowa) and still only won by eight votes. He won fewer counties last night (17) than he did in 2008 (24), got a slightly lower percentage of the vote (24.55 percent last night vs. 25.19 percent in ’08) and actually lost six votes overall (30,015 last night vs. 30,021 in ’08). Sure, Romney hardly campaigned in the state this cycle, but you’d expect a rich front-runner in a weak field with four years of additional exposure to at least improve upon his showing.

In contrast, 25,000 Iowa Democrats turned out to hear President Obama give a brief address to supporters at last night’s essentially meaningless Democratic caucus. Despite the rapid desire among Republicans to defeat the president, Democratic turnout in 2008 (239,000 voters) was nearly double the GOP turnout last night (122,000). At last night’s caucus, the Obama campaign signed up 7,500 volunteers and will leave behind eight campaign offices in the state as GOP candidates criss-cross the country.

That’s not to suggest that Obama’s re-election efforts will be smooth sailing. But in this crucial swing state, the president has to like his chances.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x