« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

What’s At Stake in Michigan

In A Brokered Convention, Who Will Control The Brokers?

Here’s why tomorrow’s Michigan primary is so important: it’s about establishment confidence in Mitt Romney and the last outside chance of getting another entrant in the race.

There are, as I’ve noted previously, a number of different types of “establishment” vs “grassroots” divides in the GOP, but you don’t have to have any particular definition of ‘establishment’ to recognize that Romney’s candidacy leans heavily on the support he draws from traditional ‘establishment’ or ‘insider’ sources: money from big-dollar fundraisers, endorsements from big-name elected officials, and covering fire from right-leaning journalists at major mainstream publications and conservative journals. Romney has depended, time and again, on his ability to get out of trouble by having the resources to go more negative than whatever opponent he’s targeting: more money to dump on negative ads and a bigger chorus of voices amplifying those attacks.

Aside from Mormon support – which is somewhat sui generis to Romney – some of Romney’s structural support comes from people who know him personally or identify with him as a fellow wealthy businessman; some comes from people who fear running a bold-colors conservative; and some comes from those who, whether or not they’d support a conservative in theory, fear Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich as electoral liabilities, Santorum for his overly outspoken social conservatism, Newt for his long train of baggage. (It’s obviously Santorum who represents the more serious threat to Romney at present.) It’s the latter two groups whose loyalty Romney must retain.

But there have been significant signs that if Romney loses his home state, where he grew up and where his father was Governor, that support may at last start to crack. Elected officials not in the Santorum or Newt camps were increasingly vocal criticizing Romney after his tripleheader loss to Santorum earlier this month. There are reports that Romney’s fundraising may be ready to tap out, which would require him to increasingly self-finance. His polling among independents is poor, calling into question the whole “electability” rationale of his campaign. The clincher came ten days ago when ABC quoted an unnamed Republican Senator saying that if Romney loses Michigan, a new candidate is needed to avoid running Santorum:

“If Romney cannot win Michigan, we need a new candidate,” said the senator, who has not endorsed anyone and requested anonymity.

The senator believes Romney will ultimately win in Michigan but says he will publicly call for the party to find a new candidate if he does not.

“We’d get killed,” the senator said if Romney manages to win the nomination after he failed to win the state in which he grew up.

“He’d be too damaged,” he said. “If he can’t even win in Michigan, where his family is from, where he grew up.”

(There was similar talk when Romney seemed in danger of losing Florida to Newt Gingrich) Talk of this nature has quieted a bit as Romney’s polling improved in Michigan, but it could revive in a big way if he loses there, while continuing to trail badly in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Such a response is, in my view, the last remaining plausible path to nominating someone other than the 4 candidates presently in the race.

There’s been a ton of talk about a race that is contested all the way to the convention, perhaps resulting in some sort of brokered deal to get a new candidate. Sean Trende (see here, here and here) has your must-read summaries of what makes such a convention possible, why it’s still unlikely and what the risks would be.

Color me skeptical, for reasons that overlap to a good extent with Trende’s. First, any sort of brokering will be done by and through the party machinery – the very folks who are already behind Romney, and would be the last ones to abandon him to a deal with Santorum or Newt. Second, while Santorum and Newt may have plenty of experience counting noses in Congress, a scramble for uncommitted delegates is likely to come down to the kind of horse-trading where money is the decisive advantage – and again, that means Romney (alternatively, power would rest with current officeholders, few of whom have backed Santorum or Newt). Third, any establishment figure who is open to a draft and would be a semi-credible candidate is likely someone who is already publicly behind Romney (eg, Chris Christie) or at least privately more favorable to him than to Santorum or Newt. Fourth, a candidate chosen so late in the game is bound to be unprepared, undervetted, not blessed by any choice of the voters, and in need of a ton of fence-mending with people who spent the whole spring and summer behind another candidate. I can’t see it happen.

For similar reasons, I don’t expect anybody else to get into the race now. The people who bowed out did so for various of their own reasons, and are unlikely to want to reconsider if it still means jumping in against Romney’s well-oiled attack machine. It’s not possible for a late entrant to get on enough ballots to get past 50% of the delegates, so we go back to the list above of reasons why Romney would win at a contested convention. There’s no time to build a new organization and new fundraising base in time to get in the race, unless the new entrant inherited one already in existence. And the not-Romney voting bloc, large as it is, would need to be convinced that a late entrant isn’t yet another ruse to allow Mitt to win on a divide-and-conquer strategy.

But there remains one and only one way, however unlikely, that this whole dynamic could change: if Romney drops out. Which he’s naturally not inclined to do, after running almost continuously for six years. But would his view change if a significant bloc of his support came to him and said it was time to back a new entrant – if his supporters concluded either that Romney couldn’t stop Santorum or would be too damaged goods to mount a serious challenge to Obama? I think it might, just as the view of someone like Christie might change if he was released from his endorsement of Romney and begged to enter to stop Santorum (who Christie clearly views as a disaster for the party). Even without the ability to win 50% of the delegates, a credible new entrant who started reeling off wins in the remaining contested states would be able to build an argument that the grassroots and the establishment have finally found a candidate they can agree on, creating a much stronger position to squeeze Santorum and Newt to get on board.

(I’ve used Christie as the most obvious candidate, but he’s not the only possible one among figures who can more plausibly bridge the gap between the various factions of the party but who chose not to run)

Is this a likely outcome? Probably not, even if Romney loses Michigan (it might have been more likely if he’d been blown out there, but that won’t happen). But it’s at least still a plausible path, and in my view the last plausible path to any outcome other than Romney or Santorum (or, far less likely, Newt) winning this thing the traditional way.

COMMENTS

  • jamesm

    Rasmussen has Romney +2 over Santorum
    ARG has Santorum +1
    PPP has Romney +2
    Mitchel has Santorum +2

    All released within the past 24 hours

    Going to be close

    • red_oakster

      The real question is Santorum could win a majority of delegates before the convention even if Romney falters.

      • jamesm

        today. (For whatever that is worth) Yes it seems numbers are flowing back to Santorum. Every day away from the last debate is a good day for Santorum. If Romney loses Michigan the media will spin this against Romney big time. Santorum will have huge momentum going into Super Tuesday where 437 delagates are up for grabs. Santorum will win Texas and most likely California.

        • sulmak

          It could be driven by a single highroller feeling bearish or bullish.

          • jamesm

            But I totally agree that Intrade market could easily be affected.

          • jamesm

            Lost nearly 28% so far today of him winning the Michigan Primary. Bail! Bail! Lol

          • sulmak

            http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/fivethirtyeight/primaries/michigan

            And Santorum has consistently outperformed his polls.

          • jamesm

            Who is this guy?

          • sulmak

            But I meant to say “their”, rather than “his”, referring to the intrade odds in general.

      • Whacker77

        I get the sense Santorum has the momentum simply because he’s not Romney. Conservatives, in general, just don’t want Romney and he’s doing everything he can to alienate them.

        • jamesm

          looks like a great move for the Not Romney team. Millions are going to watch this tonight. Nascar is huge. Brilliant move.

          • Scope

            that he doesn’t follow it closely, but he has friends that support NASCAR teams was another out of touch classic from Romney. It goes along with Ann owning a couple of Caddos. Can someone explain the meaning of his comment that the trees in MI are the right height, and the streets are just perfect? Romney doesn’t do well without his teleprompter, and we already have that in the WH now. Ha, and some worried about what would come out of Rick Perry’s mouth next.

          • kowalski

            Or his wife driving an Audi. It was inconsequential to me, and most of the Conservatives I know in my family (as well as the liberals) have at least 1 Cadillac. A Lincoln here and there too.

            But an Audi! What kind of freak drives an Audi?

            Well I do. Love them in fact, and really some of the best cars in the world:

            Audi 5000CS Turbo Quattro. Yeah, it’s a 1987, but it only has 80,000 miles on it. You will not find a better car to drive in the winter in New England.

            Remember that Audi suffered the slings and arrows at the hands of 60 Minutes because of their bogus report on “unintended acceleration”. Frankly they’re great cars and Rick Santorum shouldn’t be ashamed of his wife driving one, or him driving one, either. They’re great cars. Vorsprung Durch Technik and all that.

            Neither should Romney be ashamed of his wife driving a “couple of Cadillacs.” What, do you guys all want to aspire to drive Ford Focuses with Grateful Dead stickers on them, or what? I think it’s nice his wife has a couple of Cadillacs. I want a couple of Cadillacs.

            The “trees in Michigan being all the right height” comment was mostly picked up as some kind of suspicious statement by lefitists. If you Google it, you can see that most of the lefties are looking for something nefarious there.

          • kowalski

            And just plain hatred is so strong here at Redstate that Romney could say: “I’d like to have a Happy Meal at McDonald’s for my Children” and Dan McLaugllin, Streiff and Thomas Crown would all write editorial pieces saying that it means Romney wants everyone to be poor and that Happy Meals are some kind of cult influence on children when Mitt Romney recommends them.

          • trickamsterdam

            Yup, that’s all the “Anti-Romney Bias” is…just class warfare arguments and dog whistles about the fact that he’s a member of a “cult”.

            How about this as a more realistic reason?

            He’s the failed [36% approval rating] one-term [no chance of reelection, and it's not because he was an R, because W. Weld and his predecessor were just fine] barely right of center [probably literally more liberal than Olympia Snowe] Governor, whose signature achievement was RomneyCare.

            How about the fact that he’s not even electable (unlike, say, Chris Christie, who whatever people think about him could do the things that people claim can do but Romney clearly can’t do based on all rational [recent] evidence)?

            How about the fact that we’re allowed to be annoyed, even hate, a guy who lies to our faces and tells us he’s the most conservative and others who have blood on the tracks of conservatism aren’t?

            But mostly, how about this…when he’s trailing Obama by double digits in late October, you at least don’t blame the conservative base for that, like the MSM is going to? “They stayed home”. How about that?

            No, he was awful, and, since FL, clear to anyone w/ even a rudimentary understanding of political strategy, not electable.

          • David123

            Now he wants to be elected as a pro-life candidate. This does not compute.

          • radicalrighty

            thake that time to consider that perhaps he polls in the 30s BECAUSE HE HAS HAD 3 – 8 OTHER COMPETITORS ON THE ENDLESS DEBATE STAGES WITH HIM SINCE THIS THING BEGAN.

          • trickamsterdam

            No, I meant he polled in the 30s when he was Gov of MA, w/ the people of MA.

            Which is why he had no chance of running for re-election, which is why he ran for President (another ludicrous lie by him, though…”I didn’t want to run for re-election, because that would have made it about me, and it should be about the people of MA”…yeah, you don’t want it to be about you…so you run for President! How about this, Govenor? Why don’t you…Oh, nevermind).

            And no one can say it was because he’s a Republican, because W. Weld and the R Governor right before him, did fine w/ that electorate…they’d had Rs for like 15-20 straight years or something. And no I can’t take a breath from talking about Romney. It’s entirely a political board, therefore it will be entirely political.

            If he gets the nomination, I’m sure you’ll have six months of relative niceness about Romney here, although mostly it’ll be about Congress and Gov Races though. Won’t help Romney in any case, I hate to break it to you. He’s doomed, squire: either in the Primary or the General.

            PS – Romney Delenda Est

          • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

            for opposing Romney in exhaustive detail over the past 5 years.

          • Thomas Crown

            streiff would ask if he was taking the dog off the roof before going through the drive thru, and I’d remark that I wondered how long it would be before the Romney campaign began an all-out assault on Burger King.

            Also, one of these things is not like the other.

          • JSobieski

            Come on man, Monday is no excuse for losing perspective.

          • Scope

            The trees being the right height in Michigan was a Romney statement that made no sense to most anyone, it was more than a little weird, and I doubt Romney even realized how stupid the comment was. That goes along with his comment that the streets were just right, it made no sense, and was rediculed appropriately.

            My reply about Romney’s NASCAR statement had nothing to do with the type of car he drives, or even his wife Ann. There are less and less people who can afford a Caddo, as the middle class is disappearing, and likely the older models were crushed with the Cash for Clunkers program. The point is he was dumb enough to say “Ann has a couple of Cadillacs.” He also dumbly added that he doesn’t follow NASCAR, but hey, I have some friends that own NASCAR teams.

            If you don’t get the very poor messaging by Romney, which comes out sounding like I drink lattes and wear birkenstocks, then you just don’t have a clue as to why Romney is not seen as a credible or viable candidate by the majority of the citizens that don’t fit into his 1% mold. He just doesn’t even know how to hide his snobbery, and has no ability to connect with those that he obviously doesn’t have any empathy for. Hel1, I’ll take someone in a pair of worn out and faded blue jeans, and wearing boots with animal manure on them them the Gucci guy.

          • jamesm

            Just does not get it.

          • jamesm

            Watching the Daytona 500. Where’s is the car sponsored by Romney? Did he get crash already?

            Just kidding

      • youngthegiant

        Look carefully at the last 15 polls and then tell me which candidate has seen an increase in his numbers: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/mi/michigan_republican_presidential_primary-1589.html#polls

        Romney is on a roll. The only thing that can stop him now is if enough liberals crossover to vote for Santorum. Ick.

        • jamesm

          just out

          • jamesm

            Looks like this is going to be exciting

      • jacobite

        His father, Jorge, gave MI its first income tax, fought Barry Goldwater tooth and nail, and had little bad to say about LBJ. With today’s “hair-on-fire” comment, Mitt tips his hand that he’ll be running against O’bwana with kid gloves, just like Juan McCain did. That went well, but you have to understand that McCain and Romney are really running against conservative Republicans, not Democrats..

    • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

      which means he will likely do better than predicted, even if by only a few points, added with a Romney drop, then we may get something other than the 4 people we have now.

      Man, how did the Party end up with these four, when on our team are some outstanding options.

  • jon11

    even if romney narrowly loses michigan, he’s only going to GROW his delagate lead tomorrow.

    AZ, where he’s blowing santorum out, is winner take all. Michigan is going to deliver roughly the same number of delagates to both.

    Obviously in terms of momentum michigan is huge but its become as huge for santorum as romney…maybe even bigger…given that 10 days ago he had a double diget lead in most polls.

    Romney will go on regardless. He won’t have to, but he’d spend his own money if necessary.

    I find the white night scenario distracting for a couple of reasons

    1) None of them are going to get in the race

    2) only one of the names consistently mentioned as a potential savior would be one whit better than the current crop, and thats christie.

    Mitch daniels is boring and moderate on social issues…just like romney. Jeb Bush is also way to moderate for the republican base 2.0, as he acknowledged himself last week.

    Jeb:

    ?I used to be a conservative and I watch these debates and I?m wondering, I don?t think I?ve changed, but it?s a little troubling sometimes when people are appealing to people?s fears and emotion rather than trying to get them to look over the horizon for a broader perspective…”

    • red_oakster

      Then his delegate growth won’t look so hot.

      • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

        Romney has three states in the bag on March 6: Massachusetts, Vermont and Virginia. The big story for Super Tuesday will be Newt Gingrich–win or lose. Newt will be the headline, and what happens to Romney in the other 7 primary/caucus states won’t really matter–unless, of course, he virtually runs the table on Santorum and Gingrich–which is highly unlikely.

        • Scope

          There are many voters here in VA that are willing to vote for Ron Paul just to deny Romney the win and the delegates. There is also a large contingent of Paul supporters who have been working very hard for Paul. How do you think he got the ballot signatures required here. His C4L organization here has over 6,000 members, and they come from every district in the state. VA also has open primaries, and Paul will get alot of cross over Democrats, just as he has in other states. I won’t be voting for either of them. They are the two worst candidates in the race.

          Many out there have already forgotten about the ballot access debacle here in VA, where only Paul and Romney made the ballot. We here in VA haven’t forgotten that our choices are limited. The word here in VA among Virginia Republicans is disenfranchisement. Many of the questions about the ballot access circumstances have never been answered. The rules in fact were changed late in the game. There was a statement by the VA GOP that they notified the candidates in October that they would have their signatures verified if they collected less than 15,000, where that requirement was only 10,000 in the 08 election. The R majority legislature voted down a bill that would have closed the VA primary elections. 4 R VA Senators can be thanked for that. Another VA R Senator in fact wanted to bring a bill to make it even more difficult for ballot access, and wanted to increase the signature count to around 17,000.

          There was a recent article here saying that Gov. Bob McDonnell’s handling of the Personhood bill was like watching a hooked fish flipping and flopping on a wet pier. Some of McDonnell’s biggest supporters expressed almost shock that a bill that not long ago seemed like such a sure thing, wound up going so badly. McDonnell himself wanted an amendment added to the bill that made the ultrasound viewing to be voluntary rather than required. As most know, the ultrasound is done anyway, prior to any abortion precedure. McDonnell was already seen as a big disappointment as he promised no new taxes, yet he promoted and signed the Amazon tax bill. Sound familiar? Some of the R Senators that voted for the bill said it was all about being fair. Again, sound familiar?

          I doubt there are many in this state, that follow politics at all, that don’t know McDonnell really really wants to be Mitt Romney’s VP. The Lt. Gov. Bolling, who really really wants to be the next Gov. is Romney VA campaign chair. Both have folded like cheap suits in the face of Democrat opposition. Neither has shown any effort to fight for conservative principles. Heck McDonnell took $800,000 from the EPA for “green initiatives” in 2010, and proceeded to have it used to build a rain park, and to replace the concrete walkways around the state capital buildings with bricks. McDonnell proudly congratulated a VA based international wind energy company for getting a $4.2 million fed. grant to study and promote a wind farm off the VA coasts. A division of the company was sold to George Soros and Madeline Albright, which gave them a 25% ownership stake in the company. This is the guy that really really wants to be Mitt Romney’s VP choice.

          Please don’t say that Romney has it in the bag in VA. You know just what kind of trouble Ron Paul’s little band of warriors can create.

          • chuckludd

            Whatever a person thinks of Paul, it seems an easy choice to vote for Paul in Virginia. It’s one-on-one of Romney versus the non-Romney.

            If someone wants a real knock-out punch, it will be a Paul victory in Virginia. I think Santorum and Newt should be telling their Virginia backers to vote for Paul to stop Romney. It does not seem that difficult for either of them to say “vote against Romney.” Both Santorum and Newt have a common interest in doing this.

          • littlehouse18

            Indeed the way the ballot acces happened was quite suspicious. I also object to having the deadline so far in advance of the primary. The race has changed so significantly since then.

            McDonnell started off well, but I have been sorely disappointed recently. I don’t think he would really help a Romney ticket.

          • Scope

            According to this article VA Senator Frank Wagner has struck again. VA currently “mandates” the HPV vaccine. I believe this was done under the Dem. Tim Kaine Governorship. There was a bill brought before the VA Senate to repeal the mandate, and to give parents the choice whether they wanted their children to receive the vaccine or not. Senator Wagner was one of two Republicans to vote against the repeal.

            After the Personhood debacle, that put McDonnell in a very bad light, I have to wonder if Wagner, and a few other VA R legislators are not trying to protect McDonnell and Bolling from having to vote for or sign legislation that would put them at risk with their future higher political aspirations. Later they can claim they were for those pieces of legislation but never had the opportunity to sign them into law. The Democrats can’t go after them for something they never did.

            R VA Senator Frank Wagner-

            Voted against closing VA primary elections.

            Sponsored the legislation that required Amazon to become a VA tax collecting arm.

            Voted against the repeal of the HPV mandate.

            Is the biggest proponent and pusher of Wind Energy off the VA coasts.

            Voted against a bill allowing police to ask for residency documentation, even though one area in VA was the ideal model for working with ICE, and lowered crime in that area by 35%.

            And that is just in this legislative session, which isn’t finished yet.

          • keepcoolwithcoolidge

            I will be voting for Paul over Romney in Virginia. Anything can happen in Virginia politics. Remember, Oliver North was the Senate nominee in 1994.

          • Common_Cents

            Another diary said he wasn’t when a 2 man race there would be perfect for Paul to attack Romney. Of course he hasn’t in the debates either, there has to be some deal between them, probably for Rand to be in romney admin/VP?

          • littlehouse18

            nt

          • Scope

            running in central VA where I live. I doubt there are any ads running anywhere in the state even though the primary is only one week away. As was predicted when the ballot was to only have two names, the state has lost out on any ad revenues. Some of the VA elites and uppers wanted VA to have more say in who became the R nominee, and they cut their own heads off in that effort.

          • SoFiMil

            to raise a stink at the convention, regardless of whether it’s brokered.

            In addition, it could give him momentum and lead to Paul picking up additional delegates in upcoming elections.

            Given the alternatives, I’ll take my chances by conceding Romney a win in VA and all of its 46 delegates.

            Scope, I urge you to join me in undervoting in the VA primary.

          • SoFiMil

            Shocking! Even to me. I just realized this, but yes, Romney may indeed get my vote.

            I will not vote for Paul here, there, in a box, or anywhere.

          • mikeymike143

            the minute that loon paul wins, out will come all his racist and anti semitic articles in the press. tarring the republicans for voting for paul. i can see the media headlines now ”virginia GOP winner known for anti semitic and racist writings”.

            sofimil, i am a full blown santorum supporter, and if i lived in virginia i would also be voting for romney.

            paul’s values are not the values of the GOP. we are not nujobs and racists and i simply wont support a candidate that is.

          • SoFiMil

            Who would’ve thunk?

          • SoFiMil

            .

          • acat

            Well .. there is a third choice. Leave that question unanswered, and vote everything else.

            Mew

          • Scope

            My anger and disgust at what the VA GOP has done with this election cycle supercedes my disgust at both Romney and Paul. It was because of the outreageous shennanigans that they have participated in that has resulted in the laughing stock that has become VA. I don’t know if you’ve read my posts about the votes being cast by some of the R VA Senators, but they have all but driven me away from the party apparatus in the state. Because we don’t register to vote by party, the only way the VA GOP can get a feel for how many Republican participants there are in the state, is by the voting booth info, I think. When the VA Republicans start acting like Republicans, and can show at least the slightest bit of leadership, and stop folding like cheap suits in the face of the big mouth Democrats, they then will regain my trust.

            My biggest contribution will be in doing everything in my power to help elect Ken Cuccinelli to the Governor’s seat. He’s my only hope in this sorry state.

        • lapert

          I don’t think Newt will be the story at all – he will win Virginia and not really be competitive anywhere else. The press will focus on the Ohio contest as a ‘swing state’ measure and if Romney doesn’t close in on Santorum there the headlines will be about his inability to win swing states. If he does close in, and especially if he wins, it will be the last piece of evidence for the press that the GOP is coming around to back him. I don’t particularly think either narrative is a reflection of reality, but if I had to bet on how the press is going to construct a narrative that would be it.

          • lapert

            Sorry, meant Newt will win Georgia and nothing else – obviously Romney is going to win Virginia in a landslide (look at the polls Scope, Paul is right where he belongs in fringeville).

          • chuckludd

            I hoping Newt is in play in Tennessee as well as Georgia on Super Tuesday. Though I agree with you that all eyes will be on Ohio for Super Tuesday.

          • lapert

            The Vanderbilt University poll in TN has Santorum at 38, Romney at 20, Paul at 15 and Gingrich at 13. (link here). It’s possible the poll is way off but doesn’t really seem in play for Gingrich.

          • greenpoint

            So is Oklahoma in play for Newt.

          • lapert

            The only Oklahoma poll I have seen recently is from Rasmussen and has Santorum at 43% and Gingrich second with 22% – it would probably require a big error on Rick’s part for Newt to put that in play.

          • acat

            Remember, he’s still way behind….

            Mew

          • lapert

            Delegate allocation from the early states aren’t exactly clear but according to realclearpolitics he needs to drop 15 delegates to go back down to Newt’s level. According to CNN he would only need to lose 2.

            So, whose count are you using to suggest he is way behind?

          • acat

            .. he’s still pretty far back, by my count.

            Mew

          • lapert

            I’m sure your count is as accurate as the next guys but since I don’t have the inclination to dig into the absurdities of delegate allocation, I’m going to rely on the consensus of professionals keeping count if you don’t mind – haven’t found one yet that has the same take as you.

            Though, I also haven’t found any that agree with each other which should help highlight for people that delegate count at this point is a particularly useful number in understanding the likely outcome of the race.

    • Whacker77

      Sorry to tell you this, but I’m a conservative and I don’t recognize the nonsense these guys are spouting. Jeb Bush is conservative on every issue but one. Should we really make immigration the new abortion litmus test. If we keep putting up candidate who want deport anyone and everyone, we’ll never win another presidential election. Honestly, does anyone really believe Romney is an immigration hawk?

    • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

      On social issues? You obviously don’t know anything about Daniels or his record. He’s nothing like Romney. And as for being boring, you must not have watched his response to the SOTU address. We’d be fortunate to have Mitch Daniels as POTUS.

    • trickamsterdam

      I can no longer tell if things like this are Romney propaganda, or if this is just the type of supporter that someone like Romney attracts.

      Romney was more liberal on social issues (when he had REAL POWER, not just talking) as Olympia Snowe. Literally.

      Not “moderate”. Very, very, very, very, VERY liberal. This person also said that the one “white knight” who makes any sense is Chris Christie, aka, the biggest Romney supporter in the world (big in terms of big belly, and big in terms of his big mouth, and big in terms of his support).

      Not implying anything, just saying Romney supporters on the Internet tend to be curious (not curious in the sense of being open to new experiences, just “curious”).

  • sethellis

    It is nothing more than a way to generate more news coverage and discourage the gop base over having a weak field.

    If Romney is to be defeated it shouldn’t be through some back room stabbing. Why can’t he just be defeated outright?

    • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

      As I said, the only way it works is if the voters kick him in the front, then the money men and the party functionaries kick him in the rear.

      • sethellis

        I just don’t believe the so called establishment is as powerful as everyone wants to believe. If they were, Romney would have tied this thing up by now. Establishment can help drive the money and the message, but we are the ones that vote.

        It’s the peoples choice, and if they decide against Romney, there’s not a thing the establishment can do. The only way he gets defeated is through an outright rejection at the ballot box.

        • Whacker77

          If the establishment had found a better candidate, that candidate would have won. Romney is a bad candidate though.

          • greenpoint

            Even if Romney wins Michigan by 2 or 3 points and the delegates are split 50-50, Romney is badly damaged.

        • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

          influence over Romney, which is part of my point.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      Romney is going to do a lot worse than his current polling data suggests and then most of us at RS will be estatic.

      • jamesm

        say that Santorum nails Romney at the wire in Michigan. After that Romney would be crippled. Santorum outperforms his polling numbers in the prior contests.

        • youngsterz

          Santorum outperformed three weeks ago but that was BEFORE his media excoriation/vetting. He was still the mostly unknown anti-Romney du jour. Not so anymore. He was the last of many who burned hot then burned out when the general public finds that he is no more or less qualified to be President than our current underqualified president. It’s human political nature to think the new guy is the perfect white knight — until you get close enough to see the warts and flaws. Then some of the shine goes off.

  • Whacker77

    Right now, Republican operatives are in a state of panic over the Romney campaign. That’s understandable considering he hasn’t been able to put away the weakest field in modern presidential politics. In fact, Senators are ready to call for a new candidate if Romney loses Michigan. To that, I say great.

    Despite the widespread panic, the same people itching to call for a new candidate will be back on the Mitt bandwagon if he wins Michigan. Huh? I don’t get it, If Mitt stinks enough to suggest we might need a new candidate, why would a two point win against an underfunded candidate in Mitt’s home state change things.

    Either we want to go forward with Romney, or we don’t. Personally, I don’t want to go forward with Romney so I’m pulling for Santorum in Michigan. Unfortunately, I’m not interested in supporting Santorum, Newt, or Paul either. None of them are worth the energy.

    I believe at this point two things are true. First, our nominee will either be Romney or someone not currently in the race. Second, the only way Romney can win is if there is some sort of massive oil price shock that sends unemployment back to 9%. I’m still not sure he could capitalize on that though.

    I still believe our best bet is a new candidate not tainted by the circus atmosphere we’ve experienced these last few months. I think Jeb, Christie, Jindal, or Rubio could swoop in, win at the convention, and crush Obama in the Fall.

    • jamesm

      to find a candidate. There does not seem to be a hero waiting in the wings

      • Whacker77

        There may be no “hero”, but wouldn’t you say Christie, Bush, Jindal, and Rubio are far better than a terrible wounded Romney or Santorum?

        • jamesm

          Christie..No..I don’t believe he is a real conservative. Has not been vetted.

          Bush..maybe

          Jindal..yes

          Rubio..probably

    • greenpoint

      The others are you new candidate list have real problems: Jeb’s last name is Bush, Christie is as liberal as Romney and Romney’s biggest booster. Rubio is ithe conservative version of Obama: 2 years in the big leagues and not ready for the top spot yet. That leaves Jindal- solid executive experience, young with appeal to minorities, and articulate. Yeah his reply to the state of the union a few years back was weak, but he’s a fast learner and vastly improved since then.

  • red_oakster

    Christie wanted to run, but didn’t see a path. A Romney flameout would be his opening.

    Ryan came close, but stayed out in anticipation of Perry sucking up all the conservative oxygen. He’d accept a draft.

    So would Jindal, whose re-election campaign in Louisiana made it impossible for him to run.

    And Rubio might be persuaded to throw his hat in the ring.

    My own money would be on Ryan and Jindal. I think Christie would be seen as too moderate by large numbers of delegates.

    • chuckludd

      I’m hoping Paul Ryan is drafted. Jindal would be my second choice.

      Although I like Rubio, I think at the top of the ticket he is not as compelling after being a Senator for barely 2 years. Christie would be a good VP pick — the attack dog for Ryan.

      • greyeagle

        Was the youngest ever Speaker of the House in Florida. So he has experience under his belt.

  • chuckludd

    No matter who you back (other than Romney), conservatives should be voting for Santorum in Michigan tomorrow.

    And I think overall, whoever is the non-Romney leader in a State, that’s who conservatives should be backing. I know a lot of people on this site dislike Paul, but you need to put that aside in Virginia.

    Santorum in Michigan; Paul in Virginia; Newt in Tennessee and Georgia; and as it gets closer to Super Tuesday, there should be conservative coordination on RedState to get the word out on who has the lead in various States.

    And EE, if you are reading, this is a way for you to not endorse anyone but still pump up the base to vote for the non-Romney leading in their State rather than waste a vote on Cain or Perry who may be on the ballot as a technicality.

    • SoFiMil

      I’ll be undervoting in that one. (Officially voting, but for neither of the two Republican candidates.) Romney’s leagues better than Paul. It’s just that for a primary vote, Romney doesn’t pass my threshold.

      • trickamsterdam

        Anyone notice a pattern w/ Romney supporters?

        They’re always saying something great about him like “leagues better” but always also at the same time something awful like “but he doesn’t meet my primary threshold”.

        So your story is: In an entirely meaningless election, you can’t bring yourself to vote for Paul to hurt Romney, but Romney is so bad you can’t vote for him even though the election is meaningless unless he doesn’t win it, but you will be voting for him (meaningful election) against Obama?

        Do I have that right?

        In other words: Romney is so bad you can’t vote for this opponent in a meaningless Primary, but you’re going to be the first on board to tell us that we all have to vote for him in the General (even though voting for Paul might lead to Newt, Santorum, or a Brokered Convention) and give you a chance to not have to vote for the guy you are so repulsed by, you can’t even vote for him in a meaningless Primary.

        OK. Either:

        1) You’re the kind of guy who sweats profusely while playing Checkers w/ friends for match-sticks (certainly possible)

        2) You’re another poster who’s completely in the tank for Romney who also curses him w/ every breath, so as to try to pretend that they’re neutral.

        Yeah, if there’s a third option, it must be even worse than the first two.

        • SoFiMil

          Romney definitely doesn’t fall into the category of I will not support no master what. Romney’s bad but not that bad. It’s not simply Ron Paul’s ideology that I have a problem with.

        • SoFiMil

          ..

          • trickamsterdam

            You do huh?

            “It?s just that for a primary vote, Romney doesn?t pass my threshold.” – sofimil

            No you don’t:

            “Romney definitely doesn?t fall into the category of I will not support no master what.” – sofimil

            Right, Romney is so horrific you can’t vote for him in a meaningless primary, but can’t vote for his opponent, even knowing that Paul has no chance of being the nominee, but Romney is likely to be knocked out by the humiliation of losing to Paul in VA?

            Sorry, doesn’t add up.

            But then you’re going to be urging us to vote for this guy in the General, and calling us traitors if we don’t, right?

            You’re another guy on here who pushes this guys cause subtly, while also trashing him so as to appear neutral.

            As I’ve been saying…like candidate, like supporter. Deceiver and deceivers.

          • littlehouse18

            It’s going to really, really stink to have to pull the lever for Paul in the primary, even though I’m seriously considering it to register a Not-Romney vote. My conscience will be ok since VA Republicans have been so disenfranchised. But I might feel ill!

          • trickamsterdam

            How could he say Romney doesn’t meet his “standard” in a Primary and then vote for him in the General (in a race where it’s clearly Romney and Not-Romney)?

            In other words, how could Paul be so non-threatening that he couldn’t vote for for Romney over him….but against Obama in the General he’s going to be out there cheer-leading for this guy (Romney) that he has such contempt for he deliberately didn’t vote for him in what to him is a meaningless primary, and we know he thinks it’s meaningless because he brags about the fact that he won’t vote for either one (but, at the same time, he made it clear, he’s going to actually go physically into the voting both, just not vote for either one)?

            So apparently, Obama is much scarier to him than Paul. But Paul isn’t scary enough for him to vote for Romney to prevent the possible chance Paul could win? But if he doesn’t think that Paul can win, why wouldn’t he vote for Paul to try to knock out Romney, who he says (I don’t believe him of course) that he has so much contempt for he won’t vote even for him in a Primary?

            I know those two paragraphs seemed twisted and incoherent. But not as much as this guy’s logic. And I’ve learned when someone usually deliberately appears to not making sense, there’s a reason.

            It just doesn’t make any sense to me, and it fits the pattern of most Romney supporters on this board…they’ll say he’s “boring, liberal, awful” at the beginning of the paragragh…and then, at the end of the paragraph, say, “of course he’s also the only one who can possibly win, so don’t even think of voting for anybody else”.

            I they’re his volunteers, who have deliberately come up w/ this strategy of going on the Internet and saying “we know they don’t like him there on RS [or where ever], so pretend you don’t like him either, but then make it clear at the end how he’s the only practical choice”.

            Romney has contempt for the Republican Base. We’ve known this for a while. But now we know his supporters do too..

          • SoFiMil

            I’ll get you next time, Gadget!!!…

          • greenpoint

            Paul in Virginia is the only option on the table in Va. What are you worried about if Paul wins? He won’t be President of Virginia and they already have a gov. DUH.

          • SoFiMil

            : )

          • SoFiMil

            I had LH on the Prairie on my brain.

          • SoFiMil

            I’m not that clever. Stick with trying to convince me to vote Ron Paul ahead of Romney. If you don’t insult me this reasonable scenario you put forward has a chance to convince me. When you go all conspirstorial you lose credibility.

            But heh, at least you didn’t me of religious bigotry against Mormons. : )

          • trickamsterdam

            You must think I’m the patron Saint of Primary voters who make bizarre decisions or something. Santorum was going to give me that title if he won yesterday, but that’s all gone now.

            Now, I’ve (nearly) fully accepted that you Romney supporters have your hearts set on this, and that you’re going to get your way. Also, what I talked about wasn’t really a conspiracy, just a strategy. I accept the fact that Romney supporters think he’s more electable than the other candidates, or a brokered convention, or late entry candidate.

            It doesn’t make any sense, but I understand many of you genuinely believe it.

            Well, since you have your hearts set on it, then pursue this course of yours. You had a heck of a victory last night.

            Just understand, once he’s got the nomination, you’re on your own. And it’s not just me. And no “non-insulting reasonable scenario” is going to get me to change my mind and I’m sure that goes for a lot of others. See, Romney doesn’t meet your standards in the Primary, but he doesn’t meet mine in the General.

            Nevertheless, reading your responses, I sense that you’re basically a good guy. It’s not your fault that you don’t understand that Romney can’t possibly be elected. A dog (not Romney’s dog) wants to sing, but can only bark. Romney’s dog wanted to complain, but could only poop on the roof of his car. There it is. ;)

            PS – Romney Delenda Est

  • Whacker77

    I think the prospects Mitt might be forced to release his delegates aren’t as far fetched as one might think. If he loses tomorrow and then gets swamped on Super Tuesday, there is no real path for win to win the nomination. He wouldn’t be able to win 1144 delegates and it’s unlikely the convention would turn to him.

    If the professional Republican class finds a new candidate (Bush, Christie) and that person gets a head of steam, it’s not inconceivable Romney is all but forced to turn over his delegates to Jeb or Christie in order to stop Santorum from being the nominee.

    This option is not likely at all, but it’s conceivable considering the resisatance to Romney. It would be fairly messy, but it probably the only way we get a nominee who can win in November.

    • BlueLandRed

      and I don’t see ANY possible way that anyone is going to talk him out releasing a single delegate… evar.

  • redmymind

    1. $$$
    2. Negative ad carpet-bombing M.O.
    3. Establishment/drone support

    ALL of which BHO would soundly beat him on–also being the superior communicator who actually CONNECTS with the crowd, unlike two Caddies Mitt.

    And where would Mitty hide? Having ZERO credibility as far as conservative principles and record?

    There isn’t all that much for conservative folks to really “think about” when it comes down to a choice between Santorum or Mitt. Some mental gymnastics over Santorum vs. Newt, I might understand. But Mitty? . . . Seriously??? How hard can it be to show ole Silver Spoons the exit door???

  • Martin Knight

    Jeb Bush’s last name would be an anchor around his neck. Jindal has not indicated any interest. Daniels wants to protect his wife and Christie has adamantly declared that he is absolutely uninterested in running for President.

    McDonnell has made it very clear that he is willing to be Vice-President for Mitt Romney – why won’t he want to take the top spot.

    • Scope

      VP candidates go through the same vetting that the Presidential candidates do. Does Palin come to mind in 08? If Romney manages a win for the nom, the last thing he needs on his ticket is another moderate. McDonnell is racking up disappoint after disappoint here among the conservatives in VA. Hey Martin, if your preference is for moderates, have at it.

      • carolina

        some establishment GOP(s) warned that it would hurt his potential run in the general election IF they decided they needed to draft him.
        Would not surprise me……

      • Martin Knight

        Did I support Palin? Yes. I have the diary posts to prove it. Let’s not compare anti-Moderate sentiment – I have you beaten hands down.

        However, my ideal ticket for 2008 was Mitt Romney / Peter Pace. And before you start squealing, back then Mitt Romney was the conservatives’ preferred choice – i.e. Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin , Jim DeMint, etc. all came out in support of him against McCain.

        The problem with you is that you seem to expect a politician to align 100% with your beliefs and declare eternal enmity the instant he (or she) steps out of some narrow defined line.

        In this case, I’m pretty sure your own disappointment with McDonnell is primarily based on the fact that he did not endorse your idol, Rick Perry.

  • kowalski

    And it’s all so terribly complicated.

    Why not just get behind Romney and demand as a basis for your support that he listen to you carefully?

    • kowalski

      He’s ahead in the delegate race right now and if anything he’s winning endorsements, Jan Brewer just endorsed him. Is she the “establishment” too?

      As much as I like Newt Gingrich, I have to say at this point that these complicated machinations are really epicyclic and futile.

      Well, I know Thomas Crown wants Romney to drop out, but he’s like, one guy with a Spiked Pipe.

      • acat

        Would you take Wafflin’ Willard’s word for it?

        Mew

    • chuckludd

      I would not be opposed to that strategy if there was a way to organize conservatives and demand that from Romney, but I don’t see any organized way conservatives can do that.

    • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

      but this does not mean that I will get one.

  • kowalski

    You’re much more likely to see Donald Trump enter the race than anyone else. If we talk about the almost unprecedented act of a brokered convention, expect Donald Trump to walk right up there on the stage. As nice a guy as The Donald is, I really wouldn’t prefer him to be our President.

    • goodgovernance

      How can anyone claim to know what will happen in it? I really dislike people predicting the outcome of an event they have no experience with whatsoever.

      Brokered convention, sweet meteor of death… Romney’s so bad, it’s time to take our chances and risk a little uncertainty about the outcome, because Romney isn’t a winner anyway. And we might help the party get through that sorting out process that never happened post-Bush, too. Which really needs to be done and can only be done in presidential election cycles.

  • kowalski

    I view a brokered convention as an unprecedented disaster for the Republican Party. The idea that we can’t pick a nominee and have to take the almost unheard of step of a brokered convention is the biggest target we could paint on our backs that really, this Party deserves to lose.

    • kowalski

      I am *so far removed* from anything that could be called the Establishment in this country that I don’t even exist as a tiny pulse doppler shift on their most sensitive radars. I just know that if you want to beat the Messianic candidate you should have someone with a fresh face who isn’t carrying the baggage of the others. You guys can beat yourselves up about it but Romney is the guy who can win the Presidency particularly if he chooses a good VP candidate.

    • kowalski

      Except we don’t even have Walter Matthau as the drunk coach who redeems himself or Tanner as the smartass kid who just wants to play ball. We’re just a bunch of broken up losers if we are forced to have a brokered convention. It’s a huge embarrassment.

      You know, sometimes you have to accept the fact that the leader of the team isn’t the guy you thought would be the best. It could be that he has a lot to offer but for various reasons people just went the other way.

  • Professor de la Paz

    It’s the only way any of us survive this.

    Seriously, it’s about as poisonous of a pill as it gets, but if the alternative is watching Obama prance over Santorum’s political career’s defiled corpse, I’ll take it.

    Think about it. All the RP supporters would flock to such a ticket just because Paul’s name is on it. Paul can get Romney to accept Paul’s stance on the economy and to de-moderate his economic plan a little bit, while Romney at the head of the ticket allays concerns about Paul’s wacky foreign policy, the wholesale legalization of drugs, et cetera. Meanwhile, Paul’s strong stance against abortion and his very strong stance against the individual mandate mitigates some concerns about Romney’s record.

    It’s our best option short of a “knight in shining armor” scenario (I won’t use “white knight” simply because a liberal can come and call us all racist and the thought police will haul us away). Personally, I wish Ron’s son would have ran, Rand is Ron without all the gross, worrisome baggage that makes Ron unthinkable as President. I’d gladly take Jindal or Ryan too.

    • Creedo

      …is that I don’t see a future for this party if we don’t somehow, someway find a way to fold the libertarians into it. We can see that the party is in open civil war with itself, and chasing out the libertarians isn’t going to make things better. In fact, it will make it much worse by enticing them to chase after third party tickets and opportunities like “American’s Elect.”

    • chuckludd

      At this point, I am supportive of a 5th person coming in and pushing things to a contested convention. My preference is Ryan. But absent that happening, I can accept a Romney-Paul ticket. There is no way Paul is going to accept a VP slot (whether it’s Ron or Rand) unless Romney promises major domestic policy concessions which most everyone on this site would welcome. Paul’s foreign policy is where many on the site part ways with him and I don’t see Romney moderating much on foreign policy (though he could — and I would welcome it — advocate for a quicker draw down in Afghanistan and that would bend a bit toward Paul and be welcomed by independents). Putting Rand on the ticket is a better overall option than Ron, but putting one of the Pauls on the ticket keeps an enormously energized group in the mix for help in the General Election.

      • SoFiMil

        I’m always been very down on Romney, but his full embrace of Ron Paul has turned me off even more. That man is a racist with a defense ideology to the left of Obama. And he’s insufferable even with whiney fiscal policies. Those who believe Santorum grates on people haven’t heard nothin’ yet.

        • kowalski

          But back in May of 2011 Rand Paul was a hero here to Laborunionreport.

          http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/05/13/why-rand-pauls-right-to-compare-universal-healthcare-to-slavery/

          So I guess back in May o’the last year Rand Paul was super duper according to front page commentators on Redstate, but not so much right now?

          What “full embrace” of Ron Paul are you talking about?

          • kowalski

            BEGAN here on Redstate. There are a lot of other examples.

          • kowalski

            http://www.dailypaul.com/119127/redstate-editor-endorses-rand-paul-blog-defends-the-endorsement-of-rand

          • SoFiMil

            No worries. I’ve done that several times as their names are so similar. My first thought was that it was me that misspelled/confused the names.

          • SoFiMil

            That’s what I have a problem with.

          • acat

            is far enough removed from Ron ideologically …

            The jury is also out on whether Ron can make his endorsement of Rand stick with his merry band of tripster-followers.

            Mew

        • Creedo

          I’m a Zionist who believes our top priority should be the protection of Isreal. Obviously I’m not a Paul fan. That said, I am a western Republican with social and politically conservative values. My father was a big fan of Robert Taft, and what you are insinuating is that my father was to the left of Barack Obama on foriegn policy.

          I don’t agree with Ron Paul’s foriegn policy in today’s day and age but to say it’s left of Barack Obama shows a blatant disregard for the history of our party.

          • SoFiMil

            To better articulate, Robert Taft, you, your dad, and myself don’t blame America. Ron Paul and Obama do. This, and Ron Paul’s bigotry are his character flaws. Character first, ideology second.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            First you show off your single digit IQ on the subject of primary elections vs. caucus and now it’s foreign policy and libertarians.

            Hint stupid, Ron Paul is no more a libertarian than he is a Republican. And his foreign policy is far to the left of Obama.

            1. Paul would not authorize Predator strikes against aQ.
            2. While Obama’s record on Israel is deplorable, Paul would happily stand by and watch Iran nuke them. Paul would also shut off all foreign aid and military aid to Israel.
            3. Paul probably wouldn’t apologize for Koran burning, but he’s almost certainly apologize for being in Afghanistan in the first place. And he’d probably order an investigation of US involvement in 911.

            You were called out as an idiot yesterday, and by moderators not just little old me. You’re still an idiot, and an ignorant one at that. And, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if your dad was to the left of Obama given the record of his progeny.

        • littlehouse18

          Hers were trumped up by the media, but there’s an actual basis for Ron Paul’s problems. The field day the media would have with him would be incredible.

    • kowalski

      I’m voting for anything with “Paul” in the name on the ticket. None. And I will encourage every other person I know in this world to simply abstain from voting if the name “Paul” appears anywhere on the Republican ticket this fall. I won’t encourage them to vote Democrat because it’s a horrible thing to do – but I will absolutely not countenance a Paultard on the Republcian ticket this fall.

      If anyone thinks Mitt Romney is flirting with Ron Paul or Rand Paul to lock up the VP nomination I can tell you right now that I will unleash the Hounds of Hell on Romney if he does that. He’s FINISHED in terms of anything he ever considered to be respectable about himself.

      • kowalski

        As the President and Vice President than I would have Ron Paul or Rand Paul even appear on the Republican ticket this fall.

        • kowalski

          I’m sticking my neck out for you guys. If you bring one of the Paul Pod People into this thing, I’m personally going to do everything I can to make Obama win his second term. You’ve been warned. Don’t screw it up.

          • Creedo

            Whatever happened to party unity? I hate Gingrich, and he’s the last thing I’d ever want to see happen to us, but even I would vote for him over BHO. Romney Paul or Obama-Clinton is a pretty easy choice for me. I’ll vote for the Republican.

          • SoFiMil

            Except in all those contexts, it was what they would do if Ron Paul was the Presidential nominee. Some even acknowledges the house rules while doing so.

          • acat

            I will, however, vote for Willard Romney if he’s the nominee …

            Mew

          • SoFiMil

            I’d probably write in my cats (yes, I two tabbies) before the Green Party, but I get your point.

          • Creedo

            This talk of abandoning the Republican party is nuts. As much as I dislike Paul, he’s certainly a better option than Obama. I’m voting for the Republican, no matter who it is over Obama. I’d even vote for a cretin like Gingrich if it came down to it. And with Paul, at least I’d know we’d have the most conservative domestic policy probably the last century and a half. Paul is far from perfect, but there is definitely enough upside there if worse came to worse and the Paulites managed to pull the delegate coup off.

          • acat

            why I should take his sheepish return, his frequent jockeying for a third party run, and his serial refusal to endorse the party nominee as indicating he’s really returned.

            He just doesn’t want to be known as “the independent who caucuses with the GOP” as that’d increase the odds he gets a strong primary contender.

            With Crazy Uncle Ron at the top of the ticket, we’d end up losing a large number of otherwise winnable house and senate races, likely handing Obama not only a second term, but possibly a second term with majorities in Congress.

            If, by some deranged idea of a miracle, Ron Paul became president, you’re wrong on domestic policy; what we’d get would be gridlock on an almost unprecedented scale as both rational GOPers and Dems line up against the kook-in-chief.

            Please, Creedo. Go buy a clue. Your schtick is wearing thin.

            Mew

          • krish

            Most of the RINO media types are saying the same thing…..the conservatives will come around in the presidential elections….that is why Romney camp is not even trying to be conservative! Let us not let the cat out of the bag now!!

            How about staying home? Many in the South will do that if MA liberal is the nominee! Take a look at the ads by dems in MI.

          • acat

            Voters who stay home give up their right to vote for representatives, senators, governors, state reps, mayors, dogcatchers, bond issues, etc. etc.

            In what world is encouraging people to stay home a better alternative?

            Do please get your head out of wherever you have it stuffed and *think*.

            Mew

          • krish

            I am not advocating throwing the vote….but that is what happens when moderates are chosen as the republican nominee! Stating what is going to happen! Deal with fact instead of personal attacks!

          • acat

            There were calls – some posted here on Red State – to skip the vote “because the GOP nominated a loser!”.

            This is not serious thinking – nobody in either party gives a damn about someone who can’t get off the couch and cast a ballot – nor should they!

            Your assertion is further flawed as it wasn’t the conservatives who stayed home in 2008 or 2004 or 2000 … that’d be the moderates who didn’t like W or McCain… or the squishies who wanted to “make history”.

            Mew

      • SoFiMil

        Just saw your post. I think we agree on the distinction.

    • ennaneko

      Paul’s biggest demographis are the potheads and conspiracy theorists.

      Why would Paul team up with Romney? Why would Romney team with Paul?

      Liberal members of Paul’s campaign would see Romney as the lowest threat to their favorite social/culture issues but that’s it. I don’t see Paul and Romney mixing.

      Romney’s foreign policy advisors would leave in droves. Romney has a attracted a fair share of war hawks. Paul’s persona clashes with the image Romney wants to project, in my opinion.

      Romney’s narrowly focused on just two issues… Iran and Wall Street… period.

      He thinks that the financial sector has to be protected at all costs from the angry mob. He also thinks an aggressive foreign policy in the middle east trumps everything else.

      The economy, stopping the advance of social liberals, Obamacare, abortion, etc is all secondary. He just wants to wrap the piggy bank in duct tape and pound on Iran.

      I’m surprised Ron Paul supporters and Ron Paul himself would be so chummy with a guy who has “neocons” working closely with him. I thought the “neocons” were bad for Ron Paul and his supporters.

  • septembergurl

    going to have a brokered convention if Romney wins a majority of delegates (or even if he wins a plurality). Then the odds would be that he would achieve the nomination, perhaps not on the first ballot but eventually.

    The brokered convention would not be to pick an anti-Romney, but rather a replacement for Romney, that is, acceptable to the establishment in terms of experience, ability to raise money, etc. It would arise if Romney demonstrated during the course of the primary that he is unable to win Republican support, let alone show the ability to expand his vote in the general election.

    My personal view is that romney cannot win the nomination unless he renounces Romneycare. This is the essence of the argument against him. I think he made a fatal mistake in deciding to defend Romneycare. All his problems flow from that. And the Establishment types who supported him have also made a mistake in not understanding how this makes Romney unacceptable.

    So, we are at present struggling with some very bad realities. One is that romney was a very bad choice for the establishment. The other is that the poorly run primary campaign had some features which benefited niche candidates like Gingrich and santorum (and Cain and Bachmann before them): the proportional awarding of delegates, the Citizens United decision making unlimited PAC money available to minor candidates, the undisciplined debate fiasco.

    Another feature is the superdelegates. Recall that in the 2008 Democrap primary, neither clinton nor Obama had nailed down the nomination. There wee some thousands of superdelegates, party officials, etc, and they were essential in Obama’s win. Republicans only have a few hundred, so in a four way (or maybe more if another candidate enters after Super Tuesday — entirely possible) contest they would not be decisive. There are many ways this could play out.

  • texastory63

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/quick-spending-scorecard_631985.html

    If only Newt would endorse Santorum. Why won’t he?

  • SoFiMil

    This would be a significant win for Santorum and would show the weekends in Mitt’s spectrum of support.

  • goodgovernance

    I also think the best way to get somebody new is if Romney realizes he has to drop out. It’s not such a great push as we might have thought earlier.

    Consider the polling that shows Romney is heavily disfavored by independents compared to Obama – and let’s not shrug the numbers aside because Politico did the polling. Romney supporters have been touting Mitt’s “inevitability” and “best candidate in the general” status based on poll numbers to this point, so they can’t just ignore the data when they don’t like it now.

    Besides, Romney’s erosion of support with independents fits his historical pattern – the more voters get to know Mitt Romney, the less they like him. His negative ad bombs may be effective in dismantling his opponents, but the public can’t help but notice they’re not counterweighted with a real, substantive positive message or set of policies.

    To date, the establishment has been under the mistaken impression that Romney can turn things around for the general with a few tweaks here and there to his campaign. I think his candidacy is ultimately much more seriously flawed, but establishment types can’t see it because the flaws aren’t concrete issues you can put in a spreadsheet, the way you can Mitt’s advantages of organization and money.

    For all the reasons you stated, I hope Santorum wins in Michigan tomorrow, and I hope all Gingrich supporters there decide to vote for Santorum however they feel about the man from Pennsylvania, because this is our last best chance to take down Romney. I’m more than disappointed in Santorum himself, though. I think the man has proven himself incapable of any kind of modulation, and that would mean he’d be just as disastrous a candidate as Romney in the general.

  • usedtobelib

    candidates weak. It’s clear it’s been a strategy among some people for a long time.

    First, we had Rush and Mark L. repeating the meme that the “establishment candidate was being forced down voters’ throats.” Not true, of course. Both men are smart enough with words to understand that anyone they deem “establishment” will not be looked upon kindly by their audience, even if they never bother to establish what makes someone establishment beyond that person’s name recognition.

    Newt, for example, was never expected to do well by pundits, by anyone, yet he is the ultimate WA insider–does that qualify as “establishment”? It should if we were talking honestly, but of course, in politics words are never used honestly.

    Now, we have talk of a brokered convention. First, that talk was put forth by the same people who’ve been anti-Romney all along, establishing a set of results’ criteria for him that will deem him failure, even when he wins, yet not deem him winner when he does much better than expected, as in Iowa.

    Now, however, the brokered convention talk is, I think, likely to be coming also from the mouths of a second group–those who want the ultimate winner of the GOP nomination, Romney or one of the others, to lose the Presidency so that their candidate will be able to run in 4, not 8 years. Many of these are the Bushies.

    One day, maybe the GOP will understand the US has had enough of the Bushes.

  • David123

    Rick Santorum will beat Obama like a drum. He has shown, again and again, that he can attract Democrat and independent voters, by winning elections in Pennsylvania. This election he’s showed himself to be a tireless campaigner who beat Romney multiple times with far fewer resources.

    However, Santorum has also shown that he’s a team player. He’s not looking for a civil war in the Republican Party. He would like to guide or nudge the party and the country right, not yank them right very sharply. Santorum’s support of Specter shows he believes the Republican Party has room for people less conservative than he is and that he will work with moderates.

    Rick Santorum walks the walk and people should respect him for that.

    • David123

      Proofreading is my friend.
      Proofreading is my friend.
      Proofreading is my friend.

    • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

      Look, I love his fearlessness on social issues. I think he’s in the demographic sweet spot for this election, as a guy from a middle class Rust Belt Italian-Irish Catholic background. He’s smart, he stands his ground in an argument…I get that.

      But Santorum has a terrible propensity – related to why he got slaughtered in 2006 – to talk at length about social issues in a way that frightens independent swing voters. There’s no two ways around that. One key way you win elections is controlling the agenda. Santorum will absolutely let Obama set the agenda. That should worry us.

      • acat

        just asking Santorum to change the topic, now and then. Mix it up a little.

        Mew

        • SoFiMil

          that turns some people off. Perry and Dubya are just as strong on social issues, and worked and considered these priority issues just as much, but something about their tone and mannerism was different. Not criticizing Santorum, it’s just that some people have a gift with connecting with others.

      • David123

        He needs to focus on:
        repealing Obamacare.
        Fast&furious.
        Keystone pipeline.
        other job-creating strategies.
        Obama’s jobs record (or lack there-of)

        If Obama tries to focus on social issues, Santorum should ask why he’s trying to change the subject from jobs, and point out that he (Santorum) favors medical care for infants who survive abortions, while Obama repeatedly voted against providing medical care to infants.

        If Obama wants to talk about “extremism”, Santorum should compare his own positions on social issues to JFK’s. He should also point out Obama’s pals Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, and Jeremiah Wright, for anyone who is interested in real extremism.

        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

          Every time he opens his mouth he talks about social issues, to the extent that the MSM will frame every question around the social stupidity (because a President can’t have much impact beyond SCOTUS nominations and EOs and Santorum will be no better on those than any other candidate) and he just jumps right in.

          ObamaCare is a social issue – conscious exceptions and all that, not the overreach of government.

          He is getting lots of press now over his statement about the separation of church and state. No matter where you come down on the issue, there was NO need to bring it up and he’ll be answering questions about is forever.

          I doubt if he even knows what Fast & Furious is. He’ll certainly turn Keystone into a moral issue, probably the impact of expensive gas on the poor.

          Ad nausem.

          Obama will beat little Ricky so damned bad he’ll have a bigger majority in the Senate and maybe even Nancy as Speaker.

          • clintonformccain

            I can come up with for why on earth Santorum felt the need to go nuclear on JFK’s separation of church and state speech fifty years ago. I don’t think JFK’s speech is particularly controversial.

            It’s kind of easy to see why the voters of PA threw him out of office by 18 points. He’s definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer. It’s like he walks around looking to make trouble for himself.

          • ennaneko

            Gotta pay tribute to JFK? It sucks that he was assassinated but Democrats have turned him into a secular deity.

            most overhyped president in history.

            Why do people want Santorum to be unoriginal and repeat Kennedy’s words verbatim?

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            other than lowering taxes, has any place in this election, Santorum should have kept his stupid mouth shut. That whole idiotic refrain won’t do anything to repeal OCare, bring down the deficit or any other issue that actually matters.

          • ennaneko

            JFK is a Democrat deity.

            GOP tries to make Reagan one, too.

            Such is the mentality of Washington. Politicians are a superstitious and corny lot.

            I was watching video of Democrats praising Obama as the Lion King! Why? Because he’s born under the sign of Leo and his father is from Africa. Get the reference?

            Scoffing at JFK is a grave offense. I was once watching some video of some gala dinner some democrats were having they had painted JFK in the form of Zeus and God.

          • ennaneko

            the big beef the media has with him is that he said he barfed at JFK’s sacrosanct words which they believe every politician Republican or Democrat should applaud.

            I like this about Santorum… he ruffles feathers. It makes him such a wild card. I like it when things get fun like this.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            All of your cites are apples to oranges, and the issue isn’t some grave offense aimed at JFK. The issue is that Santorum is perceived – and very rightly so – as a one dimensional robot. All he talks about are “social” issues, no matter the subject.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            to justify their opposition to all faith speech in the public square out of the context that JFK used it. It was an unforced error especially when one considers that JFK actually invoked Scripture when speaking out against Bull Connor from the Oval Office.

          • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

            what he lacks is not intelligence so much as strategic instincts and discipline. He needs to know when he’s being led into a trap. It’s one reason I like Newt so much better, despite the weaknesses that have really made it impossible for Newt to win – Newt knows how to frame an issue, how to put his opponent in a place he doesn’t want to go, and when to declare that a question is a trap and he’s not going to fall into it.

          • buster93

            Newt is not a frontrunner at this point. In all honesty he is the only one that could be Obama. I actually did buy the CD about Ronald Reagan by Newt and Carlista and it was great. I didnt like him because I was a Rick Perry supporter.
            However he is the one to Debate Obama and win. Lets all think about this guys!!!!

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            A lack of intelligence would be “dumb”. A complete misunderstanding of the realm he’s trying to operate in combined with zero strategic instinct and zero discipline is flat out stupidity. The guy thinks the world works the way he wants it to, not the way it really does and he’s been in politics for over 20 years.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            I did say “dumb”. Now, fully caffeinated I didn’t bother to re-read my initial comment. I should not have said “dumb”. Ya got me.

            Rick is “stupid”.

  • znjs

    Mitt Romney recalled childhood memories of a landmark moment in Detroit history, noting he was “probably 4 or something like that” the day of the Golden Jubilee, to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the American automobile, the Toronto Star reports.

    Said Romney: “My dad had a job being the grandmaster. They painted Woodward Ave. with gold paint.”

    Unfortunately, the event took place June 1, 1946 — fully nine months before Romney was born.
    http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/02/27/romney_recalls_event_he_couldnt_have_seen.html

    • jamesm

      They can’t shut him up

    • littlehouse18

      Mitt’s mouth is a disaster waiting to happen. I get bated breath when he speaks or does interviews, worrying about what he’ll say next.

    • krish

      The establishment & media RINOs have been telling us how smooth Romney is….but evertime he goes off the script,he is caught lying or padding his record!! If one of his ten coaches had not prepared him for a question, he looks lost & familiar deer in the headlight……no wonder the MSM wants him as the republican nominee! Obama will slice him in debates & this out touch country club republian’s gaffes everyday are becoming a joke ….he looks more & more like his buddy from MA John Kerry – completley out of touch with America!

      MI – hopefully will give him the boot – back to where he belongs with other North East RINOs.

  • traversecityconservative

    A lot of people here didn’t even have a clue he was from Michigan. And those who knew, didn’t like his father. I really don’t expect Mitt to win any counties above Midland. It doesn’t matter what Santorum has voted for. Romneycare and all of Mitt’s flip flops with no consistent or credible Conservatism isn’t going to win him anything in our state. God bless the TV stations who are going to figure out the delegate count though. It’s a mess.

    • JSobieski

      would lose by double digits.

  • ww2nd95

    is an Obama plant..

    “During a tour of NASCAR team owner Richard Childress’ facilities Sunday, an Associated Press reporter asked Romney whether he followed car racing.

    “Not as closely as some of the most ardent fans,” Romney responded, “but I have some great friends who are NASCAR team owners.”

    I mean.. I want Obama out as much as the next guy, but Romney is so out of touch, he cannot even pretend to be in touch with everyone else! I realize all of Washington is out of touch with all of us, but Romney just can’t help but remind everyone that he’s extraordinarily wealthy. He will play right into David Axelrod’s hands with the class warfare bit..

    • ennaneko

      He’s a lousy salesman, given his background. You’d think he’d be coached a little better.

  • ennaneko

    We just need confirmation.

    The point is that blue states and swing states are supposed to be Romney’s forte. This is the type of place his surrogates and handlers say he’ll do best. He’s supposed to be the guy considered the least dangerous by liberals. He’s supposed to be the one who isn’t the bible thumper. He’s supposed to do well because the more “sophisticated” Republican voters of these swing/blue states aren’t Southerners.

    He’s the son of the former governor. He was born there. His lack of social conservative rhetoric is supposed to play strongly here.

  • davedix

    >>> some comes from people who fear running a bold-colors conservative;

    To call Santorum or Newt in any way more conservative than Romney is comic, and shows you haven’t looked at either man’s record. Both are huge, huge porkers, and not in the least bit conservative.

    • rogsterling63

      for being the voice of reason

    • Aaron Gardner

      1. This wasn’t written by Erick.

      2. The portion you quoted wasn’t describing Santorum or Newt.

    • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

      the last refuge of the Romney campaign.

      Pointing out that another man is not a giant does not make one less of a midget. Santorum and Newt have failed the movement on more than a few occasions, but they’ve also both in their own ways demonstrated a willingness to take tough conservative stands and suffer damage for doing so. Romney is a completely different animal entirely.

    • APA Guy

      But then again, Romney supporters are themselves often not conservatives, so I have no illusions of their credential to discern the difference.

    • Republican_Michigander

      How is he more conservative than Newt or Santorum? I’m not going to call them perfect, but they are miles better than Romney.

  • papayapicker

    the fact that many people automatically assume all Mormons support Romney no matter what. As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I continually make the point to friends and colleagues that I do NOT support Romney for the GOP nomination. He has violated many of the beliefs of the Church and if people would take time to do some research, they would find out what the Church believes and then look at Romney’s actions. I was leaning toward Gingrich because of his record of accomplishing REAL change with the Contract for America. It now appear Gingrich hasn’t got much chance of getting back in the race. I am currently leaning toward Santorum since he has shown more support for what I believe in than Romney has. I will vote for the Republican nominee, but I hope it isn’t Romney.

    • SoFiMil

      when I tell them of Ronney’s previous position on abortion and other social issues. It seems as if they assumed he must be pro-life. It’s never come to this, but I’d tell them if necessary RomneyCare is a disaster and he flip-flops on everything, not just social issues.

  • Republican_Michigander

    I was voter 25 in my precinct (slightly dem). 9AM. Some grumbling about robocalls, but I’m not sure who is favored by the turnout.

    • thosjefferson

      Don’t forget that the whole “Democrats for Santorum” effort started at the DailyKos as “Operation Hilarity,” a liberal effort to get Santorum nominated, or at least make things tough for Romney. Now DailyKos is touting the way Santorum joined the cause: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/27/1068833/-Rick-Santorum-Joins-Operation-Hilarity

      • Republican_Michigander

        I had 15 robocalls in four days, almost all of them negative attacks on Romney.

        Santorum isn’t perfectly innocent either, although I didn’t get called by him. My parents did and it was targeted at pro-lifers.

        As far as Kos goes, I’ll just say that he’s in Berkeley and better be careful what he wishes for, because I think Santorum is a lot more electable than Mitt Romney at least here in the upper Midwest due to blue collar appeal.

        • gwbramhall

          I would warn the Democrats who want to influence the
          Michigan vote to be careful what they wish for. I remember
          thinking how much easier it would be to beat Obama if only
          he could get the nomination away from Hillary!

  • Juggernaut

    Words of wisdom from Rush to Redstate.

    • thosjefferson

      Rush has always done whatever is best for his ratings. That meant getting Obama elected, and it means getting Obama re-elected. The worse scenario for Rush is having Romney elected, because then we’d have a conservative problem-solving President putting people back to work where they’d have less time to listen to Rush.

      Rush’s dream nominee would be Santorum, followed closely by Gingrich. Either one would boost his ratings and income tremendously. As a bonus, they’d lose the election, along with Congress, and Rush would be in 7th heaven for the next 4 years.

      • Juggernaut

        Fyi. Rush didn’t say it, I paraphrased his Obamacare words. rest assured Rush would agree because anything that’s good for ratings is good for America. Romeny has never explained how America works, he’s just like Obama, alot of hot air and rhetoric,

  • giatny

    Now that Democratic unions and other left leaning groups are getting out the vote for Santorum, the results will not be as meaningful. I strongly favor a closed primary especially when there isn’t a primary on the other side. It’s inconceivable after listening to Santorum the last couple of weeks
    that he ever could win a national election.

  • gwbramhall

    This post is really troubling. I’d never expect an argument against
    Romney on the religious issue here. It is reprehensible!
    What negative add coming from his campaign rises to this level? But no,
    that is not the end, you adopt the Obama class warfare on the rich as well.
    How does such thought gain currency in a site supposedly reflecting the
    conservative voice? You may not like him, or be suspicious about his past
    actions or beliefs, but this is not what we want to see here. Santorum is
    a fine man and if the first article on today’s site has any validity to it
    (Deja Vu All Over Again”) he might get the nod in spite of his many
    mistakes in the past and actions we hold against him. We cannot start
    carrying Obama’s water in the hopes of some unlikely outcome
    we might prefer it our primary cycle. Romney’s wealthy supporters, his
    backing from many established Republican and Conservative minds,
    and his demonstrated willingness to do what is necessary to win the
    Presidency, should not be held against him. He’s doing it for you and
    me and for the good of the country which, as I am equally sure, Santorum,
    Gingrich and Paul are doing as well