We have launched a new live blog for the results – follow our continuing coverage here.
Election workers wait for voters as the polls opened in Nashua this morning. Photograph: Mike Segar/Reuters
Ron Paul has backed Mitt Romney against the attacks on his business record from his Republican rivals. This is what he told ABC News:
I think they're wrong. I think they're totally misunderstanding the way the market works. They are either just demagoguing or they don't have the vaguest idea how the market works.
On Romney's quote that he liked to fire people, Paul was equally supportive:
I think they're unfairly attacking him on that issue because he never really literally said that. They've taken him way out of context … He wants to fire companies."
Thanks to CautiousOptimist in the comments for the link.
A 30-minute film attacking Mitt Romney's record at the venture capitalists Bain Capital has been the source of much comment. Now, Bloomberg News has seen a copy of the documentary, which will be released tomorrow and aired in South Carolina thanks to money from a super PAC connected to Newt Gingrich.
Bloomberg says the film depicts the New Hampshire front-runner as "more ruthless than Wall Street", claiming Romney was responsible for thousands of people losing their jobs.
Bloomberg's account suggests the film pulls no punches, focusing on four companies acquired by Bain that later suffered financially or went bankrupt. The four are UniMac Corp, KB Toys, America Pad & Paper (Ampad), and DDI Corp (DDIC), an electronics company.
A procession of purported fired workers describe their struggles to cope with the ensuing job losses. "The hardest part for me is the day that we had to load up the U-Haul because we done lost our home," an unnamed woman reportedly fired by Ampad says in the film.
The interview with the purportedly fired worker is juxtaposed with a clip of Romney saying, "For an economy to thrive, there are a lot of people who will suffer as a result of that."
Others depicted in the film include a woman describing how she was fired when eight months pregnant, a mother who had difficulties feeding her family after her alleged job-loss and several women who lost homes to foreclosure. Throughout the film, Romney and Bain are presented as having caused, and profited from, their hardships.
Bloomberg says the film is called When Mitt Romney Came to Town, and was produced by Jason Killian Meath, a former Republican National committee aide.
Billionaire businessman Sheldon Adelson has donated $5m to a super PAC supportive of Newt Gingrich, Winning Our Future, to help fund the cost of showing the film in South Carolina.
Politico reported today that Winning our Future paid $40,000 for the film, and that another super PAC, supportive of Jon Huntsman, had also considered it.
The big question is who will come out worse – Romney or Gingrich? The former House speaker is already feeling the heat for criticizing Romney's business record today.
Whatever the answer, it's a clear indication that the fight is going to get much dirtier in South Carolina.
Fox News has an early exit poll of independent voters, who it says make up 44% of the electors in New Hampshire. It shows them splitting fairly evenly between Romney on 30%, Paul on 29% and Huntsman on 27%. Which doesn't give us much clue about the eventual outcome.
There are some real results in already. Mitt Romney is in the lead, with seven votes – mostly from Dixville Notch and Hart's Location, which exploit a loophole in the voting regulations that allow a precinct to close its poll and count ballots if every elector has voted. Ron Paul is in second with five, and Jon Hunstman has four. Exciting!
The Huffington Post's sharp media writer, Michael Calderone, says the media corps in New Hampshire can't wait to leave the state. The inevitability of Mitt Romney's victory leaves them struggling for a story, he says,
Political reporters love a horse race, with candidates jockeying in the primary's waning days toward the finish line. The fight for second, never mind a "battle for fourth," isn't as exciting as who takes the state. So it's not surprising that reporters have been getting restless, even bored during the past week.
Walter Shapiro, a New Republic special correspondent covering his ninth New Hampshire primary, wrote that he couldn't recall a "contested race in either party this devoid of energy. It feels like the primary is being conducted underwater, with every movement slow and exaggerated."
It does indeed seem that turnout today is not likely to be as high as predicted. New Hampshire's city clerk Matthew Normand just admitted as such on Fox News.
The ballot papers that Republican and Democrat primary-goers have been confronted with today are pretty lengthy. There are ten names on the Republican paper, and Barack Obama is not the only candidate on the Democrat side. It only costs $1,000 to get your name on the Republican ballot in New Hampshire.
Fox News has just reported that the New Hampshire Attorney General's office is looking into reports that attempts were made to conduct an opinion poll in polling stations in New Hampshire today, in violation of electoral law. Fox had no further details – I'll try and find out more about this.
Back to Adam Gabbatt who has been wielding his iPhone in front of voters in Manchester, New Hampshire for the Guardian.
Jamie Feinberg voted for Jon Huntsman this lunchtime, saying she was "behind most of his ideas".
"I think he's a moderate candidate who would work to represent the country and not just certain interests."
Feinberg, 27, who runs a theatre company, said she was "actually fine with President Obama, but I figured I'd vote for a Republican candidate that I'd be happy with if a Republican could win".
The fantastic Lizz Winstead, co-creator of the Daily Show, has been looking into the Republican candidates' obsession with sex for the Guardian. Here are her conclusions:
How did these masterful hatesmen earn their coveted place in the Cream of the Crap? With their unwavering obsession with sex. All kinds of sex. Same sex, opposite sex, sex with animals.
Oh, and Muslims. But not Muslim sex. Not yet, anyway. There is so much to talk about when it comes to gay sex that they probably just haven't gotten around to it. But they will. If they know nothing about something, they always make time to spout off about it.
So, after watching 15 debates, I can't help but ask myself, "Is this the only time in their lives they are allowed talk about sex?" and "Why do guys with no access to my lady junk spend more time talking about it than guys that do?"
Our open editor, Amanda Michel, has compiled some really useful Twitter lists. Her list of the top journalists covering the 2010 elections is a great resource, and this list of New Hampshire journalists is a good list of people on the ground for today's primary.
Politico reports that a super PAC supportive of Newt Gingrich, who has been turning up the heat on Mitt Romney in New Hampshire, has bought $1.4m worth of TV ads in South Carolina, the next state to hold primary, on January 21. Wining our Future has already said it plans to spend $3.4m on TV ads in South Carolina; the new line here is that some of that money has now been committed.
A media buying source says that Winning Our Future, the pro-Newt Gingrich group that just got a $5 million infusion from casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, has bought $1.4 million worth of 30-second time slots on cable and broadcast in South Carolina.
The ad flight is slated to start tomorrow and run through the Jan. 21 primary, the source said.
The biggest purchase is in the Greenville-Spartanburg market, totaling $317,375. The broadcast total is just over $1.1 million, and the cable total is almost $267,000.
It looks like talk radio host Rush Limbaugh has turned his fire on Newt Gingrich after the attacks by him and Rick Perry on Mitt Romney's record at Bain Capital.
This is Matt Wells taking over from Richard Adams for the afternoon.
Reader Jim Nutson tweets to point out that the Manchester Union Leader, which endorsed Newt Gingrich as its preferred candidate, has made a bit of a schoolboy error when it came to putting his name on its results page. Oops, as they say.
The world's media are gathered in New Hampshire, including Marcello Campo, Washington DC correspondant for Italy's Ansa news agency, who tweets:
Roughly translated, that reads: A mini-exit poll from Manchester's first ward: 10 voters, Huntsman 5, Paul 2, 2 Obama and 1 Gingrich. Romney is not mentioned.
At the Green Street community centre, in Concord's ward five, the Guardian's Janine Gibson reports that about 650 people have been through the doors of the polling station this morning.
But not all of them have been Republicans:
I just spoke to a camera shy voter who said she voted for Barack Obama just to send him a message that people are still behind him even though things are tough right now.
Stuart Millar meets a Mitt Romney supporter:
At Concord's ward five polling station, Bryan Schroyer had voted for Mitt Romney. "I've felt since the start that he was the best candidate, ever since they started to emerge," he said. "His values align closest with mine."
Schroyer, who teaches at St Paul's school in the city, went to one of Romney's rallies. "That's what sealed the deal for me. He was very impressive."
The Guardian's Ana Marie Cox reminds us that in some respects, the spoils to the winner of the battle of New Hampshire aren't that big for Mitt Romney:
In terms of the Republican national convention – the thing that generates the actual nominee – the GOP's new proportional allocation does mean that a bigger win means more delegates for Romney. But New Hampshire only awards 12 of the 2,286 in the nation, and the state gives delegates to anyone with a showing over 10%. With five candidates at that threshold according to the latest polling, Romney stands to get about seven of the 12.
With a really big win, he might get eight! This, plus what he gained from his victory in Iowa, means he can count on going into the national convention with seven or eight delegates (remember, Iowa's caucuses do not bind delegates to candidates) – only six delegates ahead of Santorum. These numbers underscore just how long the fight for the nomination could be.
With just seven hours until polls close in the "first in the nation" primary, here's a lunchtime summary of primary day in New Hampshire:
• Mitt Romney entered polling day in New Hampshire as the overwhelming favourite to win the Republican primary. Only his margin of victory is at issue as his main rivals struggled to break his solid grip on the state.
• Several sets of analysis put Romney's likely share of the vote at around 38%. Ron Paul leads a tight race for second place, closely followed by Jon Huntsman, with Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum seen trailing in fourth and fifth place.
Signs of the battle for second place outside a polling venue in Concord, New Hampshire. Photograph: Janine Gibson/Guardian
• For the second day running Romney found himself under fire for his ill-judged remark "I like being able to fire people". He once again complained that his comment was taken out of context.
• Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry offered sustained criticism of Romney's record as a venture capitalist at Bain Capital. Perry lambasted Romney's "Wall Street ethics" as "vultures" while campaigning in South Carolina.
• Aecdotal reports from New Hampshire suggest steady but not spectacular streams of voters during the morning. Before the election, there were predictions of a record turnout in the fine weather.
Has the tradition of "retail politics" in New Hampshire died a death in the age of Facebook follows and cable television? The Guardian's Adam Gabbatt asks voters in New Hampshire if they got face time with the candidates or their campaigns, and how it affected their decision:
Talking to people outside a Manchester polling station on the morning of the presidential primary, there seemed to be plenty of truth in the thesis: about half of voters who emerged between 8am and 9am said they had attended at least one campaign event.
The Manchester Union Leader mis-spells the name of Newt Gingrich
Here's Newt Gingrich's attack ad lambasting Mitt Romney, currently on high-rotate in South Carolina.
It's a measure of the different stakes in New Hampshire and South Carolina that South Carolina's TV stations have already aired twice as many political ads as their counterparts in New Hampshire. Although it may partly be that TV advertising in SC is a lot cheaper – reaching the major NH metro market requires advertising on pricy Boston channels.
New York Times polling guru Nate Silver touches up his final forecast for the New Hampshire result.
Silver gives Mitt Romney a 99% chance of winning – is that all? – with a 38.5% vote share in a range between 27% and 47%. And according to Silver's model, no one else in the field can get above 27%
If Romney gets 27% .... that's exciting. If he gets 47% we can all go home and wait for October. Chances are higher of 47% than 27% I suspect.
Adam Gabbatt talks to another New Hampshire voter about who she voted for and why:
Debra Daigle emerged from the Carol M Hines center polling station, having voted for Mitt Romney. Daigle, originally from Massachusetts, said Romney "did some wonderful things" for her home state when governor, and "offers optimism".
"Also he was in charge of the Olympics, and I think he really brought the Olympics back to where it should have been. And he's a businessman, and I think this country needs a businessman. This country needs someone really practical with a business background."
Daigle said she had not attended any of Romney's events, but "read a lot", comparing Romney to other candidates, and said she is currently reading one of his books.
Ahead of the pack as usual, the Guardian's Paul Harris is already in South Carolina, taking the temperature in the Palmetto State and following Rick Perry, who has a full day of campaigning there today:
Down in South Carolina, Texas governor Rick Perry kept piling on Mitt Romney for his record at Bain Capital, a firm that made money by buying and restructuring other firms. At a campaign stop near Rock Hill, South Carolina, Perry slammed Romney and his firm for costing ordinary Americans their jobs.
"They were more interested in making their quick buck. That is the Wall Street mentality. Ethics get thrown out of the door," he said in response to a question from the crowd at town hall meeting. He spoke of two South Carolina towns hit by job losses when Bain closed
facilities there: "Mitt Romney was the head of Bain when that was happening. It is the mentality of making money against all other considerations," Perry said.
Perry wasn't pulling any punches:
I will suggest they're just vultures. They're vultures that are sitting out there on the tree limb, waiting for a company to get sick. And then they swoop in, they eat the carcass, they leave with that and they leave the skeleton.
Washington Post bloggers at The Fix report a rare burst of New Hampshire wit aimed at Mitt Romney:
So: the "unacceptable face of capitalism" jibe against Romney may be taking hold.
There are suggestions that footfall in New Hampshire's polling stations hasn't been great so far. Which is not surprising: the "race for second place" doesn't get the pulse racing. Neither does Mitt Romney – unless he's just taken over your company and is looking for "efficiencies".
The Guardian's Adam Gabbatt has been speaking to voters leaving a polling station in Manchester, New Hampshire.
Mike DeBlasi, a 40-year-old advertising executive, says he's backing Jon Huntsman as the candidate who has invested most time and effort in the state: "Huntsman worked very hard here and I think people in New Hampshire always appreciate the retail politics nature of this primary."
The New Hampshire primary ballot papers. Photograph: Christine Singleton / Facebook
This just in from Virginia: a federal judge has ordered Virginia's electoral boards to stop preparing ballots for the 6 March Republican primary until after Friday's hearing on Rick Perry's emergency challenge to state election law.
Perry – now joined by Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman – is challenging Virginia's requirement for a candidate to gather 10,000 signatures from registered voters spread throughout the state to qualify for the primary ballot.
So far only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have qualified for the Virginia primary. Both Gingrich and Perry's campaigns failed to get enough valid signatures from local voters, while Santorum and Huntsman didn't try.
It turns out that Newt Gingrich had already beaten Mitt Romney in one respect, by turning up at the same polling station in Manchester an hour ago. Hence the old saying: "The early Newt gets the news-worm".
Ron Paul and Gingrich appear to be the only candidates out barnstroming the polling venues today. Gingrich is also passing through polling places in Bedford, Merrimack and Hollis, before holding an "Ask Newt" tele-town hall starting at 3.15pm ET. The dial-in phone number is 855-275-6398 if anyone is interested.
Ron Paul, meanwhile, is going to Nashua, Manchester, Derry, Bedford, and Merrimack.
Mitt Romney is scheduled to visit a polling station in Manchester right now. It's a school on Elm Street, so some room for "Nightmare on Elm Street" references if things go pear-shaped for Mitt tonight.
What are the voters of New Hampshire thinking?
Filmmaker Kat Keene Hogue travelled to New Hampshire to ask primary voters one simple question: "What decided your vote?" It's a fascinating glimpse into the mind of the voter as they weigh up the alternatives before them.
There has of course been a result from New Hampshire already today, from the tiny precincts of Dixville Notch and Hart's Location, which exploit a loophole in the voting regulations that allow a precinct to close its poll and count ballots if every elector has been accounted for.
At Dixville Notch – a hamlet in New Hampshire so far north that it's practically in Canada – there are nine registered voters, and all nine voted just after midnight. Romney and Huntsman got two votes each, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul got one each. Barack Obama got the other three.
At Hart's Location – a tiny town in the White Mountains that began the midnight voting routine in 1948 "to accommodate railroad workers who had to be at work before normal voting hours," according to AP.
Of the 23 votes cast at Hart's Location, Romney got five and Paul got four. Huntsman received two, and Gingrich and Rick Perry received one each. But the winner was Obama, who got 10.
Voting may be underway but Newt Gingrich isn't taking his boot off Mitt Romney's neck regarding Romney's reign of creative destruction while head of Bain Capital.
On Bloomberg Television this morning, Gingrich was back on the attack, hitting Romney as hard as he could:
I'm for capitalism. I'm for entrepreneurship. I'm for free markets, but you have to raise questions when somebody comes, takes over a company that's apparently pretty profitable and has a real future, and then drains it of his money and walks off, leaving behind people on unemployment.
And then he followed up with this:
The question he has to answer is, why would they take that much money out of a company and then have the company go bankrupt? It's one thing to say, 'Boy, we tried hard and the company failed and we lost money, too, and we really sympathize with the workers because we all paid for it.' It's another thing to say, 'You know, terrific break for me. I got all the money. Sorry about that guys. Good luck.' Then we sense, in these cases it was the latter case.
The Democratic National Committee is taking notes and screengrabs. I hope they send Newt something nice from Tiffanys to say thank you.
So what will be the finishing order tonight? According to the RealClearPolitics average poll of polls, the order will be:
Mitt Romney 38%
Ron Paul 18%
Jon Huntsman 14%
Rick Santorum 11%
Newt Gingrich 10%
Do you agree? Tell us what you think the final vote will look like in the comments below – and in particular, how big a victory does Mitt Romney need to record to meet expectations?
, as Republican and Democratic voters troop to the polls. In both primaries there is no doubt about the winners: Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. For the GOP, the key questions will be: by how much does Romney win? And: who came second?
Polls are open now and stay open until 8pm ET in some parts of the state, although many polling stations will close at 7pm – and by 8pm we should have an idea of how the night's results are going to play out.
The Guardian's Ewen MacAskill in New Hampshire runs through the various scenarios for the winners and losers.
We'll be live blogging the action on the ground as candidates' campaigns fall silent and the voters make their choices.
Comments
10 January 2012 2:47PM
The media scrum over Mitt Romney’s statement that he likes “being able to fire people” misses the larger – and more important – points about his healthcare policy.
Mr Romney is suggesting changes that have already been made.
Is it really, "repeal and replace" – or just "Rename and Claim"?
http://thebottom99percent.com/mitt-on-health-insurance-youre-fired/
10 January 2012 3:00PM
Any chance that Romney had such a bad day yesterday that an upset might be possible?
10 January 2012 3:05PM
I still have an issue with these little, out of touch states like IOWA and NH, SC deciding the candidates who stay in the race. NY, TX, CA and FL should all go first on the same day of primaries. Then some "swing" states. And the top two or three should go on the ballot, from each and every party no matter the votes. Do that and have congressional term limits of 16 yrs and a life pension after and we wouldn't have a congress sold out to either special interest groups (welfare/poor/minorites) (Dems) and big business.(Repubs/well off)
Doesn't matter though, Obama will be re-elected. 2012 and 2013 will be better than most imagine, except for the weather events.
10 January 2012 3:08PM
expensive PAC ads. personal attacks and confusion..
Do they actually have policies insted of soundbites and personal snipes..
This process highlights all thats bad in career politicians fighting to be top dog..
what a sham
10 January 2012 3:23PM
Grendel65che - If only we could get rid of all those "out of touch" states. Face it, if those people were at all cool they would be living in New York City anyway. By the way, 2/3 of the country does NOT live in NY, TX, CA, and FL.
Here's an idea, why not have the states' primaries in the order of healthiest State economy first? Reward the voters who have responsibly elected competent officials.
First 4: WY, ND, IA, and VT
Last 4: KY, CA, AZ, and MI
Ranks of the states you want to go first:
NY 26th
TX 36th
CA 49th
FL 42nd
And you want these voters to be pre-eminent? Because they have shown such good judgement?
Source
10 January 2012 3:23PM
I don't think the media's emphasis on the super rich being out of touch applies in all cases. FDR and JFK got into politics to help the middle, working, and needier classes. It is a problem for a super-rich Republican like Romney, who interest seems to have been safeguarding his own fortune and that of his friends. You don't have to have suffered financially to have empathy with those in need and to want to use your position to help them.
10 January 2012 3:26PM
Iowa isn't a "little state" (seen a map recently?)
Nor is NH remotely "out of touch" though I cannot vouch for Iowa or South Carolina. Although the places deemed "out of touch" is telling. Because we're just a bunch of dumb rednecks, am I right.
NY, Texas, California, and Florida ALREADY have undue influence in the U.S.
By all means, take it away from Iowa et al, but don't give more power to those states.
10 January 2012 3:31PM
Gosh, let's see: the poor and minorities constitute the "welfare" group (it was Bill Clinton who revised public assistance, btw, and welfare represents a tiny percentage of the nation's budget - have you compared it to the defense budget yet?). Which "minorities" - the huge and exploding Hispanic vote? Women, who constitute 52% of the population but somehow remain a "special interest group"? The Dems haven't "sold out" to the poor, minorities, etc. - that's their alleged base. In fact, the Dems have sold out that "base" to K Street to nearly the same extent the Repubs have done. I do so love the "and big business" almost as a catch-all afterthought phrase.
The truth is, no other groups have remotely the influence on government that K Street and Big Health Insurance, Big Oil, Big PhRma, and Big Wall Street have. There is NO ONE in government representing ordinary people any longer, and there hasn't been for some time. My guess is, there never will be again.
It's all over folks. It will take blood to unseat the plutocracy.
10 January 2012 3:34PM
Actually, the primary calendar is quite representative of America's diversity.
Iowa is a midwestern swing state
New Hampshire is a northeastern swing state
South Carolina is a southern state (though not a swing state, perhaps North Carolina would better fill the role?)
Florida is the biggest swing state
and Nevada is a western swing state.
Unless you're one of those people who believes in obnoxious concepts like 'flyover states', the primary calendar seems a good 'un, if a bit truncated.
10 January 2012 3:35PM
Hmm, Nicholas Kristoff is certainly no GOP apologist..
New York Times
10 January 2012 3:37PM
Sounds as if Newt is against asset stripping, a legitimate business activity, practiced by numerous corporations. The commie!
10 January 2012 3:38PM
The main news from New Hampshire will be Huntsman's results. But, many of his votes probably come from independents or Democrats. So it will be hard to tell if his votes are enough to keep him in the race beyond the early primaries. Romney will win the primary by a plurality. Between the role of home territory and the impact of non Republican crossover voters, it will be difficult to evaluate how significant the size of his plurality is. In any case, it probably will not be large enough for him to walk away with the majority of New Hampshire's delegates. Paul's count will give another data point on the size of his support. But it does not look like it will vary much from expectations. The results of Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry will give another data point on the issue of whether one of them is going to emerge as the main non Romney non Paul contender or whether they are going to divide the votes in that category. In any case, all three of them look likely to continue at least through Florida. Possibly after Florida, the race might be winnowed down to three candidates. But, unless one of the early primaries is winner take all, Romney is not likely to emerge from the early primaries with anything even near a majority of the delegates at stake in them.
10 January 2012 3:40PM
Hiya, CO. Long time no see.
10 January 2012 3:41PM
Actually, it probably just suits him for the time being.
10 January 2012 3:42PM
As a resident of New Hampshire, the people here aren't necessarily "out of touch" so much as they're fiscally to the right and socially to the left, though there's been the usual local infiltration of Tea Party types with which people are fast becoming disenchanted. It was definitely a social and cultural wasteland to grow up in throughout the 80s and 90s, though this has changed much for the better over the past decade, but "out of touch hard right" isn't a fair criticism, as the state swung for Obama in the last cycle.
10 January 2012 3:43PM
What's up with trying to repeal same-sex marriage up there?
10 January 2012 3:44PM
T'dog forecast:
Romney 34%
Paul & Huntsman tied at 17% each.
then Santorum with something less
Romney will be deemed not to have met expectations (possibly right up to the day he is elected president).
10 January 2012 3:46PM
I still haven't figured out what's the matter with asset stripping. It's actually asset transformation. I sell it, get cash or other consideration and I still have an asset - just a different one. Someone buys it - they have an asset - something they actually want. The asset still exists.
10 January 2012 3:49PM
There are only two places that are really up for contention. Romney will win hands down. It's Paul vs. Huntsman for 2nd, and looks to be heading for Paul, but both will consider what they get good enough to stay in regardless of whether it's 2nd or third. Perry will come last and is dead in the water, the only thing we need to see is if he beats Buddy Roemer for 6th or not. Santorum had no chance in NH from Day 1, but he'll stay in wherever he comes. Gingrich, while I suspect he'll carry on anyway, is virtually out of it if he finishes below Santorum.
10 January 2012 3:54PM
New Hampshire's a state that struggles with its identity. While it seems to possess a rather demented devotion to preening about treading and taxes, that display is mostly just for show--and they know it. New Hampshire's "live free or die" persona is the stuff of lore. Residents who clutch that sort of sentimental bullshit to their bosoms are, sadly, the tea partiers you find in every other state of the union. Right out of central casting. You'll know them by their accent.
So the truth is New Hampshire is simply just another rural New England state in which a small percentage of the population clings a little more neurotically to its own propaganda than the others. Want to know where the Republicans of Massachusetts go to live? Look no further. That oughta tell you enough right there.
Mitt Romney 38%
Jon Huntsman 18%
Ron Paul 15%
Rick Santorum 11%
Newt Gingrich 9%
10 January 2012 3:56PM
Tommydog - Too long to post in its entirety, but take a look at the famous Larry the Liquidator speech from Other People's Money.
Source
10 January 2012 3:58PM
No, he wants them to go first because they're the most important electorally due to their massive populations. Who can win in those four states is more important to being president than winning in four random states with 4 or 5 electors.
10 January 2012 4:01PM
This is where those of us who believe in God may have the advantage.
We can only pray.
10 January 2012 4:02PM
Newt wants to regulate you.
10 January 2012 4:02PM
Romney 40
Paul 20
Huntsman 12
Gingrich 8
Santorum, sliding in at the rear with a single digit.
Perry: same but with lesser digit.
10 January 2012 4:02PM
With so much coverage of US elections etc, isn't it about time us Brits were allowed a vote? If not, how about reducing the coverage to the levels of other nations.
10 January 2012 4:03PM
THIS IS HAPPENING, RIGHT NOW. As Wolf Blitzer would say.
My prediction is Romney will win and Gingrich will channel the spirit of Emma Goldman in his "concession" speech. Romney being Henry Clay Frick. Ron Paul will come second but the media will decide that the "real" second was in fact someone who came in third or fourth, "attack muffin" Gingrich, Huntsman or Santorum.
Enodoc
Dude, please get your head out your ass. JFK got into politics to steer the ship of empire in a more prudent direction, and also to annex Cuba if he could.
Politicians are all vain and power seeking, at the very, very best they may be useful, on occasion, if they self-interestedly respond to upward pressure for electoral reasons. Change will come when it's demanded vociferously, regularly enough and when people stop piling their wishes and dreams into the elected officials of a central government in this ticker-tape festooned freak show.
10 January 2012 4:06PM
yeah, I saw OPM years ago. It's a rental movie, but a decent enough rental. Danny DiVito's speech was a response to Gregory Peck's defence of keeping the company going and traditional values. I've made a few trips to the NE in recent years and that speech comes to mind as I'm aware of all the rate increases various communities are having to impose as they spend huge amounts to upgrade infrastructure, yet their their tax base has dissipated.
10 January 2012 4:08PM
MD. heh, heh. And I don't want to be regulated by Newt.
10 January 2012 4:09PM
You mean we haven't?
10 January 2012 4:13PM
Totally. I mean, how stupid is it that the candidates are forced to actually interact with voters in Iowa and New Hampshire? We should totally make all the big states go first, that way those overworked candidates would be saved the torture of having to interact directly with anyone besides large donors.
Get over yourself. I'd certainly trust Iowa's Democrats and New Hampshire's Republicans to make decisions regarding their respective parties before NY, TX, CA, and FL.
10 January 2012 4:13PM
Also, I'm really really really loving watching Newt go all OWS on Romney.
10 January 2012 4:15PM
Overhead - And that's why we live in a Republic, and not a Democracy. You would have the primary over on the first day, the current system mixes small and large states to get a fuller picture of support. Since we do not directly elect a President, the popular vote is less important than the Electoral vote, which gives more say to smaller states. Its almost as if the Founding Fathers wanted to protect the voting rights of everyone, even those in smaller states. Whats next? Small states only get one Senator?
tommydog - I spend a lot of time in small towns across the country, and have seen the devastation that happens when the primary employer fails. The difference is in how likely it is that a new business will spring up to create jobs. Its no coincidence that "business-friendly" states have lower unemployment. The internal migration patterns in the US are very interesting. BTW, I live in Mecklenburg County, NC.
10 January 2012 4:15PM
Another good news poll for Romney:
The liberal dream of a Santorum or Gingrich nomination is fadingaway like Michael J. Fox's picture in "Back to the Future".
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151961/Majority-Conservatives-Romney-Acceptable.aspx
10 January 2012 4:16PM
Don't really care. The only important thing is that, for the sake of the rest of the world as well as most Americans, Obama wins the main contest, We can not afford the nut bag jokers that the GOP put up.
10 January 2012 4:16PM
Come on Ron Paul! Take down the military-industrial complex! WOOOO!!
10 January 2012 4:17PM
Why? Because you've done such a great job electing your own politicians?
But if you want to help pay down our deficit, I'd consider it.
No Representation without Taxation.
10 January 2012 4:22PM
Richard; I've read your posts ATL.........you're not taking this terribly seriously are you?
Why can't the Americans be more like the French and have two political figureheads? They should elect a President to govern America, like the French PM runs France. They can choose any whack-job they like; Bible-basher, God 'n' guns, Mormon, pro-life, anti-gay, pro-gay, cut taxes, raise taxes, free healtchare, frankly I don't care.
Just make bloody sure they put someone sane and free of corruption in charge of foreign policy.
10 January 2012 4:22PM
And that is exactly why they should not go first, unless you are intentionally excluding the other 2/3 of the citizenry. Big states have the same power, but at least we get to hear the opinions of the rest of the country. To put it another way, since the London area is the most populous, why bother with having an election in Northumberland at all?
10 January 2012 4:23PM
Stopped reading. Laughing too hard.
10 January 2012 4:24PM
dadric- Yes, that is ppriceless. Absolutely priceless.
10 January 2012 4:27PM
Prediction
Romney 32%
Huntsman 22%
Gingrich 18%
Paul 15%
Santorum 11%
Perry 1%
NH residents are well used to the primary hullabaloo and many independents keep there cards close to their chest. The polls are often some way out. There's evidence of last minute swings to Huntsman and Gingrich but not enough to stop Romney winning comfortably.
Why is Perry still running?
10 January 2012 4:29PM
Surely, this is to be expected. If you believe the state should do everything, then taxpayers fund public assistance and the role of charities is diminished. If you believe in small government, low taxation and the trickle down effect, you have to be prepared to give more of your personal wealth to those less fortunate. Therefore, charitable giving should be greater.
The question is which system provides the needy with the most help? The evidence appears to be that charities are more efficient at providing help than Government departments (International Aid being the most obvious example where much of the Government's money is wasted or stolen by corrupt leaders). However, cutting taxes to promote charitable giving only stacks up if everyone benefitting from lower taxes puts the saving into the charity box, which is highly unlikely. Maybe the answer is to channel all Government spending on the needy through the charities?
10 January 2012 4:34PM
That video at 10:15am is very good, certainly better than the usual vox pop.
10 January 2012 4:36PM
Xpeters - Unfortunately, channeling Government money through charities just politicizes the charities.
But you do make very good points. I think that the reason that charities are more efficient is that they compete for donations. Sites like Charity Navigator allow people to reward effective charities, and divert money away from less effective ones.
Should the Government be promoting charitable giving (eg through larger tax deductions)? Not sure. In the US there is a different view of the role of Government than in Europe, we tend to see it as more socially limited. While I am sure that some people would like to redirect charitable monies to Government, I don't see the converse as likely or desirable.
10 January 2012 4:38PM
Isn't this all a race for second place? Obama is going to win hands down because the Republicans have a bunch of unelectable nut jobs standing for election. Romney and Paul have both failed in the past even to get nominated and yet they are the leading contenders!
10 January 2012 4:38PM
Actually Newt is just playing "The Spoiler" now, he knows he's not in the running. He or any number of his campaign donors may have been stockholders in Bain at on time or another.
10 January 2012 4:40PM
The problem with Ron Paul is that, while some of his ideas are great (including his views of the "military-industrial complex" other views of his are so objectionable to me that I cannot support him. I may be a bit simplistic, but I have a serious red-line when it comes to Creationism.
10 January 2012 4:40PM
Ha ha! Nothing like snappy snark to get the pulse racing, too. As I sit here during my lunch correcting badly written essays, I'm heartened.
10 January 2012 4:42PM
And the vid of of Newt attacking Romney (9:40am) is interesting. The interviewer expresses surprise on behalf of 'many conservatives' that he is against asset-stripping. They'll be calling Newt a socialist next!