I realize that Romney did receive the most votes in the Iowa caucuses (a whopping margin of 8!) but there are a few things that tell me that he didn't actually win in Iowa:
1. The percentage of total votes cast that went to Romney (24.6%) is the lowest percentage that went to the "winner" ever in either party's caucus. Even Bob Dole was able to get 26% in Iowa in 1996. The average for all contested Iowa GOP caucuses for the winner is 34% For either party, the average winner receives 43% of the vote. I don't see how having 3/4 of GOP voters not want you despite spending an obscene amount of money on TV ads makes you the winner (Romney spent $4 million on TV ads. If he spends at the same level nationally that is equivalent to a $400 million ad buy!).
2. Romney actually got fewer votes and a lower percentage of the vote in Iowa than he did 4 years ago! In 2008, there were 30,021 votes for Romney, accounting for 25.2% of the vote. In 2012, after spending million of TV ads and having many in the "conservative" media back Romney early, Romney received 30,015 votes, representing 24.6% of the votes cast. How incredibly lame. It is just so amazing how Romney has not been able to make ANY headway in Iowa given all his resources and positive press. I guess Iowa GOP voters, like all other GOP voters, are just not that into him. Tell me again how he won?
So who did win Iowa? Nobody. Possibly Rick Santorum, though we shall see how he does in the next two contests given that he has skeletal staff in both NH and SC and the fact that the media is finally focusing on some of his more extreme beliefs like believing that states should have the right to ban sodomy and birth control. I'm a pro-lifer and even I think banning birth control is ridiculous. Nobody is hurt by its use. There is no baby being killed, no pain inflicted. How can you possibly justify this? And people thought some of Newt's comments were over-the-top.