If you're like me, then you probably believe most of the post Iowa caucus analysis is pure crap. (CNN, called Obama the big winner..... no surprises there, and that is why they are running dead last in the cable ratings). I tuned into Fox for a little while, and the commentators spent about 80% of the time talking about Santorum. They made a couple of interesting comments about Mitt Romney, saying "TECHNICALLY he won... I guess," and "the REAL winner was Rick Santorum." OK - I get what they're saying - Santorum had a pretty good showing. But still, Romney did accumulate more votes than Santorum, and interestingly, he hardly even spent any time in Iowa. Santorum on the other hand, spent just about the entire past 4 months visiting every town in Iowa. I suppose he's gotten some recognition, but i still sense a pretty big anti-Romney bias out there.
To me it's interesting. Romney, being the supposed front-runner, has withstood the attacks from day one. Others have come and gone - whether it was Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, and now maybe Santorum. Some on Fox said Romney benefited from all the negative attacks on Gingrich. This is probably true, but at the same time, Romney has been the subject of attacks from the beginning, and he's the only one to have stayed the course.
By the way, I believe the race if far from over. More debates are on the way, and Gingrich and Paul are excellent debaters, and very intelligent, and Santorum will likely get some more questions his way. Additionally, this year, there are fewer winner take all states, so the race could drag on for some time.
My point is that Romney should be given an ounce of credit this time.