[T]wo of the 'guesses' I think you missed in your analysis of last night's results are, a few weeks ago, Evangelical leaders met in Texas to settle on one candidate to back. They chose Santorum. I am gussing that last night, we saw some of the first results of that decision. Additionally, I would speculate that there is a Mormon bias at play. No one likes to admit this, but I am guessing that there is a Bradley-Effect corollary at play here. I am sure it weighs, at least partly on some folks decisions.Since I'm not an evangelical and I ended up voting for Ron Paul for fiscal reasons, neither of these considerations entered into my mind. And while I would imagine there's a certain amount of anti-Mormon bias out there, I strongly suspect it is overstated, as is the notion that "Evangelical leaders" have that much control over how people vote, especially in Minnesota. My guess is that for many voters, Santorum was the best available "Not Romney" on offer, since Paul's views are a nonstarter for a lot of people.
So here's the question -- is Rich on to something, or not? And if you voted for Santorum in the caucus straw poll, what was your primary motivation for doing so? Okay, that's really two questions.