Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

grantcart

(53,061 posts) Sat Jan 21, 2012, 10:29 PM Jan 2012

Incredibly Gingrich's 41% in SC was bigger than Romney's 39% in NH

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2012_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries

Mitt they really really really don't like you.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Incredibly Gingrich's 41% in SC was bigger than Romney's 39% in NH (Original Post) grantcart Jan 2012 OP

If I were a republican XemaSab Jan 2012 #1

Same here, from a purely "pragmatic" perspective, I'd be crapping myself. joshcryer Jan 2012 #2

Without Huntsman running, Romney probably would have done better in NH. n/t ellisonz Jan 2012 #3

XemaSab

(60,212 posts)

1. If I were a republican

Reply to grantcart (Original post)

Sat Jan 21, 2012, 10:53 PM

Jan 2012

that would scare the crap out of me.

Who cares which republican can win the nomination in the relatively liberal northeast? I know NH's a swing state, but still, it's yankee country.

I would look for the candidate who could bring out the votes in the south and the west.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)

2. Same here, from a purely "pragmatic" perspective, I'd be crapping myself.

Reply to XemaSab (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 21, 2012, 10:59 PM

Jan 2012

ellisonz

(27,711 posts)

3. Without Huntsman running, Romney probably would have done better in NH. n/t

Reply to grantcart (Original post)

Sat Jan 21, 2012, 11:47 PM

Jan 2012

Reply to this discussion