How is New Hampshire the "most free" but Romney leads the polls there?

[RileyE104]

This makes no sense to me. You would think someone like Ron Paul would dominate that state..

[cindy25]

they voted for McCain in 2008, also Hillary. Romney is considered to be the most viable secular candidate. Ron wins in Iowa he will take NH.

[trey4sports]

because he's form the northeast. NH is probably the most freedom dense state but freedom loving folks are still greatly outnumber by american idol loving sheep. Besides, reality is different from perception.

[SL89]

I'll stick to MT. :D

More to work with.

[crhoades]

Massholes?

[Jeremy]

Who Republican primary voters vote for is not a measurement of liberty.

[talkingpointes]

New Hampshire is so free because of the few die hard supporters of real freedom working on the local level. For a state whos motto is "live free or die", their federal voting record is seriously questionable.

[Schiff_FTW]

NH just edges out South Dakota in this extensive study:

http://mercatus.org/sites/all/modules/custom/mercatus_50_states/files/Freedom50States2011.pdf

[kylejack]

This makes no sense to me. You would think someone like Ron Paul would dominate that state..
Because he's leading with a plurality, not a majority.

[Anti Federalist]

Flip is also "trial ballooning" NH Sen. Kelly Ayotte as VP which would also solidify his NH position.

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/294343/no-title?CSAuthResp=1322200276%3Ak5vqvrcev8ghn60trra7 l5r5d1%3ACSUserId|CSGroupId%3Aapproved%3A915E0BCE2 BA14C0E79FDA9C30BCC9DAE&CSUserId=94&CSGroupId=1

Which makes sense, she's an empty skirt like he's an empty suit.

[TheDrakeMan]

It's a small, small portion of people in New Hampshire that get liberty candidates elected into office. That's all it takes. Most people don't pay attention to local elections so they are easier to infiltrate. But every Republican is paying attention to the race and unfortunately they like Romney. Probably having to do with the fact that he's had a mansion in New Hampshire for the past decade, and he was a Governor of their neighboring state. Plus he is outspending all the candidates there, right?

[specsaregood]

they voted for McCain in 2008,

not only that^; but exit polling showed that the majority of the anti-war vote in the gop primary went to mccain. gnaw on that one for a bit and it will all become clear....

[low preference guy]

not only that^; but exit polling showed that the majority of the anti-war vote in the gop primary went to mccain. gnaw on that one for a bit and it will all become clear....

I recall a woman from NH explaining why she'd vote for Cain: "He is the only one who will bring the troops home"

[low preference guy]

This makes no sense to me. You would think someone like Ron Paul would dominate that state..

It might be freer more due to traditions than a love of freedom.

Consider this tradition: legislators get paid $100 a year. That produces a part-time legislature, so they have less time to pass oppressive laws. Moreover, it's codified in the state Constitution, so it's hard to change.

[Becker]

because truly free people don't vote.

[Anti Federalist]

not only that^; but exit polling showed that the majority of the anti-war vote in the gop primary went to mccain. gnaw on that one for a bit and it will all become clear....

I heard that from a number of people in 2008.

/facepalm/

[Xenophage]

I recall a woman from NH explaining why she'd vote for Cain: "He is the only one who will bring the troops home"

This is why phonebanking and brochures are IMPORTANT!

[Keith and stuff]

This makes no sense to me. You would think someone like Ron Paul would dominate that state..

I don't understand where you are coming from with the question. Is Romney the worst candidate in the race, Ron Paul the best, both or are you talking about something else in addition to all of that?

As for why Romney is doing well in NH, I covered this here,
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?330683-Why-is-Romney-Popular-in-NH&p=3751307&viewfull=1#post3751307


Thanks for asking this question. I get asked this question a lot for some reason I cannot understand.

This story covers a great deal of the reasons, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...hampshire.html

Most of the other reasons are covered here,
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-New-Hampshire

There are other reasons. For example, he has received ALL of the top level endorsements in NH that I know of unless you consider John Stephens joining the Perry campaign top level. Romney was also endorsed by 2 candidates that dropped out and the popular gov. of NJ. Romney also has the most signs in NH. Around 25% of the people in NH are from MA. Most of those folks are Republicans or lean GOP. Many of them voted for Romney when he was governor of MA. Romney has by far the most money and is spending a lot of it in NH.

Romney and Paul are the 2 most popular candidates with undeclared voters in NH. They take similar positions on many issues. For example, they have the closest taxes policies of any candidates among the top 10 in NH. They both call for very similar personal income tax rates and a big cut in the corporate tax rate. While it is true that Johnson calls for the largest spending cuts and the largest reductions in government work force, outside of Johnson, both Paul and Romney arguably call for the largest reductions. Paul wants to cutting spending by 1 trillion. Romney wants to cut it by 500 billion. Paul wants to cut 5 departments. Romney wants to cut the federal workforce by 10% They both want to end ObamaCare.

To sum it up, Romney almost won in NH in 2008. Romney has been visiting, campaigning in, and donating money to NH since he lost the nomination in 2008. Since he has been campaign for the GOP nomination for 5 years straight in NH, many people think it is his time to win.

You can argue that Romney is lying about all of this if you want. I am not going to disagree. Maybe he is lying. However, this is what he is telling voters in NH and he is reaching a great deal of the voters in NH.

As for why Ron Paul is doing better in NH than any of the other primary states, that's a more complicated and I don't have a solid answer for it. I guess some of the voters like his message. He has one of the best organized campaigns in NH; although, not as organized as Romney's. Out of all of the candidates, Ron Paul has spent maybe the 4th most time in NH (Romney by a long shot, Huntsman and Roemer have spent more time.)

It could be argued that Ron Paul did best in NH in 2008, out of the primary states so maybe he already has a good base to build on.
http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jsorens/rpvotes.pdf

If you are speaking of something else, like the other candidates... Perry made major mistakes in several debates. He also made a big mistake while speaking in NH. Additionally, NH voters cannot stand either Bush. NH was the only state to go for Buchanan instead of Bush. The next Bush was unpopular in NH. In fact, in 2006, the NH State House and the NH State Senate went Democrat, for the first time in 100 years. Bush, his lies, wars and other problems are consider one of the main, if not the main reason for the Democratic victories. After Perry made all of those mistakes, voters started to think of Bush III when they looked at Perry.

Almost all of the campaigning Huntsman is doing is in NH. Some of his supporters are college students that are against war. He also seems to agree with Paul on a view positions like torture. He has about 8% in NH.

Almost all of Johnson's campaigning is in NH. While Johnson only has around 1% in NH, he also has volunteers. My guess is that the majority of that 1% would support Paul and the majority of Johnson's volunteers, if they did help another campaign, it would be the Paul campaign.

[Inny Binny]

'Most free', not 'free'.