Romney Wins Nevada Big, But What Does It Mean?

By Amy Walter | ABC News – Sat, Feb 4, 2012 11:53 PM EST

To no one's surprise, Mitt Romney racked up a huge win in Nevada tonight.

He was helped by the make-up of the electorate and the fact that his opponents essentially ceded the state to him. Rick Santorum and Ron Paul didn't even campaign in the state today, choosing to spend their time and attention on the upcoming caucus states of Colorado and Minnesota.

And, even though Nevada is home to Sheldon Adelson, the financial muscle behind the pro-Newt Gingrich SuperPAC "Winning Our Future," the group only spent about $50,000 here - on radio and Internet advertising.

Other examples of why Nevada differed from the four previous contests in South Carolina, Florida, New Hampshire and Iowa:

- Mormons outnumbered evangelical voters: 26 percent of the Nevada caucus-goers were Mormon compared to just 23 percent who said they were evangelical Christians. Only New Hampshire had a lower-percentage of evangelical voters, at 22 percent. Even so, Romney carried evangelicals here with 48 percent - the best he's done in any state thus far.

- Very low turn-out: With Romney all but assured a win here, Nevada GOPers weren't exactly inspired to get out to vote. In 2008, just 45,000 Republicans caucused. This year, it looks like even fewer will vote. Given the dismal showing, it's going to be very hard for Nevada to justify its early state status in 2016. As the New York Time's @natesilver tweeted: "new rule: if you don't turn enough people out to fill state's largest football stadium, you lose early voting status."

- Race decided in December: Unlike many of these other early contests where momentum played a role in determining the winner, voters in Nevada were all but immune to the ups and downs on this campaign season. And, that was good news for Romney. A whopping 57 percent of Nevada voters said that they had decided for whom they were voting in 2011. Of those, 57 percent said they voted for Romney.

That said, a win is a win. Romney carried every demographic group, including strong tea party supporters and very conservative voters. More importantly, it denies Gingrich the momentum he's been so desperate to capture since his big South Carolina win.

Also Read
 

11 comments

  • Lawrence
    Lawrence  •  Phoenix, Arizona  •  3 months ago
    "Romney Wins Nevada Big, But What Does It Mean?"

    Fewer Nevada voters turned out for 2012 than 2008.
    Romney received fewer votes and a smaller percentage than in his failed 2008 campaign.
    Romney couldn't even get a majority of 2012 voters.
    Romney did worse in 2012 than he did in his failed 2008 bid.
    And that's a "Big Win" ........how?

    If a Romney candidacy can't unite his own party, how can a Romney Presidency possibly unite the entire country?
  • Johnie
    Johnie  •  3 months ago
    What a dumb article, it means more people in Nevada voted for him than the other dupes.
    Why does everything have to have a special meaning?
  • OverTheRainbow
    OverTheRainbow  •  3 months ago
    It means Nothing....because....of voter fraud...people are going to Write In Ron Paul...they do NOT want Romeny....google it.
  • kanobi
    kanobi  •  Elmhurst, New York  •  3 months ago
    The media circus around this election would make you believe that it’s all but over. The reality is that just 28 (that’s twenty eight) delegates were at stake out of 2,268 and that Nevada is a special place very much unlike the other states.
  • My Chemo Head
    My Chemo Head  •  Gilbert, South Carolina  •  3 months ago
    It means that we will be stuck with the National Defense Authorization Act. (The threat of martial law, military imprisonment, and no due process of law.) Romney said he was in favor of it and Obama has already signed it into law. Too few citizens are even aware of it and those that are aware are not complaining to their congressmen & senators.
  • 097234571
    097234571  •  Savannah, Georgia  •  3 months ago
    It means most everybody was not motivated to vote, except the Mormons.
  • Elisa
    Elisa  •  New Braunfels, Texas  •  3 months ago
    Newt won in SC because he threw a temper-tantrum. Instead of ansering a question about his second wife, who might embarass and expose him, he threw a temper tantrum instead. Typical action of a "cornered" liar. A child or a brat will do this also. Newt got mad at John King, the CNN moderator, thus making a scene or spectacle of himself, for bringing up his infidelity, actually a series of adulteries. He never answered or has to answer "that" question again. His getting mad at the CNN moderator brought his win in SC. Other than that, he has no issues that could win the WH. The media was stopped from "digging" into his infidelity or adulteries. This is what the people loved, some excitement, nothing about the issues. This is between Newt and the media. This series of adulteries is one of NEWT's baggages, which never was brought up, but Obama will.
    • ozz2
      ozz2 3 months ago
      is this the i love obama site
  • R
    R  •  Knoxville, Tennessee  •  3 months ago
    It means Gingrich will become the next President!
    • Elisa
      Elisa 3 months ago
      No way can an adulterer and a liar become president of anything, not even a president of a dogs' club. An adulterer has to be a liar also. Adultery is a mortal sin, and cannot be committed without lying. Show me an adulterer who did not lie. Bill Clinton? A liar has no credibility and cannot be trusted. We have one already in the WH. ENOUGH!!
  • Time
    Time  •  3 months ago
    The answer to the title is a no brainier. It means voter fraud just like in South Carolina !!!!!!
  • hot shot
    hot shot  •  3 months ago
    it means romney is going to wip odumbo as)s
    • ozz2
      ozz2 3 months ago
      no it means obama versus wobama
  • Neal
    Neal  •  Tucson, Arizona  •  3 months ago
    Nevada where the number one job is a hooker... what does that tell you!
 Post a comment
Loading...