Comments about ‘Nevada voters bet on Mitt Romney to boost economy’

"Nevada voters?"

Don't you mean, "Nevada Republican caucus attendees?"

There's a difference.

Could this newspaper at least _attempt_ something akin to objectivity?

I disagree with the premise the caucus attendees backed Romney because they think he'll fix Nevada's economy. That's simply an assumption by the writer. Instead, it's more logical Romney is the lesser of evils in a weak field of candidates. For, keep in mind Romney has never proposed a "fix" for Nevada at all. Quite the contrary, he's gone on record stating he'll do nothing to help Nevada's current housing crisis.

Interesting that an LDS-run newspaper coincidentally found so many LDS members to interview in a state made up of only 7% of that faith.

'"In my book, it didn't hurt he was LDS," Jim Daniels said.'

Well, Mr. Daniels, I hope you are not one of those who whine and complain about discrimination against Romney for his faith, because it obviously is a factor in your vote as well.

Those who believe Romney will be able to turn an economy around because of his Olympic experience seem to be forgetting that a) as President, Romney will have far less influence on national politics than he did as Olympics director, and b) the nation's economy is far larger and more complex than the Olympics.

I'm a Mormon who prefers Ron Paul and haven't yet met another LDS Paul supporter who thinks Romney's religion would hurt him in the November Presidential election. Rather, it's Romney's policies and platform that are his greatest weaknesses. Romney is going to have an incredibly tough time convincing Republicans like me not to vote third party like I did in 2008. Neither Obama nor Romney (despite the awesome business skills he could have brought to the table) want to balance the budget or Constitutionally wage war or protect domestic civil liberties outlined in the Bill of Rights. Romney loses Independents and Libertarians on those issues.

About half the homes on the street where Jim and Deanna Daniels live are in foreclosure, the reason they have a Mitt Romney-for-president sign in their front yard....yet Mitt said "we need to let the forclosure market just run it's course"

I suspect the condition of the economy in Nevada, bad though it is, had only a small influence on the vote.

Too bad Romney can't run while telling the truth.

A quick fact-check demonstrates he's not above outright lies to curry favor with the same people who brought us 8 years of destruction with George Bush.

President Obama has done an amazing job and will have an even more productive second term (when he stops "playing nice" with crybaby partisan politicians like Lee, Hatch, Bishop and Chaffetz).

I am a Romney supporter. Now, Mr. Romney has to prove that he can "do the dew" and create economic opportunity instead of "redistribution of wealth"

Newt Gingrich has demonstrated that there is one thing that he can run: His Mouth.

Newt lives in Virgina and could not even get on the ballot there. That is how dysfunctional his campaign is.

Romney is not as skilled are Gingrich at public speaking; however, if I were hiring a CEO for a fortune 50 company, I can't think of a better man for the job. Romney's skill set matches the needs of this nation to the tee.

Gingrich is a great spokesman (if you can eliminate the gaffs) and a great idea man. I would make Newt a part of Romney's administration.

As for that previous comment: "Obama has done an amazing job..." Wow, amazing can be taken two ways. Amazing like Mitt did in the SLC Olympics or amazing as a Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction? Obama fits squarely into the latter category.

Good choice Nevada voters! Way to go Mitt -- hope the momentum continues until you are in the White House!!

8% voter turnout? What, the local ward members?

Blue has this right. This was no vote. It was a caucus of a small percentage of Republican activists, who surely were overrepresented by Mormons and who don't necessarily represent even the will of the Republicans in Nevada, let alone the entire population. This is a gross exaggeration. The media should be more responsible in its reporting.

Re: Esquire | 8:39 p.m. Feb. 5, 2012
" It was a caucus of a small percentage of Republican activists, who surely were overrepresented by Mormons and who don't necessarily represent even the will of the Republicans in Nevada"

It couldn't have been the Mormons. They were probably still returning to Florida where they helped Romney take that important state.

Embarrassed utahn,
Who would you vote for?
And please state, if you believe your guy is 100% perfect.
Thanks