U.S. & World

Romney loses South Carolina to Gingrich; tells supporters he'll keep 'fighting for every vote'


Return To Article
  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 23, 2012 10:20 p.m.

    The way I see it.
    Obama got into the white house because he is 1/2 Black...' - JKayDS | 11:53 a.m. Jan. 23, 2012

    And WHO brought up the skin color of Obama..?

    The same people who will not vote for Romney because he is Mormon.

  • Miss Piggie Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 23, 2012 2:45 p.m.


    "SC has demonstrated that there's a state full of fools when they voted overwhelmingly for an admitted adulterer who served divorce papers on two wives on their sick beds and while committing adultery with his current wife. What kind of ugliness do they want walking the halls of the White House, anyway?"

    Do we really want to be calling a woman who committed adultery with a married co-worker, the FIRST LADY?? In my eyes, any woman knowingly and willingly conducting herself in that manner is no lady.

  • Gattaca Pittsburgh, PA
    Jan. 23, 2012 12:28 p.m.

    JKayDS: Granted people voted for Obama because he was black but they were cancelled out by people who voted for McCain because he wasn't black.

    Obama got into the White House because the country blamed Bush for the war and the economy and did not want his heir apparent aka McCain to become president. Adding Palin to the ticket just put the nail in the coffin.

    Jan. 23, 2012 11:53 a.m.

    The way I see it.
    Obama got into the white house because he is 1/2 Black (funny how everyone seemed to just forget that he was 1/2 white also). And he was a good speaker.

    Newt(if he gets there), will get there because he is a good speaker and because he is not LDS!

    Yeah, our forefathers who sacrificed so much for our freedoms would be so proud of the way we are running our country now!

  • Pac_Man Pittsburgh, PA
    Jan. 23, 2012 11:27 a.m.

    This was Romney's race to lose. He failed to adapt.

    You were a business men. We get it.

    You were a governor. We get that too.

    But what have you done for me lately?

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 23, 2012 11:01 a.m.

    South Carolina: Gingrich

    Nebraska: Romney

    Iowa: Rick Santorum

    Common denominator: All Republican. This is the worst Primary in the Republican parties history.

    Pounding the partisan war drum of 'I'm more conservative' until there is no one left.

    We HAVE a family values canidate.

    It is the man who is married to his wife, in the white house.

  • williary Kearns, UT
    Jan. 23, 2012 10:15 a.m.

    Spells big trouble for the party. Even though on one hand you would have to give Republicans credit for actually choosing someone who is just as a crazy conservative as the party has claimed to be over the last 3 years. Gingrich has a 0% chance of beating Obama, but at least go down with the guy who represents your values.

    The coronation is off, and perhaps the nomination. Florida is a closed-primary, so no help for Mitt by the moderate/independent voters. If Newt can eak out another win, while being outspent again by Romney and his Super Pac, things could change pretty quickly.

    And all of this just swings the 2012 race even more to Obama. Romney has finally shown everyone who he really is. And even his own party is rejecting him.

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Jan. 23, 2012 9:49 a.m.

    Sympathy votes for Gingrich because of the way he was attacked about his torrid personal life? Where is the "sympathy" for a man who has been smeared because of his religion and because of success in his financial career?

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Jan. 23, 2012 9:47 a.m.

    Clearly religious bigotry is alive and well in S.C. Not voting for someone because they pay tithing to their church? Afraid that electing a Mormon president will be free advertising for the Mormon church?
    Many Americans thought that such religious bigotry was eliminated with the election of JFK. We have had a Catholic President, a Quaker president, many Protestant presidents, and many presidents who did not belong to any religion. How can anyone be afraid to elect a man because of his religion, when millions of Americans practice that religion and are responsible citizens, including above average rates of service in the armed forces of our country?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 8:13 p.m.

    Let the GOP rationalizing begin!

  • Alfred Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 7:12 p.m.


    "The job creating numbers aren't an outright lie but they are misleading. Why not say thousands of jobs rather than 100s of thousands to begin with?"

    It's probably near impossible to state exactly how many jobs were created. Maybe he should've adopted the Obama lingo and said, 'created or saved.'

    "People don't like feeling they've been treated as fools."

    SC has demonstrated that there's a state full of fools when they voted overwhelmingly for an admitted adulterer who served divorce papers on two wives on their sick beds and while committing adultery with his current wife. What kind of ugliness do they want walking the halls of the White House, anyway?

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 7:03 p.m.

    A flawed Bible believing GOP is far superior than a smartly educated, elitist non Bible believing Democratic party. Yes, Mr. Obama is a good family man of faith and reason, but once he leaves 1600 Pennslyvania Street in Jan. 2017, his party will crumble or will have crumbled due to corruption and lack of faith. Mr. Obama is the last and only good thing his party has going for them, but don't fret over his victory this fall, the GOP will control the House and Senate. Then we will just need term limits for Utah's delegation and things will start working for the positive.

  • antodav TAMPA, FL
    Jan. 22, 2012 6:11 p.m.

    Well, as expected, ignorance helped the cause of liberty in South Carolina. Though my own candidate did not win, it is enough to see Mitt Romney defeated. He is not a true conservative, and he has frequently taken positions that are contrary to the teachings of the general authorities of the Church. Mormons should examine his record and think twice before voting for him; remember, identity politics is how we got stuck with Barack Obama.

    "Stand fast in the liberty wherewith ye have been made free, andtrust no man to be a king over you." Mosiah 23:13

    RON PAUL 2012

  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 5:33 p.m.

    As I see things Jon Huntsman was the least flawed Republican candidate.

    He was a good governor and led Utah well. Did he please all? No but most would view him on both sides of the aisle as competent.

    He has demonstrated good family values.

    He has showed the ability to serve country first and party second.

    He understands the Chinese culture and language thus giving him unique insight on who will likely be our economic and perhaps military rival for the next generation.

    Though from a wealthy background, he doesn't come across as uber wealthy. He doesn't have investments in the Cayman Islands.

    He doesn't have extreme positions on abortion, contraception or other social issues like gay marriage that would be appealing to many in a general election.

    I think Romney would be the next best choice but Newt would have no chance in a general election. Let's get serious. He wouldn't get 40% of the woman vote in a general election and that would be "Katie Bar the Door" for the Republicans.

  • Aggielove Junction city, Oregon
    Jan. 22, 2012 4:36 p.m.

    Ask yourself this.
    Who can beat obama?
    everything doesnt matter.
    Come on utah people, dont get caught in the clouds.

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 4:35 p.m.

    Nothing new here: the South does not like the Northeast; it goes back 150 years, maybe further.

  • BruceW SANDY, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:56 p.m.

    Let's just put the religion thing aside and all think about who could govern our country and direct its reemergence as a great nation the best. Gingritch is just a smart politician who plays dirty and has a terrible record. Santorum is not exciting and can't gain broad support. Ron Paul is unrealistic about foreign affairs. Romney has shown his ability to merge different political views in Massachusetts to achieve compromises. He was outstanding in business and in directing the Olymbics. Obama has been a disaster financially for our country, can't even see the wisdom of approving an oil pipeline and has offended our best allies. We need a change. I wish Romney were a bit more foreceful in his debates. However, let's get behind Romney.

  • Ms.W South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:55 p.m.

    Well...South Carolina has some time to let this sink in and think about who they really voted for. This reminds me of obama's election...getting caught up in the moment without really seeing what they're doing.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:50 p.m.

    @ A Guy With A Brain, would you like me to enumerate Romney's weaknesses? You can insult me all you like, but those things don't change. Your guy will never be President, and I am not sure he can even get the nomination.

  • Ms.W South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:49 p.m.

    "What's with the slams against Newts adultery? First off I don't see what that has to do with governing anyone exept, maybe his wife. "

    Moral character is at the root of whether government and country succeeds or not. That's why it matters. If they lie and cheat in their private lives, what would stop them from doing it in their business dealings?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:46 p.m.

    Okay Romney led by almost a dozen with a week to go so anti-Mormon bigotry wasn't enough since those wouldn't have been supporting him last week. Romney lost because he was playing prevent defense and South Carolinians like a fighter which Gingrich proved to be in the two debates. That's not to say there is no anti-Mormon effect, just that that is not to blame for Gingrich's 25 point swing the final week (from being down 12 to Romney to beating him by 13) since those people never supported Romney in the first place.

  • Ms.W South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:41 p.m.

    "You have to give it to Newt, he did a great job this week."

    Newt didn't do a great job, the media did. Would he have still won if the ex-wife kept silent? There would have been no standing ovation from me...what are we applauding?

  • Wildcat O-town, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 3:09 p.m.

    I totally agree with UtahBlueDevil. I am LDS as well and am tired of hearing the "they hate us" line. Romney was leading the state a week before the vote. His poor debate performances put Gingrich in the lead--not a bias against the LDS religion. Romney's poorly phrased words of my speaking fees "not that much money" when it is $300,000 also isolated him from a state that is experiencing high unemployment.

    His tax records and his time at Bain Capital are relevant to discuss as is Gingrich's ethics violations and personal history. He is just not as adept as Newt is at deflecting criticism or blaming the media. He still has the inside track because I think most states will think he is more electable, but he needs to worry about the task at hand. Last week, he was talking like he was the nominee. Don't count your chickens before their hatched. I think he may be tag teamed from Santorum and Gingrich. From watching the speeches, it looks like those two have an alliance formed. Should make for good tv next debate.

  • L Kaiser REDMOND, WA
    Jan. 22, 2012 2:38 p.m.

    For a long while I thought the LDS bigotry towards Mitt was exaggerated, But the SC primary has me in serious doubts about this. I just cant understand how a group of supposed "devout moral christians" could vote for Newt 2-1 over Romney when their main political driving force has been family values and morality. Its clear being LDS is worse to them and thats awful. Voting for Newt who has repeatedly violated the very things they preach so hard against is beyond hypocrisy. Mitt Romney isnt my personal first choice, but how any christian moral upstanding conservative could vote for Newt over Romney is far beyond me.... I also have a very hard time believing a bunch of democrats would go to a republican open primary in droves to vote for Newt so Obama can win, its a convenient argument buts its now clear to me LDS bigotry is alive and well.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 22, 2012 2:30 p.m.

    First, I am not a Newt backer or apologizer. But lets get real here. As an LDS person, i am always embarrassed by how members like to play the persecution card. Many of these same people are the same ones who complain that blacks play the race card too often, then turn right around and play the religion card. Get over it. There is always someone who doesn't like something about a class of people, too short, too tat, western, yankee, southerner, muslim, catholic, jewish, whatever. There are also the same who hate political correctness, yet then feel free to whine when someone says something negative about their group.

    I don't think we are a nation of beggers, but I do think we are a nation of cry babies.

    Second part Utahn's don't get about evangelical beliefs is the premise that they view all people as imperfect, trying to become so relying on grace to become so. Utah LDS tend to have this attitude that you are expected to be perfect, and that failures to be so is a sign of weakness. It is a small but very significant difference - and why they forgive Newt.

  • Mayfair City, Ut
    Jan. 22, 2012 1:30 p.m.

    from article: "many evangelical voters who wouldn't consider Romney because he is a Mormon...that attitude may not be as pronounced in other states, it's not going to go away. It's going to be an issue everywhere he goes"

    These same GOP people who still have such problems with Mormons in government would have had a complete apoplectic fit if they had known how many of President Reagan's staff and advisers were Mormons.

    I wonder if they see their glaring hypocrisy in basking in this continuing
    phobia of Mormons, while embracing and voting for a person condemning honest financial gain, while he himself sought and received substantial questionable financial gain.

    And who cries and complains when anyone wonders at his seriously questionable morals, habitual infidelity and mockery of marriage vows.

  • Wildcat O-town, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 1:28 p.m.

    Newt just threw out red meat for the base in South Carolina. As Diamond Joe Quimby on The Simpsons says, "They're like trained seals. Throw'em a fish, and watch the slap their fins together for some more."

    Romney needs to go on the offensive and talk about the ethics violations the former speaker. Although Newt has brilliantly tried to block this move by saying he doesn't want to go negative. Any questions about him in debates he deflects off as the media out to get him. If Romney brings it up, he will look like he is trying to be negative. Romney needs to get the tax returns out and put it to rest. If he didn't pay that much or any at all through loopholes, he could use the "That's why we need to reform tax laws" strategy, but he needs to get the focus off of that issue.

    Romney still has the money (you can't spell Romney without M-O-N-E-Y) and the infrastructure, but he has to go on the offensive or risk losing momentum--this could go to convention without enough delegates to win. GOOD TIMES!

  • Dark Reaver SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 1:10 p.m.

    one vote
    "Reality crashes down on the Utah conservatives. Better start a separate party because you have no clout whatsoever with the Republicans."

    Theocracy anyone? :)

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:53 p.m.

    I have voted for every Republican presidential ticket beginning with Reagan. If Newt ultimately wins the nomination that streak will come to an end.

    How can you support a man leading an impeachment against a president for lack of moral conviction while the man himself is stepping out on his wife? Dispicable.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:33 p.m.

    Last comment due to DN restrictions.

    one vote: I don't care at all about the clout I have or my religion has with the Republican party. I didn't affiliate with them because of some ego trip that I would be given great power. I affiliated with them because they most closely reflected my own political thought. But when they abandon those principles, whether social, economic, political, or other principles; well, perhaps that is time to part company.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:14 p.m.

    Reality crashes down on the Utah conservatives. Better start a separate party because you have no clout whatsoever with the Republicans.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:11 p.m.

    The job creating numbers aren't an outright lie but they are misleading. Why not say thousands of jobs rather than 100s of thousands to begin with? People don't like feeling they've been treated as fools.

    I hope his opponents continue to call him on these exaggerations.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:04 p.m.

    Bebyebe: How are those contradictory. Doesn't 110,000 count as tens of thousands? Doesn't it count as thousands? Each of those claims was made in the context of a much broader statement or point he was trying to make at the time. But they do not contradict each other.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 11:47 a.m.

    Washington was an idealist in a very immature time in our nation's existence. Remember, candidates did not even run campaigns in that timeframe. They were drafted, so to speak. Although parties existed, their role was merely to define a system of political thought through a platform of loosely-held ideas.

    Martin Van Buren, during the Andrew Jackson campaign, is the one who first exercised the political clout that an organized party could muster and his efforts created a political machine that kept his party in power pretty much uninterrupted for more than 30 years.

    Washington had been dead for a quarter century when the party process that we know today was born. IMHO, there is nothing wrong with people trying to create organization out of chaos in order to bring about a common set of objectives.

    The problem is that just like other social organizations such as unions, the NRA, ACLU, Sierra Club, etc; those that are most passionate (and most extreme because of their passion) tend to rise to the top of the organization. Virtually every political and social organization tends to become extremist. And with extremism comes the idea of objectives over principle.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 11:43 a.m.

    The "hundreds of thousands of jobs created" isn't true and Romney knows it. He has changed this number over the last several months.

    From the debate on CNN: 'created 120,000 jobs minus 10,000 jobs is 110,000 jobs created.'

    from CBS after NH win: "tens of thousands of jobs"

    from his own ad before the SC primary: "thousands of jobs" created.

    He can't deny saying 110,000 jobs. He said it very plainly. Once something's been said in a public forum it's out there forever thanks to the internet.

    He should have owned up the the 'thousands of jobs' rather than have to backpedal now. It's this kind of dissembling that people don't like.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 11:14 a.m.


    "In light of the stark reality that the Republican party is a party of convenient principles (demonstrated last night), can anyone argue why I should retain my party membership instead of renouncing it and becoming an Independent?"

    The answer is you shouldn't have been a member of a party in the first place. I like what George Washington had to say about political parties.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 10:51 a.m.

    In light of the stark reality that the Republican party is a party of convenient principles (demonstrated last night), can anyone argue why I should retain my party membership instead of renouncing it and becoming an Independent?

    When Newt was excoriating Bill Clinton, he asked if a man could show such poor judgment in his personal affairs and still show good judgment in the execution of his office. Within the last few months, the revelation of Herman Cain's indiscretions caused the right wing of the party to reject him.

    The hypocritical South Carolina Republicans have decided that it mattered before but it doesn't matter now.

    I supported this party through "The Contract with America" which I hated.

    I supported this party through their "Borrow and Spend" doctrine while they were simultaneously condemning the Democrats "Tax and Spend" doctrine.

    I supported this party when out-of-state tea party activists stole my opportunity to vote for Bob Bennett by stuffing the state convention with delgates that kept him off the primary ballot.

    How can I continue to support an organization that is more concerned about itself than those it claims to care for, the citizens of the United States?

  • VitaMan Park City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 10:09 a.m.

    With this the GOP just handed the election to Obama. Gingrich has no chance against Obama. If Mitt pulls it out in the end he will be to battered for the general election. The democrats are laughing themselves silly.

    If the GOP is comprised of evangelicals who are so accepting of an immoral and dishonest person as Gingrich it makes you wonder about their true level of adherence to Bible principles. I have been a life long member of the GOP but perhaps this is not the party of vision and justice any longer. It is probably time to abandon the party and look at charcter.

    At least Obama as far as I know has been faithful to his spouse. I hate his policies but would rather tell my children that moral correctness always trumps ideology every time. This is why Bill Clinton was such a failure for the Presidency. I never respected him and also never trusted one thing he said. I will say the same about Newt. I can't trust him and although a good orator he is in it for himself and not for us.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 10:07 a.m.

    Until we're ready to marginalize religion from the political process these are the results we will get.

  • Dark Reaver SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 10:04 a.m.

    No one should be "demonized" for being rich, Kennedy was extremely rich. Wealth is a non issue for me. It's my guess that most have an issue with Romney's father starting the the tax form release tradition with releasing 12 years of his own. Yet his son has not been willing to follow in his fathers footsteps.
    Personally, I believe the GOP made a major mistake with the treatment of Huntsman. He was their only good canidate, I could care less about any party, party is irrelevant, the individual is the only aspect. As I posted above, quoted from Joseph Smith, if Newt is the GOP canidate, who will you vote for?

  • Dark Reaver SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 9:31 a.m.

    And if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than upon an unworthy individual, who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us with."

    Doubtfull I need to say who this is quoted from...

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Jan. 22, 2012 9:11 a.m.

    Why was Al Gore or John Kerry never asked to publish their tax returns? Why is Romney demonized because he accululated some wealth but Al Gore, Kerry, Nany Pelosi, Bill and Hillary, et al never are? Double standard? No doubt about it!

  • donn layton, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 9:09 a.m.

    MapleDon: It's comforting to know (but not terribly surprising) that the evangelical voters of South Carolina voted for an adulterer who bails on the second most important relationship in life (next to that with God) when trouble reared its ugly head, rather than a Mormon.

    In South Carolina, nearly two-thirds of voters Saturday said they are born again or evangelical Christians, backed Gingrich over Romney by 2-1 also. Im surprised he received that support from the pale of Christianity who understand forgiveness, but probably dont really understand Mormonism.
    Romney in Utah would receive over 95% of the Mormon vote,do to the institutional belief system, which leads to falling into theological cement.

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    Jan. 22, 2012 9:07 a.m.

    The United States Government is full of people who "twist"(lie) the facts to suit their needs. This is nothing new.
    Maybe you folks are so terribly upset because your Mitt has possibly "twisted" his issues as well. Chris Christie and other
    "highly thought of" Republicans, tried to get Mitt to discuss and disclose his taxes and reasons for offshore accounts.
    Mitt chose to ignore their advice. What could be so bad, that Mitt let this issue bring him down?
    According to the media, Newt deserves credit for his tenacity in bringing Romney's financial issues to the forefront for American voters to ponder.
    Apparently, voters could not relate to Mitt. It could be his financial issues, his Mormonism, or the fact that he cannot relate to the common man.
    The majority of Voters in SC could relate Newt, want his as their leader, and have either forgotten, or forgiven his issues.

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 9:05 a.m.

    The race has just started. I am not giving up on Romney. He is still the man to beat.

  • CB Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 8:50 a.m.

    It appears we are in the 'entertainment, soundbite generation'. When the circus comes to town the clowns get a lot of attention, but that does not mean the are qualified to do the high wire act.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 8:30 a.m.

    @A Guy With a Brain
    "Here's my question: if Newt Gingrich promised BOTH his previous wives he'd be faithful to them but did not, how can you or I believe he'll be 'faithful' (politically speaking) to what he promises you and me he'll do for us if elected?"

    Fair argument, but being someone who was very fond of Mass-Mitt who was completely different than current-Mitt, I'm not sure how this helps your argument since Mitt already was unfaithful (politically speaking) to what he promises.

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    Jan. 22, 2012 8:25 a.m.

    Romney would do himself a favor if he spoke to the issues facing this country and not continue the chant "beat Obama". We got that months ago, so how will you be different?
    Stop your headlong race to the radicalized right. It is a small faction. Your strength is being a past moderate. Your current campaign tells me the king has no clothes.
    Do not be afraid to let people know your financial worth. It will come out soon enough, to include the reported $40 million in a Cayman bank. No, you do not pay US taxes on that money. We are not all fools.
    Try the truth and identify yourself as who you are, not how you think people want to see you as.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 8:25 a.m.

    Religion matters to the right wingers.

  • JP71 Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 8:17 a.m.

    It is a sad day when SC will give up the presidency to Obama just because they dont want a Mormon to be president. Newt has long history of infidelity, lying, and has been divorced twice. So much for southern values. To win the presidency you must have a major portion of the independent vote and no independent will vote for Newt.

  • logicguy TUCSON, AZ
    Jan. 22, 2012 7:54 a.m.

    Those fickle South Carolina voters. They couldn't bring themselves to
    vote for a high-qualified, decent individual -- who happens to be a
    Mormon. So, instead, they vote for the only candidate who tried to have
    two wives at the same time.

  • Rynn Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 22, 2012 7:20 a.m.

    It's a vote for a Presidential nominee, not a vote for "Husband of the Year".
    To say that all those who voted for Gingrich did so because they hate Mormons and condone adultery is not fair and just as prejudiced as you claim the Evangelicals to be.

  • byufootballrocks Herndon, VA
    Jan. 22, 2012 6:00 a.m.

    Who'd have thought that in this so-called enlightened age anti-Mormon bigotry would be strong enough in a place like South Carolina to elect a two-time adulterer and career politician over a man of the character of Mitt Romney.

    Shame on you, South Carolina. If you wanted to make a statement, you sure did. You demonstrated your ignorance. I wouldn't give Newt Gingrich a snowball's chance in the fall election.

    This guy offends the marjority of the people he has to work with to get anything done, which is why the Republicans ousted him. But never mind, he's a "safe choice" for the statement-makers who don't know how to win.

  • MyChildrensKeeper Taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 4:36 a.m.

    Getting better all the time for Ron Paul. Romney didn't have a chance against the bible belt baptist who can see through Romney for what he is, a phony. Gingrich just happened to win because he was the either/or candidate and Ron Paul is being black listed by all news media companies because he is their enemy of lies of the news.

    As time keep crumbling the de-facto GOB politicians, the truth is unavoidable and the small but giant voice of the American people can see the truth of Ron Paul. He is unwavering and talking straight and proving the lies of government and politicians. Ron Paul can and will beat Obama at his own game, without pity or remorse, or perjury. Obama has perjured himself so many times he has created dozens of rotten eggs to be debunked as a hoax and unamerican.

  • JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt Beverly Hills, CA
    Jan. 22, 2012 1:20 a.m.

    Gingrich 40%. Romney 28%, My fellow LDS Republicans ( I am former but LDS) the SC primary shows that Republicans prefer someone who has lived a life of DISHONESTY after making vows before GOD to take care of his wife time 2.

    TIME TO QUIT the Republican party. They want it to be run with moral HYPOCRITES.

    I called this months ago, I said Romney would stumble in the South. Stop supporting this party that puts up with Mormons like we are broccoli that must somehow be stomached.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:53 a.m.

    re: davidutefan
    Evanston, WY

    ..."What's with the slams against Newts adultery?"

    David, well, for social conservatives it's an issue because there is a sense of if someone is willing to lie and cheat on oath to his spouse that he has ethical flaws that speak to his ability to hold fidelity to his oath of office. As a Democrat you should be railing against Newt for hypocrisy since he led the charge to throw President Clinton out of the Whitehouse for being unfaithful to HIS marital oath.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:26 a.m.

    I'm not a Gingrich fan. I think Romney is the best qualified candidate for the office and I hope he gets the nomination. However, I'm not about to sit at home or throw my vote away on a candidate who can't win. Even if Gingrich ends up winning the nomination, the most important thing is stopping the bleeding. I will vote for Newt (or whoever the GOP puts up) in a heartbeat to get Obama out of office.

    It's nothing personal and it isn't racist, as some have claimed. I knew Obama was not qualified for the job before he ran. But now he has added $5 Trillion to the national debt, saddled us with a healthcare program we cannot sustain, seems content with over 8% unemployment, and has even defunded NASA. He is presiding over our decline. If it has to be Newt, then so be it. Obama has got to go.

  • Miss Piggie Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:07 a.m.

    @Al Thepal:

    "If Newt wins the Republican nomination I will probably write-in Romney in the general..."

    Same here. I will not vote for an adulterer who served divorce papers on two wives on their sick beds... while committing adultery with his current wife.


    Mitt was beaten badly in the debates on top of very poor handling of the Tax issue..."

    What tax issue? He paid his taxes... all that was due. It's not his fault if the Congress saw fit to pass a 15% tax rate on certain income.

    "... didn't have good response for Bain Capital and offshore accounts."

    He emphatically and clearly stated that Bain created 110,000 jobs. He also stated he paid taxes on his Cayman income. Obviously, SC votes are not smart enough to fathom the simply put truth.


    "Mitt Romney lost South Carolina because of his... sneaky methods used in his personal income tax payments, and business strategies that resulted in a loss of jobs to American citizens."

    You must be from SC where they simply are incapable of understanding the truth. Mitt paid the taxes due and his company created 110,000 jobs.

  • Midwest Mom Soldiers Grove, WI
    Jan. 22, 2012 12:05 a.m.

    I'm sorry. I just couldn't finish this article for the ridiculous people who were quoted as representative South Carolinians. It could be that many only voted for Gingrich to give Obama a better chance in November.

  • Obi-Jon Kenobi Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 11:50 p.m.

    This is almost as disappointing as that Civil War thing, South Carolina. Sigh . . .

  • Alfred Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 11:43 p.m.

    @Steven S Jarvis:

    "If Romney loses here in SC, it could get ugly and long."

    How much uglier can it get than to expose the despicable conduct of Newt re his wives and affairs?

    Apparently SC voters would rather put an despicable admitted adulterer ahead of a faithful, dedicated husband and father. And speaking of 'admitted,' he comes crying for forgiveness and forbearance simply as an expediency to run for public office. Give us a break, Mr. Speaker. Pick up your bad temper and foul conduct and go home.

    Since Gingrich has decided to get mean, Mitt has a few aces up his sleeve.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 11:39 p.m.

    South Carolinians voted against the media (Newt tirade), not for Newt. If they did, God help them for voting for an admitted adulterer twice over. This has nothing to do with not forgiving. It has everything to do with understanding that character matters. Washington is about power. Unless Americans return to God, it doesn't matter who they choose. The choice now is either liberty and freedom (Ron Paul) or Fascism (Republican candidate) or Marxism (Democratic candidate). If Romney wins, he has only one choice, to move this nation toward Liberty and freedom, or watch the party that elected him break into pieces, along with the country he loves.

  • Janet Ontario, OR
    Jan. 21, 2012 11:29 p.m.

    The exit polls prove that a lot of SC voters fit the unflattering stereotype of the uneducated Bible-thumping rabble in the South. I used to think that stereotype was an ugly myth. I'm not in love with Romney, but there's at least some hope of improvement if he's elected. Romney is successful. He shouldn't have to apologize for that; it's the reason he might be able to lead the country into more prosperous times. Romney is a faithful Mormon. He shouldn't have to apologize for that, either; his religion advocates charity and integrity. The rest of the Republican candidates are embarrassing. Santorum is sanctimonious, but his record is unimpressive; Gingrich is Machiavellian in the extreme; Paul is off the reservation. Obama has proven his willingness to compromise; he has proven popular with our allies; he has made headway against the tsunami of financial woes he inherited. I didn't vote for him in 2008, but I sure will in 2012 if Romney is not the Republican nominee. The choice may be very easy, in the end.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 10:39 p.m.

    It's comforting to know (but not terribly surprising) that the evangelical voters of South Carolina voted for an adulterer who bails on the second most important relationship in life (next to that with God) when trouble reared its ugly head, rather than a Mormon.

    Not impressed.

  • snowman Provo, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 10:18 p.m.

    FreeAndClear: Romney does not need to condemn something that involves his family and many other families in this country. The LDS Church did not want to rule the U.S. or the world.

  • spudlydoright McCammon, Idaho
    Jan. 21, 2012 9:46 p.m.

    I hope that I don't have to choose between Newt and Obama. I disagree with Obama on just about everything, but I will not vote for a serial adulterer who has shown a complete lack of fidelity to anything or anyone. Maybe there will be a box entitled "can we have a do-over?"

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    Jan. 21, 2012 9:07 p.m.

    The exit polls showed Mitt did poorest with the least educated and most conservative voters. Bottom line: Mitt's running in the wrong party.

  • Rick2009 MESA, AZ
    Jan. 21, 2012 9:01 p.m.

    I am sorry Mitt Romney lost in SC, however I am for Ron Paul and he was last.

    My question is why would anyone especially a member of The Church of Latter-Day Saints want to be president of the US now. There is no way that he/she could save America at this point. We have gone past the point where we will ever get our freedom's back.

  • shuttdlrl Smith River, CA
    Jan. 21, 2012 9:01 p.m.

    South Carolina is an open primary state. I wonder how many Democrats voted for Gingrich? I don't believe Chrisitans would vote for Gingrich.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    Jan. 21, 2012 9:01 p.m.

    First off I support Santorum.
    Gingrich got less than 50% of the vote. Only three states have voted at all. The race is not over despite South Carolina precedents. South Carolina has made a lot of progress, but they are still in many ways stuck in the 19th century and 19th century mentalities.

    The Republicans will be making a mistake in endorsing Gingrich. He will have a hard time carrying Utah, and even if he does it will hurt Utah candidates down ballot from him and add to political animosity and bickering. I shudder at the thought of Gingrich as the nominee.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:57 p.m.

    Give Newt some credit for using adultry to gain votes. Not even Obama can beat that.

    With a sixteen trillion dollar debt, and high unemployment, we once again show our inability to elect honest leaders with character. Unbelievable!

  • AFVet Lindon, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:53 p.m.

    This is what happens when you flip flop your positions for political expediency. You lose to the guy that betrayed his ex wives when they were married. It is one thing to lie and cheat on you wife, but it is another to lie and cheat on the American voter. Maybe Mitt should have asked for an open relationship with the Pro-Choice people and other groups\issues he once supported. That way he can flip flop with no consequences.

  • bballjunkie Pleasant Grove, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:50 p.m.

    Just shows you how ignorant people can be. Here is a state that has a unemployment rate at 10% and they can't get passed being and saying some of the most bigoted things to help get them out of their problems.

    Newt gets this thing and then Obama wins another four years, I hope you all enjoy your unemployment and this nation being at the bottom of the toilet because of your ignorance... lol

    Oh by the way is So Carolina even in the US? lol

  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:47 p.m.

    Santorum wins Iowa. Newt wins South Carolina. Romney wins mass. His home state basicly. The Gop has gone to Cain, (My 9 9 9 program) Perry (I cant remember what i'm talking about), to now Newt. It seems they want ANYONE but Mitt. The democrats just sit back and watch the circus as the GOP eats their own. Just like the GOP in Utah did to Bob Bennett. The GOP is a circus, and their followers just grab the tail of the elephant in front of them and are lead in whatever direction. The GOP is a joke

  • davidutefan Evanston, WY
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:46 p.m.

    for those of you who have never lived in the south here's a news flash for you. Southerners will lie to pollsters about personal bigotry whether religious or racist. I'm a Mormon that has spent half of my life there including my birth and formative years. A Mormon will not do well with the Evangelicals in the south.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:43 p.m.

    @the atheist
    do you mean the fourth place candidate? right above all the people that already dropped out. I guess maybe the should give him one last shout out before he exits the stage.

  • I Bleed Blue Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:37 p.m.

    Wow! I hear they are shooting fireworks over the White House tonight. Now Newt can pick Rush Limbaugh for his running mate. Equally unelectable. Thank you South Carolina. You can now get back to what you do best-- Watch SEC football.

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:28 p.m.

    Newt Gingrich has a national unfavorable rating of 56% right now. No major party presidential nominee has ever began a campaign with such high disapproval.

    What is that scripture many of you quote? What is evil will be seen as good...?

  • Gr8Dane Tremonton, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:27 p.m.

    Outcome shows that Evangelicals in South Carolina are more bothered by Romney being a mormon than Newt Gingrich being a serial adulterer.

    So called "values voters" check their values at the door when it comes to religious bigotry.

    The result is that they are helping defeat Romney who has the only real shot at beating Obama in a general election. Gingrich may be good at throwing red meat to conservatives, but he will NEVER win over Independent voters who are the key to the election. Hes too polarizing and has too much baggage.

    No, the evangelicals both in Iowa and South Carolina are willing to shoot themselves in the foot. Heaven forbid that a mormon get the nomination.

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:18 p.m.

    re: Esquire @ 3:53 p.m. Jan. 21, 2012

    It may be spin or even semantics but what A Guy With A Brain means when he says "Romney: measured, tempered and even-keeled." is repressed, pedantic, & so lacking in emotion he makes Spock look like a 13 yr old girl at Justin Beiber concert.

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 8:15 p.m.

    I love the headline. Does this mean MR buys his competition and it goes through a "reduction in force"??

  • davidutefan Evanston, WY
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:59 p.m.

    I am a lifelong Democrat that none of these candidates have a chance swaying in the general election. That said, What's with the slams against Newts adultery? First off I don't see what that has to do with governing anyone exept, maybe his wife. It seems to me that's between him and her. The other thing that blows my mind is, How Newt supporters keep carrying on about a "Ronald Reagan conservative." Seems to me that is the sure fire way to lose an election. Most Americans are moderate. You can argue center left or center right all you want but, you won't win with an extremist conservative. As a Dem, I welcome that because, as a liberal, I see Obama as a moderate. You extreme rightys only see him as a liberal because you're so far right. I am probably just as far left as you are right and, trust me, Obama's not over here with me. I want a FDR liberal as much as you want a RR conservative.

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:57 p.m.

    Well, it's official. South Carolinians hate Obama (and Mitt) enough to turn their backs on their precious 'family values'.

    What a slap in the face to Santorum.

  • SammyB Provo, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:57 p.m.

    A CNN analyst just said that she was speaking with Gingrich earlier and he told her that he could tell people that red is blue and they would believe him because he is passionate. The man is an amazingly gifted orator, but he is cruel and dishonest. We need to share information with friends and family to help people see reality.

    Four years ago, McCain went from last in the pack, no money or organization, and within two days, many major news orgs came out to endorse him...obviously organized. The media fought for him and he shot up. Then they turned against him (to his utter shock) in the generals because they had set him up as a candidate with too much baggage to fight their golden boy. This has just happened again. Is America smart enough to see they are being manipulated? South Carolina wasn't.

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:43 p.m.

    Romneycare: Romney needs to say LOUD and CLEAR that:

    1st - the people of Massachusetts, as a whole, wanted universal coverage. When I say "as a whole" I mean the majority of Massachusetts citizens. This is what the Massachusetts state representatives (80-85% Democrat, BTW) said, ie, "Our constituents want universal healthcare". The same can NOT be said of Obamacare. Don't believe it? Just Google and YouTube all the angry protests at town hall meetings when Obama and the Dems were trying to sell this to the American people.

    2nd - Massachusetts Democrats added lots of expensive bells and whistles to the law that have made operating costs more burdensome and expensive. I say that because I CLEARLY remember Romney saying that to McCain in one of their debates in 2008. Why in the world has Romney not been saying it this time around?

    One thing is for sure: Romney has GOT to speak with more fire and passion in the debates or the liberal mainstream media is going to bury him. Dems want Obama to run against anyone other than Obama. The #1 issue is jobs, jobs, jobs and Romney is the only one capble of beating Obama on that.

  • S.Andrew Zaelit Deseret, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:43 p.m.

    Political reality folks.

    Mitt was never, NEVER going to win South Carolina. He is a Mormon and that trumps an philandering adulterer who helped build Fannie/Freddie into the anchors of the Great Recession. Do not kid yourself here. All of those alleged family values Evangelicals will overlook quite a bit of baggage. Mitt can win Virginia and Florida which will help him. The plan is survive the South, win the North, and let the West (not the coast) come through. My hunch is California wont go for Newt.

    Anyone who thinks Newt is a Reagan Conservative needs to re-examine history. You have omitted either by ignorance or willful blindness the entire Newt record.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:39 p.m.

    The comedian comments said something along the lines of I will vote for Mitt's statue as it cannot change.

    Chances are Mitt will be fine and the GOP will get behind him after Jan31 but til then he will have to endure a torture test.

    I am guessing that the country saw Clinton still serve his country well after straying and are hoping for the same from Newt.

    Seems no matter how much we like Mitt in this state he tracks about 25% of the GOP vote nationwide. More candidates spell success for Mitt but when Cain and others drop out his 25% is no longer a majority.

    Pres Obama is criticized for not enough government experience, Newt should not get the same treatment if he gets in.+

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:26 p.m.

    Guy with a brain...

    "Here's my question: if Newt Gingrich promised BOTH his previous wives he'd be faithful to them but did not, how can you or I believe he'll be 'faithful' (politically speaking) to what he promises you and me he'll do for us if elected? It's a simple question but with enormous implications. "

    Completely agree with you on this. If his ego and passions can get him to sell out, how do you know he will not do likewise to the people of this country. It is a question that deserves the deep introspection as does Romney's finances. Unfortunately people know about Gingrich's issues, and can make judgements on it. On the other hand, Romney wants to wait until after he files taxes for last year before discussing his business ethics.

    To many, it is a question of judging the devil you know, versus the devil you won't know about until April. If Romney would just put this behind him, he could spend more time on other issues. But now this is the big unknown elephant in the room Romney decided to keep around until April.

    Hand very much misplayed.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:20 p.m.

    "Gingrich is ahead down south because the hard core southern folks are having a hard time getting behind a moderate Mormon candidate."

    Ummmm, no. Romeny was in the lead up until Monday by a large percentage, until he opened his mouth about his "wealth", inserting his foot in his mouth deeply. Romeny thought if he just called people who were poor as jealous and bent on class warfare, this would all go away.

    What he miscalculated that a large portion of the poor in South Carolina are conservative, proud, and insulted by a Yankee claiming they are in envy of his riches. They resent money was sent to Wall Street to bail out very rich American businessmen, while nothing was done to keep their homes from being foreclosed on by these very same people.

    Had Romney stayed positive, been forthright about his finances, followed his fathers lead in disclosure, it would be Romney celebrating today. His rants about "free enterprise" fell flat on ears of those who have been burned by the free banking system who was bailed out, but small businesses we left to struggle.

    It was that backlash that hurt him, not his religion.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:14 p.m.

    This is really frightening. But what's even more frightening is that so many people actually voted for this man.

    What's wrong with this country?

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:12 p.m.

    From a guy with a brain

    "Gingrich: focused primarly on beating Romney.

    Romney: focused on beating Obama."

    There in lies Romney's biggest mistake. He was looking ahead to a competition he had yet earned the right to compete in. If there is a lesson from business Romney should have brought with him, is that you learn to close the deal before you start figuring out how to win the next one.

    We saw the same attitude from Rumsfield and Cheney. They didn't complete mission 1 - beating the Taliban, before they went after yet another opponent. The Bush administration ended in a total failure with regard to the Taliban due to their guidance. And it resulted in a hugely flawed plan going into Iraq, not having an exit plan to close out that campaign before they started handing out contracts for Iraqi oil.

    It is the reason that one must really look hard before installing a "business man" in the role of commander and chief. Winning a war is a lot different then a leveraged buyout. If you are failing, you can't just run to Bankruptcy court to make your problems go away. LIves versus corporate profits are at stake.

  • JNA Layton, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 7:02 p.m.

    Please Please Please, ultraconservatives are going to hand Barack Obama, who is the worst President in the History of the United States his reelection if we nominate the likes of Gingrich, Santorum or Paul. Independents will not vote for these 3. Get a clue!!! Barack Obama is ruining this nation and he and his wife will not stop until they have completely destroyed it. We must not let Obama have another term and I am afraid the right wing, evangelicals are going to put us right on the brink.

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:47 p.m.

    Gingrich supporters:

    Your man Newt Gingrich is an admitted two-time adulterer. If that doesn't matter to you, you are devoid of worthwhile values. Morality always matters. Always.

    Here's my question: if Newt Gingrich promised BOTH his previous wives he'd be faithful to them but did not, how can you or I believe he'll be 'faithful' (politically speaking) to what he promises you and me he'll do for us if elected? It's a simple question but with enormous implications.

    Can Newt 'repent'? Sure. But can he be trusted? No, not in the 2012 presidential race because there simply isn't enough TIME to regain that sacred trust. You don't know him, you've never met him, have never dealt with him on an intimate, personal basis so you how do you know? You don't.

    To emphasize what I'm trying to say, consider this hypothetical instance (which, sadly, may not hypothetical for many of you out there: if your spouse cheated on you MULTIPLE times, how long would it take you to trust them again. Not just forgive them, but to fully TRUST them.

    See what I mean?

  • paperboy111 Lindon, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:46 p.m.

    Now we have a real race! It's noteworthy that Romney received only 26 percent of the vote, close to the 25% level that Mitt has been tracking for the last 6 months in polls. Guessing that the GOP primary race will go to the bitter end.

  • Ok Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:45 p.m.

    Mitt Romney lost South Carolina because of his flip-flopping on important issues, sneaky methods used in his personal income tax payments, and business strategies that resulted in a loss of jobs to American citizens. The fact that he is a Mormon had little, if anything, to do with his loss. Romney's losses will continue. His political ship is sinking.

  • t702 Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:44 p.m.

    Ok Mitt suporters, stop being sore loosers. Mitt was beaten badly in the debates on top of very poor handling of the Tax issue, didn't have good response for Bain Capital and offshore accounts. These are Mitt's strength but he fumbled badly, common Mitt we know you are better than that.

    I'm glad Mitt lost so he can show us that he deserves our vote.

    You have to give it to Newt, he did a great job this week.

    What happened tonight was the best thing that Mitt can ever hoped for. Go Mitt!

  • Bill Shakespeare Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:42 p.m.

    Romney? More like "wrong-knee," or wrong FOOT, as in he got off on the wrong foot.

  • Clarissa Layton, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:34 p.m.

    I'm sad. Bummer, but people have a right to their choices, even if I disagree with them.

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:25 p.m.

    Esquire | 3:53 p.m. Jan. 21, 2012

    Spin? Everything that I said is just "spin"?

    Good grief.

    And you can vote, too.

    How long, Lord, how long?......

  • mtmanmc Colorado Springs, CO
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:21 p.m.

    I've been a Republican all my life. South Carolina just prove to me that there values aren't important in a candidate. Should Gingrich win the right to fall election. I'll vote for no one. This nation is at a cross roads. I've earned my right to vote as a Veteran. The Republican Party fired Gingrich that should be enough said.

  • hubbardesquire Alabaster, Alabama
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:20 p.m.

    I believe that Mitt will win fairly easily. Remember that Newt is not on the ballot in several states. The few people that I have talked to in Alabama, all non-Mormons, are either undecided or say that they will vote for Mitt.

    I also believe that Florida will go for Mitt. All that Newt's win in South Carolina does is put the front runners back to "0 to 0" at square one.

  • BYU_Aggie LOGAN, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:09 p.m.

    Lest we forget, Romney lost to Fred Thompson 4 years ago in SC. Yes, the actor. SC was uphill from the beginning for the Mormon candidate.

    Looking at the exit polls surveys, South Carolinians clearly care more about a candidate's religious beliefs, and whether they announce themselves as a "conservative." (Seriously, do even "conservatives" even know what that really means anymore?) rather than the real issues and a leader's character.

    All we can glean from today is that it'll be a long nomination process and a three-man race (Paul will fight to the end). Who knows, maybe Utah's vote will actually matter this year!

  • Crazy Heart A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:08 p.m.

    Newt Gingrich is winning because millions of Americans like you are standing up
    to the liberal media and the moderate Republican establishment.

    Conservatives don't want Mitt Romney leading the Republican party.

    We want a serious Reagan conservative who will go toe-to-toe this year against Barack Obama.

    Newt Gingrich is now ahead in many polls in South Carolina, despite millions and millions of dollars spent by Mitt and his friends in negative ads.

    Newt's message is still resonating because he is offering a positive agenda of less government, less taxes and less spending.

    As Speaker of the House, Newt pushed through a conservative agenda starting with his Contract with America.

    Speaker Gingrich cut taxes, restrained spending . . . and forced Democrat Bill Clinton to come to the table. They even reformed welfare and led the nation to four successive balanced budgets.

    Unliked Mitt Romney, Newt has consistently been pro-life. Romney says he's changed, but Romneycare allowed patients to get tax-funded abortions.

  • Al Thepal Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:07 p.m.

    If Newt wins the Republican nomination I will probably write-in Romney in the general, or if Paul runs as a third party I may even vote for him. I simply cannot vote for Obama and I will not vote for Newt. Both are equally distasteful. I was able to vote for McCain as the lesser of two evils. Newt is not a lesser evil then Obama.

  • The Politics of Listening A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Jan. 21, 2012 6:03 p.m.

    I guess they like dogs there.

    Several years ago Romney strapped, in his words, "the beloved family pet," Shamus, a high strung Irish setter, in a cage on the top of a car for a 12 hour trip to the family's lakeside lodge. Not surprisingly, this arduous exposure to the elements caused Shamus to defecate in terror, thereby soiling himself and the car. Despite the dog's obvious acute distress, Romney merely hosed Shamus off with water at a gas station and merrily continued the 12 hour trip.

    Romney, likely our next president if the GOP prevails, ignored the obvious, more humane choice of strapping luggage, instead of the "beloved family pet," to the top of the car.

  • Kathy. Iowa, Iowa
    Jan. 21, 2012 5:50 p.m.

    Mitt has long known that South Carolina would be a hard state for him to win. No surprises here. Newt isn't even on the ballot in Missouri, Virginia, and others, so we will see how far this goes.

  • Oatmeal Woods Cross, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 5:32 p.m.

    If Mitt loses tonight, it is essentially all over for the Romney campaign. Newt will sweep through the South, take Texas and Mitt can't take California after the Prop 8 battle. Anti-Prop 8 people will register as Republicans just for the chance of voting against a Mormon.

  • t702 Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 21, 2012 5:27 p.m.

    We shall see what kind a fighter Mitt is. Regardless of the outcome tonight, Mitt needs to show more passion in defending his record

  • CougarKeith Roy, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 4:57 p.m.

    I got a kick out the the guy who totally uninformed states, it's ok to give millions to a "Christian Organization" but to give it to a "Mormon Cult Organization" is wrong? When will people educate themselves to the truth of the matter? It's so funny how after I talk to "Open" Christians about my faith they understand we (Mormon People) are Christians just like they are! It is so frustrating, he doesn't trust Romney because he has this hidden MORMON Agenda? Yet all the other candidates have those supporting them calling Mitt's beliefs a "Cult" without knowing the facts and thousands and possibly millions follow them blindly not knowing the reality of what Mitt Romney believes! To steal a phrase from Newt, "I am appauled that these kinds of attacks from Main Stream Christendom is taking place!" It's a joke!

  • Jared Average, SE
    Jan. 21, 2012 4:44 p.m.

    If either Gingrich or Santorum win the nomination, I will vote for a Democratic candidate for the first time in my life (unless there is a good alternative on the ballot as an independent). Only Romney or Paul are worth voting for in the general election (for different reasons). I still can't believe Gingrich is supported by so many Republicans - what ever happened to supporting morality, honesty, and integrity? Paul and Romney have all those traits (and if you don't believe that Romney does not have integrity, you don't know him; integrity is a measure of character and morality in personal life, not of never changing your beliefs - that's dogmatism).

  • TheAtheist SLC, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 4:14 p.m.

    Classy move, post a picture of the presidential candidates and leave out the #2 candidate. Ron Paul

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 4:07 p.m.

    Gingrich is ahead down south because the hard core southern folks are having a hard time getting behind a moderate Mormon candidate.

  • Steven S Jarvis Orem, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 4:04 p.m.

    If Romney loses here in SC, it could get ugly and long.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 21, 2012 3:53 p.m.

    @ A Guy With A Brain, pure spin. Pure spin.

  • A Guy With A Brain Enid, OK
    Jan. 21, 2012 3:45 p.m.

    Gingrich: admitted REPEAT adulterer (capable of being forgiven but not able to rebuild the required trust soon enough).

    Romney: faithful to his wife.

    Gingrich: largely a career politician.

    Romney: NOT a career politician (and, no, running for office repeatedly does not make you a politician. Think about it: if you run and lose do you have the authority to make the laws, lead, govern, etc? No.).

    Gingrich: censured and 'fired' by his own political peers (federal House of Representatives).

    Romney: never censured or fired by his own political peers (Massachusetts state House of Representatives, etc).

    Gingrich: prone to shoot his mouth off and later regret it.

    Romney: measured, tempered and even-keeled.

    Gingrich: self-made millionaire 'guilty' of practicing capitalism like Romney but hypocritically doesn't decry his own pursuit of wealth.

    Romney: self-made multi-millionaire and relatively quiet about it (he allows other to 'the pursuit of happiness' as they see fit).

    Gingrich: focused primarly on beating Romney.

    Romney: focused on beating Obama.

    Gingrich: worked for Freddie Mac (which CLEARLY helped bring about the Great Recession).

    Romney: worked for Bain (Staples, Domino's, Sports Authority, etc) which helped create over 110,00 jobs.

    Gingrich: flash.

    Romney: substance.

    Please, please LOOK!