Election 2012: Mitt’s Big March
The Republican race kicks into high gear in March with nearly three-quarters of the 1114 delegates needed for the GOP nomination at stake in contests ranging from Vermont to American Samoa. Put another way: on Super Tuesday, March 6, more delegates were awarded in one day than in the previous two months. While the March schedule doesn’t exactly favor Mitt Romney, it’s not likely to severely damage him either. He’s likely to end March the way he began it: in the lead for delegates to the GOP Convention in Tampa.
Romney has succeeded in the primary goal of any primary effort: he’s consistently won more delegates and votes than everyone else. His victories in Michigan and Arizona at the end of February gave Romney a 2-1 lead over Rick Santorum in delegates; he won just over 40% of the total votes cast in January and February. That’s good enough in a four-way race. Except for his wipeout in South Carolina, even when he lost (as in the Midwest) he typically finished second. While Romney may not have the deepest reservoir of GOP support, he has the most consistent appeal.
Four times, Romney has been faced with “must-win” primaries: New Hampshire, Florida, Michigan, and Ohio. He won all four. The margins might not have been awe-inspiring, but as former Bush White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer keeps saying: “a win is a win is a win.” He now has more than half of the total delegates allocated, which means he is currently on track for a first-ballot nomination.
Of the 10 Super Tuesday contests, Mitt won six, Santorum three, and Newt one. Romney won so overwhelmingly in his home state of Massachusetts that he was awarded 100% of the delegates. And when Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich failed to qualify for Virginia, Romney was awarded 43 delegates to Ron Paul’s three. With his narrow victories in Ohio and Alaska plus a 32-0 sweep in Idaho and a solid win in Vermont, Romney has built a healthy lead and is almost one-third of the way to the threshold.
For either Gingrich or Santorum to win the nomination, they would need roughly 70% of the remaining delegates. That is not remotely likely as long it is a four-way race. The other good news for Romney is that Newt’s big win in Georgia means he will stay in the race and keep on splitting the conservative opposition with Santorum. (Newt gathered over 170,000 votes in Ohio while Santorum only lost there by 12,000. Newt undeniably played spoiler.)
The rest of March presents a mixture of opportunities for the Romney camp: his superior finances and organization make him a favorite in Hawaii and the other island caucuses. Based on his consistent pattern of rural support, Santorum should have the edge in Kansas. Newt’s only wins so far have come in South Carolina and Georgia. Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana could well be Gingrich wins. Illinois on March 20 has the biggest batch of delegates in late March: the Chicago suburbs are full of the upper-class white collar workers who have been Mitt’s base in 2012. Roughly half of Illinois Republicans are suburbanites and they have often voted for GOP moderates like Charles Percy, Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar, and Mark Kirk.
Even if Romney were to lose almost all of these contests, he will still be gathering 25-30% of the delegates, rolling steadily toward the nomination.
Romney’s critics keep arguing that he can’t close the deal with the conservative majority of Republicans. That may be true, but Mitt is closing in on an almost insurmountable delegate lead.
And so now we have the latest to wear the hand-me-down Mittens Cheerleader suit at PJM.
YAWN.
A win is NOT a win is NOT a win is NOT a win…when the delegates are distributed proportionally (38% Mittens VS 37% Santorum).
An “insurmountable lead” which does not get a candidate past the 1,114 (?) number is no lead at all. That’s why the necessity of hollow Mittens Cheerleaders crying incessantly “he’s inevitable!” (NOTE: emphasis on the EVITA in that word…)
True, Romney CAN’T close the deal the conservative majority of Republicans.
And, *should* he be the GOP candidate to go against Obama, he’s likely incapable of closing the deal with most independents…according to the saying: Why go with an unknown wishy washy guy when you’ve already got one in the hand…err…White House?
Santorium is down 16 delegates in the District of Columbia for failing to register
He is down 4 districts in Alabama for failing to register
10 in Illinois for failing to register
A total loss of 30 next month. How can you support someone to be president that is so unorganized?
Obama’s political machine is working very hard to upset Romney. Why, because Obama fears Romney. Obama is the creation of Santorum’s surge.
Democrats crossed over here in Michigan to defeat Romney and it happened in Ohio also. Democrats are feeding Santorum’s PAC and unfortunately many republicans are overlooking the truth. Can you really trust a candidate who asks the democrats to help him cheat?
Unions have pumped millions of dollars in the race to defeat Romney and they are not done yet. Romney is not only defeating the unions, the liberal media, he is also defeating the ultra-conservative campaign smear. (people like Mr. Ed)
Mitt may indeed win, but it will only be because of a split vote on the conservative base. Mitt is Mr. 40% for a reason: he doesn’t attract conservative voters.
Rick may indeed not be eligible for some delagates. I do have to wonder though if that is all that uncommon and if some (or alot) is similar to Virginia’s rules that rendered ineligible a ton of signatures in order to invalidate one’s appearance on the ballot. No doubt, Mitt has the establishment sorts in his corner. Perhaps it is like the delagate vote in Michigan awarded after the fact to Mitt and against the pre-ordained rules.
If you are a Mitt supporter, don’t worry: Newt won’t leave and thereby ensures Mitt’s crowning. Newt has become a spoiler, plain and simple. Not one ounce of respect for this guy.
Mitt will likely be the candidate, and in doing so will have the most left-of-center record in the history of republican potus candidates: (pro-abortion, pro-govt run health care, pro-gun control, pro-homosexual, etc). Oh, I realize he says he has changed. This country boy ain’t buying what he’s selling though.
The real joke is on you, republican voter.
Santorum speaks of growing up in a coal mining town and how he has to support seven children. He wants you to believe he is just common folk but the truth is, he lives in a 2 million dollar mansion in Great falls, VA. I would like to ask the senator one question: how did you earn this type of money.
Voters need to check voting records also, you just might be surprised. Santorum is totally misleading. The nicest word I can think of.
You Mitt people just seem to have no shame. You criticize Rick for owning a $2million home when your guy Mitt owns how many? If the $ amount (and I would add # of homes) is a disqualifier, then I’ld say Mitt looses that one big time.
I’ve noticed Mitt and his surrogates seem to hit everyone else for things he’s the weakest on, so you would really like to talk records would you.
Mitt’s record when he last held office would fit rather nicely with Ted Kennedy, but not the conservatives (perhaps too left of the RINO’s for that matter):
-pro gun control (signed a permanent assault weapons ban in 2004, supported the Brady Bill, bragged about being at odds with the NRA
-pro abortion (promised to uphold the womens right to choose in ’94, promised to maintain status quo in 2002, including allowing minors to avoid parental consent, refused to sign the Susan B. Anthony pro-life pledge in 2012
-pro homosexual rights (ran left of Kennedy in ’94, supported “don’t ask don’t tell in ’94 (but no longer-says he wouldn’t reinstate it), wupports open homosexuality in the military (see prior statement), refused to sign an anti-gay marriage pledge in July of 2011
-believes in global warming and says he is open to cap and trade
-supported “stimulus” in 2009 (says he didn’t mean obama’s ?)
-author of romneycare and DID suggest it’s mandate could be adopted at a federal level (USA Today op-ed, July 30, 2009, and at least one 2008 debate w/ Fred Thompson) and LIEs about that support now
-supported No Child Left Behind, even though he attacked Rick for it in the last debate
-bragged about money he obtained from the fed for the olympics, then LIED about it during the last debate
Cannot seem to draw support unless he or surrogates relentlessly attacks and distorts his opponents’ character and record.
Yeah, no thanks, I’ve done my homework and I’ll take Rick any day over Mitt (or any of the others). His misdoings are very minor in comparison.
And please, whining about the money?
Your guy, Mitt, wouldn’t be anywhere if he wasn’t outspending everyone by a few magnitudes, carpet-bombing them with negative ads relentlessly.
Sympathy for Mitt?
I’ld really like to see your proof that unions are spending millions against Mitt, by the way.
Campaign dollars are donations meant to be spent.
Deb, Your words prove that RomneyBots have no morals or standards…JUST LIKE OBAMA SUPPORTERS. “By any means necessary (with daddy’s money)”
Why go with an unknown wishy washy guy when you’ve already got one in the hand…err…White House?
Obama’s a hard core leftist. But you know that. Freddie Mac Gingrich finishing 3rd in a 4 man race is getting to you.
Terry, Please see post #3 as a delightful response to yours. Didn’t write it, but it’s spot on.
This is a very weird election cycle complicated by establishment politicos and media.
Newt has done what we want in the past…entitlement reform, balanced budgets, challenged his own party when needed (a sitting republican president over taxes).
His challengers? Romney the godfather of obamacare, appointed liberal judges. Santorum’s hypocritical record of big-government and big-labor support as the “team player”.
Sowell, Palin, Cain, and Perry support Newt over Santorum.
McCain and Dole support Romney. Two unrepentant RINOs who lost general elections help one of their own.
Speaks volumes.
Actually, when Newt “challenged his own party when needed (a sitting republican president over taxes)” it was after he had already signed off on the deal. Michel had convinced Bush the Elder that without Gingrich on board, the bargain was political death. Newt agreed but as soon as he saw the reaction from conservatives, he went public against it – without even so much as a phone call to those he betrayed.
This was an early example of his backstabbing of his colleagues – which unfortunately has proved the rule rather than the exception in the little miscreant’s career. Thank God he has no chance of being on our ticket.
“Michel had convinced Bush the Elder that without Gingrich on board, the bargain was political death. Newt agreed but as soon as he saw the reaction from conservatives, he went public against it – without even so much as a phone call to those he betrayed.”
If you had documentary evidence of the text of such a deal, you’d begin to have a point.
What you have is fluff, coming as it does from Newt’s enemies, who used known lies to throw him down.
Was everyone picking on Newt when the HOR vote 395-28 to reprimand him for misleading the ethics panel with false statements? Newt admitted guilt to the matter:
“I did not manage the effort intensely enough to thoroughly direct or review information being submitted on my behalf. In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete, and unreliable statements were given to the committee, but I did not intend to mislead the committee.”
His supporters cite the IRS exhoneration as proof he was maligned falsely. What they conveniently skip is the fact that he was reprimanded and fined $300,000 for provided false information. The fine was an assessment on what the additional investigation cost the HOR due to his false statements.
A whole lot of Republicans voted with that, you know.
“Was everyone picking on Newt when the HOR vote 395-28 to reprimand him for misleading the ethics panel with false statements? Newt admitted guilt to the matter:”
No, he was completely exonerated. An dyes, the establishment was throwing him out because he was too successful in rocking their boat.
Tom:
You are simply not correct. The tax impropriety question was submitted to the IRS as part of the SAME reprimand. The IRS cleared him of the tax exempt questions pertaining to the original ethics inquiry. It did not, nor could not, clear him of the other. It is part of the record. You can deny it all you want and buy into the Newt spin, but the truth is the truth. What I quoted is the part of his actual statement given to congress in what was essentially a plea deal.
You could check it out, should the facts matter.
It’s kinda funny in a way: Newt wants everyone to forget the post-1998 record (in which he supports global warming action by the feds, the individual mandate-see May 15, 2011 meet the press interview on youtube, TARP support, amnesty for illegals, etc; not to mention certain parts of his prior record (support for the endangered species act, admitting guilt on the ethics panel investigation for providing false info-supported by a 395-28 HOR vote & $300K fine).
Conversely, Mitt wants everyone to forget his pre-2006 record (pro-abortion, pro-gun control, pro-homosexuality, pro-govt run health care, etc) and part of his more recent record: promoting mandates and other parts of romneycare as models for obamacare, not signing the pro-life pledge (Susan B. Anthony-this year, anti-gay marriage last year).
Yeah, I’ll take Rick with a few pro-union votes any day of the weak compared to these guys (who supported far worse and far reaching ideas which I’ve cited above), as well as his subpar votes for No Child Left Behind and Medicare part D, which both Romney and Newt gave lip-service support to I believe (and would have voted for it also I’m sure).
At least Rick doesn’t have to explain support for giant issues, which few are really pointing out about Newt, and few want to hold Mitt’s feet to the fire for.
Is anyone else struck dumb that Romney touts wins where he will lose to Democrats in the general election?
Did I mention Sowell, Palin, Cain and Perry support Newt? This should make folks consider a Newt candidacy with serious consideration.
Don’t buy into the inevitability myth of Romney. Santorum is the poorest choice of the not-Romney.
Newt can win the hearts and minds after a convention through articulation of our conservative arguments and holding accountable the current officeholder.
Vote your conscience and principles.
Which conservative principles will Newt tout? The individual mandate, as he did for 17 year (at least as recently as May 15, 2011 Meet the Press interview).
Talk about tone deafness. Perhaps amnesty for illegals, which he still touts. Maybe another global warming conference with Pelosi where they can once again promote HUGE government ideas. Perhaps ethics, like kiting checks at the House Bank, or providing full and truthful information to ethics investigators.
Maybe he could talk about his favovite president of the 20th century, FDR (sorry, Ron, you don’t rank with Newt). Or perhaps provide more protection for the great conservative program called the Endangered Species Act (that statement is found in his 2007 book, A contract with the Earth). Well, if nothing else Newt could simply hold a marriage conference.
These would be funny if they all didn’t represent his ACTUAL positions.
Like I said earlier, I’ll stick with Rick. Newt seems to serve very little purpose at this point other than a spoiler. By the way, of the past 12 races (excluding Virginia), Newt finished dead last in 7. That is last, Paul finished ahead of him in those. One win, no 2nd places, and 4 3rd place finishes.
He’s a spoiler.
When the election comes I will vote for Romney. If he gets elected my kids will have a better shot at getting a job, so I just don’t give much of a hoot how impure he is. I would have liked Perry. I would have liked Christie. I also would like a Boss 302 in my garage but it might not ever happen.
More like consistent weakness. Romney outspends his rivals four five and six to one. Despite that huge financial edge he can’t break the 50% barrier outside of liberal New England and the mountain states where Mormons have dominated the turnout.
Without the Conservative base, Romney loses. He will be in McCain’s place in the 2008 elections, trying to make up for lost Conservative votes with Democrats & Independents & still lose. Romney needs the Conservative base.
Furthermore, a Romney nomination neutralizes the most controversial modern day legislation to date: ObamaCare. ObamaCare needs to be part of the 2012 debate. A Romney nomination will just make ObamaCare useless since he won’t disavow RomneyCare.
Conservatives who don’t support the GOP nominee aren’t conservatives. They’re idiots.
Republicans will vote for the nominee.
If it’s Romney that hypocritically condemns obamacare there will be no fire in the base or impetus by the independents that see little difference in the status quo of Obama.
Romney is a guarantee for a loss this fall. Romney is McCain II.
Terry, I think I know what you’re trying to say…and I would normally tend to agree.
However, with what you *actually* wrote, all I can say is: YOU ARE CLEARLY NO CONSERVATIVE, and that YOU are the moron.
After Dole/Bush43/McCain (etc etc), Conservatives – and many other reasonable individuals right of center – can reasonably say, “Enough of this Born To Lose with Moderates CR*P!” For decades, Dems have pushed their Party ever farther Left to the point of hardcore Marxism, where we now find ourselves. The Repubs insist with equally powerful brass knuckles (see: Palin, Cain, Bachmann, among others) upon pushing towards the Center, racking up the losses one after another.
An exception? 2010, which was NOT won by the GOP but by the Tea Party.
Terry, your autographed Mittens knee-pads are waiting for you by the courtesy telephone at your local Country Club.
According to you, but who cares what you think. Moderates who don’t support Gingrich or Santorum don’t want to win. See, I can do the same thing you did.
Conservatives who oppose a progressive leftist are wise. In a contest between Obama and Mitt, pick Obama.
He’s less likely to get what he wants.
Tom,
I’m certainly no Mitt fan (as my posts should aptly demonstrate), but I wouldn’t exactly classify him as a choice below barry.
The primary isn’t over, and here is what can be said of Rick:
-never supported the individual mandate
-never bought in to global warming nonsense
-never supported TARP (all you Newt/Mitt fans who want to address his spending, defend their support of TARP)
-never supported amnesty
-always a solid pro-life vote and has the endorsement of those groups
-always a traditional family supporter
-has demonstrated an ability to compete with Mitt, even being out spent and even with Newt still dragging away conservative votes
I really think it will all be over this month. Romney is still winning, although not by much, but the fact is that he is still winning, which is more than the other candidates can claim. Santorum seems like the next Mike Huckabee, but even Huckabee knew when he was beat and threw in the towel. If Romney keeps picking up big states, espcially Texas, then it’s pretty much over. Unless Santorum can win a lot of the next primaries (and I doubt Newt stands much of a chance now), it’s over. Both Santorum and Newt will be able to make big speeches at the convention, but that’s about it.
If Romney can win the next several primaries, then it’s time to just get behind him and end this. Mind you, Romney was never, ever, my first choice (it was Bachmann), but it’s time to face facts and get behind him. And ANYBODY is better than Obama. Anybody.
Why are you advocating getting behind someone that will certainly lose in the general election? His 5-1 money advantage in the primary will mean nothing this fall.
He is the godfather of obamacare and equivocates on conservative issues. He renounced Ronald Reagan. He lost to McCain in 2008 and will lose to Obama in 2012.
You’re kidding yourself if you think the Romney smear machine makes him our conservative standard bearer.
Huckabee threw in the towel when McCain locked up 1191 delegates, and not before.
Romney should be our next president. He has experience in leadership, something the incumbent has yet to learn. I will vote for him. I think he is a decent man.
I think it’s a plus that he’s a Mormon. I have known a few in my lifetime, and without exception, they have been honest, outgoing and personally attractive. I trust Romney and his family to match my expectations of them, based on their religion and their past behaviors. They are in vivid contrast to Obama and crew.
I take it you’re being facetious…no one could possibly believe that the godfather of obamacare and blessed by the RINO McCain is the proper standard bearer of the republican party.
Have we lost our minds?
Well, Terry has.
My God, Romney supporters really *are* emulating the ObamaZombie worshipping.
Ben, give us a sane, rational, factual basis *why* or give it a rest.
“Romney should be our next president.”
Sowell, Palin, Cain and Perry are not of that mindset. Perhaps you should reconsider or are they inconsequential in your opinion?
The convention is not an unreasonable option considering the horror of capitulating to the myth of Romney’s inevitability.
Sowell is brilliant concerning most things, though I would disagree with him on Newt.
Perry and Cain endorsed before Newt’s star had fallen.
Palin? She’s already on record as open to a nomination if it goes to the convention (which I submit she will not be chosen), which means she is vesting herself with an interest in the race which has little to do with Newt’s actual chances of winning, but likely requires Newt to remain a participant.
Whether Rick could win were Newt to drop out remains somewhat speculative, what isn’t speculative is the the notion that Newt remaining and drawing 5-15% (and sometimes more)of the vote isn’t ensuring a Mitt victory. I’ll concede it may not ensure a Rick win in the end, but it does split the conservative vote, much of which would likely end up with Rick.
Romney’s fundamental problem in not attracting the Conservative base will be his downfall as Sean Treade thinks may happen:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/03/09/romney_really_might_not_have_the_delegates_by_june.html
Romney needs the base, but the Conservative base doesn’t need Romney.
Nothing would be easier than to laugh at the Republican Party, whose presidential candidates have vied for our amusement. A more dismal group has not been assembled since Sarah Palin dined alone.
Those who remain in the race for the Republican nomination, and those who have departed it, made up a group characterized by insularity, intellectual shallowness and meanness of spirit, coupled with an unshakable eagerness to pander to every holy roller, Tea Partier, gun worshipper, global warming denier, government hater, nativist and billionaire financier – or, as Yeats would say, “the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
From Jeffrey Simpson, Globe and Mail
Your keen “insight” [sic] will be truly valued at HuffPo.
Romney has managed to survive the millions of dollars unions have invested to defeat him. Romney has survived the liberal media working diligently against him. Today Rasmuessen shows Romney leading Obama by three pts in the General Election.
Romney has spent the last four years working hard for republican candidates, campaigning and helping them to win elections.
I have to give him credit, he has earned the votes he has gained.
To address one major “distortion of the facts” [in *my* circles, known as f*cking LIES]:
Romney has from BEFORE the beginning been worshipped and put on a pedestal by not only the MSM but the Establishment GOP. You conveniently omit all the Messiah-like chants of “inevitable!” (no, I’m NOT shocked, SHOCKED!).
SHOULD Mittens be the nominee, refer to the MSM’s Modus Operandi one day after McCain’s nomination: suddenly their “darling” turned into LOSER-non-plus-ultra…and the same applies with your beloved Mittens.
He “earned” the votes he has gained?!? More like: he BOUGHT each and every one.
(pssst: NOT effective in the General Election).
It appears you like to attack anyone who doesn’t agree with you Ed. Go read the headlines on Drudge and then come back and apologize for accusing me of “distortion of facts.” Actually my numbers were less than is being reported.
Campaign dollars are suppose to be used for that purpose. Sorry that Romney is raking in more money than your candidate, perhaps you should open your wallet.
You deserve NO apology, you deserve rather a sharp spanking until you grow up.
I posted this link as rebuttal HOURS ago, but for whatever reason it did not appear:
http://minx.cc/?post=327370
Mitt Romney.
That is who will win. Palin, Ryan, Christie, and others people, conservative pundits, tea partiers wanted did NOT get on the ballot. Gingrich is combative, aggressive and very human in being able to connect to the average voter. Yet that is not enough. He is a fire-brand and while that is exciting to think of doing a lot of damage to the liberals Gingrich can and will very likely burn the voters who put him in office.
Rick Santorum is weak and unorganized. He gets easily distracted by social issues when right now the economy will be the focus for 2012. There is only one man for the job of President of the United States to reverse the damage done by Obama. The majority of Americans did not want Obamacare. Massachusetts, the model Obama used, wanted universal health care. A Rrepublican govenor in a Democratic deep blue state.
If you want Santorum or Gingrich to win in the face of superior organization and funding (just like they would have to face with Obama) then give everything you have to your choice. Whiners need not apply. Romney is a flop-flopper, Mittens is a RINO, Mitt buys votes, sounds bitter and even in spite of conservative whiners will win.
It is indisputable that Romney saved the winter Olympics in 2002, a successful businessman who understands the US economy, and stands on his record warts and all with no excuses for being the godfather of Obamacare.
“…[Romney] stands on his record warts and all with no excuses for being the godfather of Obamacare.”
*Thanks* for reinforcing one fundamental reason why so many Americans WILL NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY!
Since YOU MENTION Romney and ObamaCare….ENJOY!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv078A36t7Y&feature=player_embedded
“The New Road to Serfdom: Lessons to Learn from European Policy”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2o8Vy3uXqE&feature=BFa&list=UUudqVyQYnmi8NwWfd11Rmvw&lf=plcp
Ed Wallis, your delusional. I’d put up more of an argument, but that is pretty much the level your arguments deserve. You still haven’t answered the question what you will do IF Romney becomes the candidate. Your screams of “No he won’t be,” isn’t an answer. I will tell you this that probably hasn’t crossed your mind; There are Tea Party supporters who have reconsidered support for the Tea Party because they are becoming religiously anti-Romney rather than pro-American.
Jettboy, here’s a link you should be wise enough to consider:
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/52680
I quote Ron Watson from the comments to that post.
“Republicans are just as guilty of these misguided Keynes based economic policies as Democrats, if not more so because they should know better. Conservatives must unite and defeat both parties or this nation faces destruction. The GOP’s policies just make us Greece in 10 years of instead of the 5 years it will take the donkeys. Balance the Budget this year and all years after that. Paul Ryan, that supposed radical, never balances the budget at all in 10 years he still has a 400+ billion dollar shortfall. We can and must do better than simple team oriented party politics. Support proper ideas not idiotic parties.”
Romney is the Republican we must beat. He’s promising to be the company man when the company is the problem.
I will not vote for him, and I don’t know that I won’t vote for Obama.
It would be good for there to a Democrat in DC to blame when things don’t get better.
Poor child, from what I have read, no one has asked me what I will do IF Romney becomes the candidate.
Nevertheless, I’ll give you an answer that is is clear and hard to misinterpret: None of your f*cking business.
*Should* that occur, I will decide and act accordingly. WE ARE NOT THERE YET, CHILD, SO GROW UP AND STOP YOUR IMMATURE POSTURING. It’s clear from your writing that you’re (by the way, child, LEARN the difference between YOUR and YOU’RE) not thinking in a way people past puberty consider…ahem…well-thought-through.
“Your screams of “No he won’t be,” isn’t an answer. “
I’ve never said that, a§§hole. He SHOULDN’T be, but that’s not within my control.
On the topic of “Tea Party” and Romney supporters: I will only note that it has been solely the Romney supporters who stand for the ANTI-AMERICAN ending of the primaries prematurely. That is ALL the “he’s inevitabvle!” and “it’s over!” hogwash means: ANTI-AMERICAN steamrolling…JUST LIKE THE OBAMA MACHINE.
YOU DISGUST ME.
What have we learned here folks? That Mitt’s opposition is livid and angry beyond rationality. One even said he might vote for Obama. I have said it once and I will say it again; conservatives of a certain kind should leave the Republican Party and form their own. They certainly don’t think the Republican Party as currently constituted is acceptable, always harping on its leadership. Now I realize by saying that it means the Democrats will take charge for the next generation, but what else can you say when there is such complete differences of opinion? Do we really belong to the same party?
By the way, I am a conservative who didn’t like McCain and wished someone else had been the Presidential candidate. What I didn’t do is scream and rave and go off my rocker because he was winning the Primaries. I voted for him anyway because, well, we now have Obama. Those who ask if we will have a slow death or a quick death? Frankly, I’ll take a slow death where there is hope for an eventual recovery than a quick death where we bury the American Dream right away. Wanting to take the fight all the way to the convention? Fine, but its hurting more than helping no matter how much you call it the democratic processes.
More like “livid and angry” at the stupid platitudes of most Romney supporters.
Hollow phrases. Little more. Good luck with that.
“While the March schedule doesn’t exactly favor Mitt Romney, it’s not likely to severely damage him either. He’s likely to end March the way he began it: in the lead for delegates to the GOP Convention in Tampa.”
Now is that a description of a winner? /sarc
Or is it just a good example of how to damn with faint praise?
Someone in the administration just made a decision that will affect the votes in SW Ohio come November. Indiana, Kentucky & Ohio were all affected by the tornadoes of Friday March 2nd however they have refused to send help to Clermont Co. Ohio.
http://www.wlwt.com/news/30649383/detail.html
Santorum’s arrogance and delusion is Obama’s fortune. As much as I disagree with Romney on a plethora of issues, Santorum is letting his grandiosity get in the way of being rational. He is gifting Obama with his continued presence in the race.
MITT ROMNEY IS THE CHOICE OF THE PEOPLE ….GO MITT !!!!
That kind of cheerleading belongs in one of the two camps:
1) Obama 2008, or
2) Ron Paul for Uranus
What people. Most of the places he’s winning are only due to a split conservative vote (thank you, Newt). He’s called 40% for a reason.
He couldn’t carry that if he weren’t drowning the opposition with negative ads relentlessly.
The fact is, the “conservative media” by and large are completely ignoring his prior record (which is way left) as well as ignoring when he gets caught lying (his promoting the mandate to obama as a federal idea and the magnitude and scope of the money he sought and obtained for the olympics) and grossly hypocrytical attacks (such as going after Rick for No Child Left Behind, which Mitt publicly supported).
The media on the right refuses to scrutinize Mitt. That lack of scrutiny will last only until he’s the nominee, and then we’ll never hear the end of Mitt’s actual record.
Good day for Mitt today. Yes, Santorum carried Kansas, with Romney coming second and getting some of the delegates. Romney also won Guam, Northern Marianas, Virgin Islands and more delegates in Wyoming. Altogether, he won more than Rick. Next Tuesday – Alabama and Mississippi – will really be interesting given the polling data so far. Mitt must say “y’all” in a pleasing way; he’s leadiing in MS and very close to Newt and Rick in AL. After that things turn really favorable for him.
Go Mitt!!!
I would be more impressed if he could find a way to win other than out-spending the opposition 4, or 5, or 12 to one, primarily with attack ads, ( what’s wrong with him, not what’s right with Mitt), and otherwise laying low.
That’s not going to work with “the won”. An East-coast gentlemen’s campaign amoung the good old boys gives us another four in hell. If the man has no passion and won’t take the fight to the enemy- in public, no closed doors, then he will lose.
He’s winning, but he is not inevitable yet, so I’ll continue to hope for a miracle.
EXCERPT: “Romney is oddly emerging as a regional candidate — he runs well in states with strong LDS populations and in the Northeast. He has problems in the South and the Midwest and with the core of the Republican Party.
“Romneycare is the story in this election,” Brit Hume said in the wee hours of Fox News coverage, as Super Tuesday slipped into Super Wednesday with Ohio still undecided. Those in Ohio who decided whom to vote for the day of the election went for Santorum. Hume suggested that new information that Romney supported a federal mandate in health care was part of the reason.
Romney hasn’t come clean; he has massaged and spun. His story on mandates (like his story on abortion) just doesn’t ring true or make sense.”
FROM: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=50109
yah, yah. democrat-lite, repubican elite annointed, R is for republican establishment, romney is inevitable (as he has been for two years now), the one-the-only “electible,” shoe in. might as well not vote…blah, blah.
sorry not buying it. the guy seems to get the feckless, one-third of the dead, but doesn’t yet realize it, R-party, but that is all he’ll get. writing another another check for santorum (who, as an unabashed conservative, is still rising).
again, in conscience, i can not vote for romneycare, global warming, and abortion on demand candidate, let alone support him with my treasure, family and friends. let the Lord decide about him. i’ll work down ticket.
Do you want another four years of Obama? If Romney wins the nomination, that is what we get. And it will be what we deserve. I say this because the conservative right, Republicans, whatever label you want to use, will not vote cohesively for Romney. Yes, it’s sad but true. We condemn ourselves to Obama by selecting Romney. Obama is seen as an arrogant Muslim and many view Romney as an arrogant Mormon, equal suspicion accounted to both. The silent majority and uber conservatives respect Santorum. Even his opponents will rally around the wagon if he is selected as the nominee. He is more palatable to conservatives as a whole than Romney. Please think beyond the nominee, think about who will unite the conservative vote and make an offensive move to beat Obama. That person is not Romney.