Looks like it’s all over, folks:
GREENVILLE, S.C. — Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.) won a stunning come-from-behind victory in the South Carolina presidential primary on Saturday, using hard-edged debate performances to vault over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.
Gingrich was actually trailing Romney, in very early returns, after polls closed at 7 p.m.. But exit polls made it clear that he had defeated Romney — a win that will profoundly re-shape a nominating contest that, a week ago, seemed to be almost over.
Suddenly, Romney’s claim to be the GOP’s inevitable nominee looked dubious. Romney had arrived in South Carolina as the apparent winner of the first two GOP contests and faced an electorate that seemed open to his message that only a Washington outsider could restore free markets and sensible spending.
And yet he was beaten by a man who had been the ultimate Washington insider.
At the same time, the victory in South Carolina seemed to validate Gingrich’s new model for a presidential campaign — which held that his own strong debate performances could overcome Romney’s edge in advertising and money.
Here, it finally worked…
Now a different candidate has won each contest. And for the first time since I’ve been covering SC politics, South Carolina didn’t give the nation a clear front-runner. And may not have picked the eventual winner.
What a long, strange trip this has been…
Related Posts
First Haley, now Gingrich… do you ever feel like you’re talking to a brick wall?
Maybe you could take a tip from George Costanza and try being Opposite-Brad.
Let’s hope not.
But there is justice in that, no?
Kookie.
TPM Editor’s Blog
Bad Sign for Mitt
JOSH MARSHALL JANUARY 21, 2012
According to the exit polls, Mitt Romney lost all income levels with the exception of those making over $200,000 a year.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/01/bad_sign_for_mitt.php?ref=fpblg
I’ve been asked why SC evangelicals are going so much for Gingrich, and I have no idea–listening to NPR the other day, and they were interviewing a lady from Lubbock TX (my home town) who drove over with her kids to help in the Gingrich campaign.
My guess: move toward polarization in general, so more readiness to ignore character failures in candidates whose positions are acceptable; more and more expectations that complex issues have simple solutions (why, I have no earthly idea); rejection of Mormonism and Romney as non-Christian.
Well, to quote Jon Stewart and the Daily Show yet again:
Thank You, South Carolina!
Boo Hiss. It really is disturbing that so many people let themselves be taken in by the aura of hate and evil that exudes from Newt.
May God have mercy on us.
With the evangelical voters, its about perceived membership, not about adherence to a set of principles.
I’m more amazed at how many hardcore Democrats here are upset with this.
Steven, you seem to be confused about Democrats. Apparently, THEY are thrilled. You’ve made their day.
I should have said, ‘positions considered (by them) to be acceptable’ — don’t want to be understood as endorsing Newt’s campaign against humanity.
Looks like the only two counties Romney took were Richland and Charleston… both traditionally Democrat counties. Tells you a lot about what SC thinks of Romney.
Just call me Mr. Egg on Face. I did not see this coming a week ago. How did things turn so fast. Incredible turnaround.
But that’s not 1/10 the mystery that explaining the evangelical vote. According to the polls I’ve seen these so-called religious voters went overwhelmingly for Mr. 2-time 2-timer.
Brad, the ones here on your blog are upset.
Steven, how do you rationalize Beaufort County going for Romney? It’s not traditionally a Demo county.
The GOP wants the guy, not who will beat Obama, but the one who will humiliate him in a debate, lay bare the “real truth” about him, and leave him destroyed. It wants an emotional Waterloo.
J, Beaufort = Hilton Head. The one demographic that went hard for Romney was those making over $200K per year. Considering all the second homes on that particular part of the state, its not a weird outlier. The GOP it elects are on the 1st tee on Sunday morning, not the church pew.
One thing that really struck me is that every televised campaign appearance of Romney’s in SC, that I saw, had at least a brief shot of Nikki Haley in it; she seems to have been everywhere with him.
Since Romney’s left the state now, I would imagine that she has already been deleted from his speed-dial…
j, because I posted it before Beaufort County results came in.
Oh, rationalizing… I don’t know I don’t obsess over SC politics like some do. I’m not from here, don’t know the history, and likely won’t stay here upon retirement. Really don’t care why they voted for Romney.
“One thing that really struck me is that every televised campaign appearance of Romney’s in SC, that I saw, had at least a brief shot of Nikki Haley in it; she seems to have been everywhere with him.”
But yet she stayed home from his post primary gathering. Did the Romney camp ask her not to come or was she too chagrined to show her face? Either way, it didn’t look good.
Yep. Perhaps her Wunderkinder staff advised her not to appear on a stage, in South Carolina, with a loser.
@ Herb– My theory is that evangelical voters really like his “redemption” story, are wary of Mormons and Ron Paul, and doubt Santorum can win.
I do not understand why the one Protestant Christian, President Obama, who must clearly have been faithful to his wife, etc., or someone would have found out by now, is so widely disdained by (white) evangelicals….and I’m not playing the race card, merely pointing out that black evangelicals love Obama, for the most part.
Your responses are indicative of the fact, as you stated, that you’re not knowledgeable of the state.
Kathryn, could it, perhaps, maybe that race has something to do with it (perish the thought)?
Obama has to be faithful, because he’s the only President who’s had a wife who could beat him to death if she wanted to.
@ Kathryn
Problem is, fellow evangelicals won’t let the President be a Protestant. And I think the real issues are ideological and also, unfortunately, white churches and black churches mix very little, so there is not much exposure to other viewpoints.
If there’s one thing that can be said about Mitt with certainty, it’s that he’s been faithful to his wife.
I agree, South Carolina may not be the “King Maker” this time around.
I certainly hope this time around that South Carolina doesn’t pick the GOP nominee.
One of the robo calls I received was from Beverly LaHaye “Beverly LaHaye Endorses Newt Gingrich for President”. Her reasoning is here:
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Beverly-LaHaye-Gingrich-endorsement/2012/01/16/id/424344
I guess it sort of answers Herb and Kathryn. Truthfully I don’t understand why people just don’t vote for who they believe is the best person instead of gaming the system – which is bound to backfire…
@ Karen
No doubt it has to do with race. These attitudes do not just go away over night. Unfortunately, evangelicals have a blind spot and have had it for over 300 years.
The LaHayes are in favor of any candidate most likely to bring about the End Times.
Is it true that Mormons don’t drink caffeinated beverages? That could be a deal-breaker for Mr. Starbucks Warthen.