While both the Romney and Santorum camps can claim bragging rights as they head for New Hampshire, Dave Weigel suggests that the results from Iowa reveal one big, unambiguous loser:
The Tea Party isn’t a small government-first movement. It was Sarah Posner who coined the term “Teavangelicals,” a little neologism for a simple idea. The Tea Party, she argued, was not some new force of libertarians. It was a new framework for the same conservatives who dominated the GOP a month before the Tea Party began. Iowa may not have been the best place to test this, as its Republicans have always been more economically populist than not, and in the last decades they’ve been reliable social conservatives. But its Tea Partiers did not demand much economic libertarianism from their GOP. Sixty-four percent of caucus-goers called themselves “Tea Party supporters,” and 30 percent of them backed Rick Santorum — a social conservative who proudly defended his earmarks. Rick Perry, who campaigned desparately [sic] on the issues Tea Partiers say they care about — no earmarks! Term limits! Part time Congress! — got 14 percent of this vote. Michele Bachmann got 9 percent of it.
Weigel also notes that, despite hype by the “liberal media,” data from the caucuses suggests Republican voter enthusiasm was down in Iowa this year:
Republicans aren’t so excited about 2012. Four years ago, a depressed GOP went to the precinct caucuses, very well aware that Democrats had all the energy. The total GOP vote: 119,188. This year, Republicans should be psyched about the chance to uproot Barack Obama. There will be something above 122,000 total votes. An improvement, right? Well… in 2008, 86 percent of the people who chose the GOP caucuses were Republicans. This year, 75 percent of the electorate was Republican, with the rest of the vote coming from independents and Democrats. What the hell happened?
Republicans say want smaller governments and seem to insult the poor (get off welfare! earn your own healthcare!) yet put their kids in the brass welfare (the military) so we can police the world putting their families on the government payroll for life. They say their freedoms are the most important thing and liberals want to take them away but then create The Patriot Act stealing our rights after starting a false flag war based on lies. They say they are pro-life but are pro-death penalty and pro-war and against stem-cell research that will save lives and doesn’t destroy life. Do they even see their hypocrisies? The only one of these prospective candidates who doesn’t make my hair hurt is really an independent and that’s Ron Paul.