That Mitt Romney did well in the Iowa caucuses is unsurprising, but what is surprising is Rick Santorum’s surge. One YouTube user asked, ‘how the f–k did santorum jump so much in 3 days…somethings fishy here…’ Lew Rockwell posted what Brad Funkhouser said: “I’ve been following Iowa GOP vote counts for a long time … They are being slow-walked…in 2012. Negotiations are going on… Cash is changing hands. Apparently GOP chieftains are ‘persuading,’ by one means or the other, Perry and Bachmann people who hold considerable hold sway over large blocs of votes to switch to Romney and Santorum - leaving Ron in the dust… Also abusing suddenly lax ID registration may have created many fake votes for neocons Santorum and Romney. Santorum has no organization, never drew over 100 people during his entire campaign. Of course he did bribe and received the benediction of of that ‘family’ leader who demanded 1 million dollars that were to be distributed in part to cronies. This is the biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia Primary. Perry had built a pretty organization and was around 13% of the vote. He drew far larger crowds than Santorum and ends up with just 10%. Did those votes go. Santorum? Santorum didn’t earn 24% of the vote.”
However, there may be a less conspiratorial reason for Santorum’s 29,944 votes, so I will not jump to a conclusion yet. I dislike blaming nameless ‘GOP chieftains’. What is the evidence to support this claim? None, but unsupported opinion.
The controversy over Ron Paul and the newsletters may have harmed Paul’s popularity to the point of denying him victory in the Iowa caucuses, but I cannot read the minds of Iowans.
However, as Wheylous noted below, Paul may have secretly won the caucus: “I think Ron Paul just won Iowa,” declared Mark Hansen, Ron Paul’s Pottawattamie County coordinator. Here at a bar serving as the unofficial county headquarters of the Paul campaign, Hansen had just conceded that Paul would not win the popular vote in Iowa, but he also pointed out that after the straw polls, the precincts appointed delegates to the county conventions in March – and that in every precinct in Pottawattamie, at least, two or three Ron Paul supporters volunteered to be delegates, and few other candidates’ supporters volunteered. Delegates at the county conventions help select delegates to the state convention, which then select delegates to the Republican National Convention. Technically, tonight’s vote was a straw poll, determining no delegates, but setting the tone. The only actions that actually could make a difference in electing delegates to the National Convention heavily favored Paul. Nobody will be watching in June, unless this election gets much more exciting, but Ron Paul might send more Iowa delegates to Orlando than any other candidate.
If any libertarian feels discouraged by Ron Paul placing third in the Iowa caucus poll, view his post-Iowa caucus speech. The end of the speech, where he invites Corporal Jessie Thorsen who was cut off while speaking on CNN, was a good wrap-up, but it could have been better if the soldier spent more time defending a non-interventionist foreign policy. Still, a current veteran standing by a former veteran is good political symbolism. It will help Paul change the range of politically acceptable opinion.
Earlier in the election, there was much focus on Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, but they both faded: Perry because of his bad debate moments and Gingrich because of his record, highlighted by Paul.
What will likely happen post-Iowa caucus is the lower-ranking Republicans (Huntsman, Bachmann, Perry, and Gingrich) will be pressured to drop out the race. That will give Paul more time to speak during the debates and allow the Paul campaign to direct attack ads at Romney and Santorum.
Former CIA intelligence officer Michael Scheuer endorsed Paul while Santorum is rejected by his nephew for Ron Paul. This is a good start.
Eventually, I believe Paul should give a national security speech that will go into detail about blowback, the motives for Islamic terrorism, indefinite detention, rendition, enhanced interrogation techniques, massive surveillance, national security letters, and other issues security related. He should note that he has received the most donations from military veterans, but the speech should primarily be about explaining why the decade-long war in various Islamic nations has been counterproductive. He should follow up on this speech with attack ads on Santorum and Gingrich with military veterans explaining how their foreign policy preferences are dangerous, expensive, and unconstitutional.
