« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The biggest news of the day for Mitt Romney

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 5th, 2012 at 12:54 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

With Iowa now under his belt there is some monumentally big news for Mitt Romney that no one has really noted yet today. Allow me to congratulate him.

For the first time since November of 2010, Mitt Romney has broken through the 25.5% ceiling that has been his maximum share of support in the Real Clear Politics polling average.

This is pretty significant as he has been on an upward trend since early December. But this is the first time he’s gone above 25.5%. He is now at 26.6%. My guess is he may be around here for a while longer, plus or minus a percent, before we see if there is any impact on the coming attacks on him by his Republican opponents.

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.neoavatara.com/blog neoavatara

    Ugh. I mean, this is just depressing. Either Santorum better turn into the next coming, or Romney better. This is profoundly pathetic, especially in a cycle where we should be crushing Barack Obama.

  • thirstyboots

    Romney is the 2nd choice of about 15% of other candidates supporters. Once some of them start imploding/dropping out, his numbers will quickly climb up.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    . . .

  • sethellis

    The conventional wisdom put there is that Newt was destroyed by negative ads. I disagree. He was able to hit new highs even after the ads started running. He was able to rise in spite of the negativity. What did it was the real Newt showing. The day he attacked Romney on Bain was when things went bad for him. We all realized who he really was, and decided that even Romney was better than that. The ad blitz only hastened the fall, but they didn’t cause it.

    I disagree with the notion that Romney will be brought down with ads. Voters have already heard it all. Saying it louder won’t make a difference. Attacks sew doubt, but they can’t change a well worn narrative voters have been hearing for months, nor can they change the weaknesses of the attacker. Unless someone else can make the case that they are a viable challenger, the attacks won’t do anything other than hurt general election chances.

  • satchman3

    He’s at 21 in the latest Rasmussen national poll on rcp. How’d he do that over the holidays? I guess Newt’s supporters are going to Santorum in droves.

    I wish they’d go to Huntsman.

  • goodgovernance

    Romney barely won Iowa by 8 votes, less votes than he got in 2008. Yet you’re already starting to see rank and file Republicans start to move a little bit his way, before New Hampshire, the rest of the primaries.

    If Romney wins big in New Hampshire as expected, you can expect his poll numbers to start taking off. He might even be really competitive in South Carolina.

    That’s what Romney thinks, anyway. He’s so cocksure of himself (“I”m going to win this thing!”) he’s not even in New Hampshire today, he’s campaigning in South Carolina.

    The debates this weekend are one of the few real opportunities left to change the trajectory of the campaign. And I’d suggest it’s make or break time for a few candidates. Huntsman, obviously, since he placed all his chips in New Hampshire.

    I’d also suggest it’s the last real opportunity for Perry to break through. The only way he becomes a viable national candidate is if he can shatter expectations, by really turning in a stellar performance and maybe even trounce Romney, who until this point has treated Perry with disdain. Did any of you catch how Romney was mocking Perry in one of the last debates, when he turned to Perry and said, “I’d do three things…” and then listed three different items (successfully)?

    There’s been a lot of wishful thinking in regards to Perry, but not a lot of sober analysis of his chances. When he talked about going back to Texas to “reassess” his campaign, that was the typical language politicians usually use to indicate they’re about to fold up their campaign. I know Perry supporters disagree that he ever meant to quit, but if that was the case Perry made another unforced error Tuesday night. The pattern of missteps and verbal gaffes with him has hardened to the point it’s almost impossible to turn that around.

    When you start to pity a candidate, it’s over for the candidate. And there have been many times where people have started to take pity on Perry.

    I still think Perry’s a good guy. And if we could reset time so Iowa was six months from now, he might be able to recover. But Iowa’s in the past, and the window of opportunity to defeat Romney is closing up, possibly within days.

    I hope if the people of New Hampshire surprise us all with a good showing for Huntsman, the base rallies around him, quickly.

  • bdirks

    Rick Perry managed to garner 0% in the latest New Hampshire poll, a full 1% behind Bachmann who quit the race yesterday.

    I know, I know. Perry is not competing there, and its nothing but a bunch of squishy RINO’s, but getting 0% in a swing state, and the only state in New England we have a chance of winning, is like getting an F on a test of general election viability for Perry. Perry has visited, shook hands, and given speeches all over New Hampshire for months, and they have completely and wholly rejected him.

  • tonotisto

    Most folks are not engaged. They hear Santorum is ahead and say “oh, I’m for that guy”.

    The only poll that matters now is the poll booth in South Carolina.

  • votemout2012

    Perry message is what we are all looking for. He has the proof of his leadership in TX. Ppl choose to elect their candidates on a debate performance is pathetic. How about putting some time and look at candidates record? I am starting to believe the conservative are as blind to the right candidates as the democrats.

  • rwnewsnut

    There are just too many candidates splitting up the vote. Last time this happened we ended up with John McCain. There were so many direct assaults against Republicans by McCain (gang of 6, immigration, etc…) that conservatives could not vote for him.

    Let’s let the voters vote in the primaries for our candidates. We would be happy with any of these candidate instead of Obama.

    Keep that in mind.

  • joshdunn

    This is just what percentage of Republican voters want him as their nominee.

    And it is a deceptive number because it mixes registered voter polls in with likely voter polls.

    Rasmussen Reports ran a poll yesterday of 1000 likely Republican voters which had Mitt’s support at 29%. This is up 8% from where Rick Santorum is now (21%). Newt Gingrich’s support has come down from 38% at the end of November (Rasmussen) to 16% in yesterday’s poll.

    He’s just staying in the race to try to drag down Romney. He may actually be pulling down Santorum and Perry if his supporters are more likely to go to one of them than to Romney. Good ol’ Newt.

  • Wes_W

    Thats it? Romney has been running for President for 5 years, has massive funding, has been anointed “most electable” by the liberal press, has been endorsed by John McCain, and he has nice hair. With all of those factors he should be in the mid to high 40% range at this point. You should be worried about your candidate right now.

  • joshdunn

    but no one seemed to be listening.

    McCain undercut Bush and conservatives at every turn. The two most famous examples are his Gang of 14 deal with Harry Reid which kept conservative judges off of the bench and his consistent opposition to drilling oil and natural gas in ANWR. Then he tried to use “Drill, baby, drill!” as a campaign slogan.

    Actions and votes speak much louder than campaign slogans, John.

  • joshdunn

    He has now broken that promise. He’s going to attack Romney over the next few days in the hopes that it will help him win South Carolina.

    I don’t see it. Because the evangelical right in SC will be split between Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry, Romney has a shot at placing 1st or 2nd in SC. I think that we can all agree that if Romney wins in SC, he is the presumptive nominee.

  • rharrison

    Perry’s only chance now is he lights it up in the debate on Saturday and more importantly, that serious damage is done to Santorum and Romney…by Gingrich most likely. The debate needs to get ugly where Perry comes out of it unscathed , just like Santorum did for four months and Newt did for three.

  • joshdunn

    Newt’s people are shifting to Santorum.. And Huntsman would be a better choice. But many of these voters will always be suspicious of LDS candidates whether they are perceived as moderates or conservatives.

  • joshdunn

    Or maybe they know something we do.

  • joshdunn

    “Amazing Grace”. “Christ Redeemer”.

    Something beautiful like that. The more he tries to establish himself as an issues guy the more people tune him out.

    Sing a song, Rick.

  • nuclear139

    He’s support is only nominal because we lack a clear front runner who can unite the concervative base. Mitt is the text book definition of a default candidate who voters will only vote for because they lack a viable alternative. In the next few weeks will see how real is Romney’s base of support when every one in the race is going for is throat.

  • nuclear139

    Mitt Romney is not doing as well as he clearly should be right now and worse his support has only ticked upward by only 1 percent after winning Iowa. Your right negative ads will show us nothing new but it will make the case of why we don’t like Romney. If you hit Romney where it hurts the most the fallacy that he is the most electable candidate, his campaign will fall apart like a house of cards. Mitt needs you and every concervative to believe he is not only electable but he is the only Republican option to beat Obama. This is utterly wrong, hell Rick Santorum can beat Obama just like at the unemployment rate and his approval rating. Please don’t believe the hype.

  • lineholder

    Newt can present ads that are truthful about the inconsistencies in Romney’s record, or display points of weakness in the man’s approach or mentality, and still stay relatively positive in the process of doing so.

    Romney has yet to be genuinely challenged by much of anyone, and this needs to happen before we get to the general. If not, the MSM will eat him live, and the general public will have a bunch of information dumped on them at a time where our risks will be much higher than they are now.

  • thosjefferson

    It’s amazing Romney has been this steady in spite of all the constant (and mostly false) attacks that he’s a flip-flopper and not conservative. And the active opposition from the evangelicals. And the constant attacks from the Democrats. And the “spirited” campaign ads from McCain last time around. And Newt’s latest bomb tossing.

    That Romney has weathered all of this demonstrates the kind of steadiness and self-confidence we need. Voters will move toward him in increasing numbers as they see through the anti-Romney propaganda.

    Or else they can go with Perry, who wasted more money on Iowa for fewer votes than anyone in history and is about to do the same in SC.

    Or else Gingrich, the lobbyist-in-chief who has had more opinions on more sides of more issues than all the rest of the candidates combined.

    Or else Santorum, who, like Gingrich, sells access to government largess to his clients and lost by 18 points in a critical swing state.

    Or else Huntsman, who at least isn’t a professional politician and DC insider, but who ducked Iowa knowing how weak he’d be in a general election.

    Or else Ron Paul…

  • eabjr

    Mitt Romney took an already left state even further left in Massachusetts. He was also spending his money on helping elect democrats to seats throughout his history…including voting for Paul Tsongas in the presidential primary back in 1992: see http://wp.wnd.com/2012/01/9410… where Terrace Jeffery and Steve Baldwin are cited in these matters.
    If Santorum (according to the ever ridiculous Ann Coulter) is Ted Kennedy except for his Catholicism (which is a ridiculous statement) then Mitt wanted to BE Ted Kennedy. That this is the GOP establishment pick reveals so much of why we are where we are in America today…wake up…

  • nuclear139

    He damaged his campaign by not going to Iowa because of that he has no chance to win in New Hampshire. Huntsman has always been more electable because he has almost as much executive experience as Perry and he has by a mile more foreign policy experience than any Republican candidate since Bush 1 in 88 but he lacks the gravitas to catch fire with the base. He is a loser because of this and all the other bad decisions he has made in this primary race.

  • texashistorian

    to be really attacked, and if you are honest, you will admit that. He has gotten far less scrutiny and negative attention than any of the other candidates except perhaps Huntsman who hasn’t been much of a presence.

    We’ll see how steady his ship is once he becomes the main target for a sustained period of time like Perry, Newt, and Cain have gone through. He might survive just fine, but we don’t know yet. His mini-tantrum to Bret Baier certainly doesn’t bode well for his temperament once the fur really starts flying. You might be right, though; time will tell.

  • goodgovernance

    If you think Romney has been “constantly attacked,” wait until you see what’s in store for your man.

    You ain’t seen nothing yet.

  • rharrison

    Nice try but with Youtube, Mitt’s liberal past is all there for us to see with our own eyes. Maybe he’s repented and seen the light, but we just can’t know for sure. He’s electable no doubt but not reliable.

  • rharrison

    and Dancing with the Stars. As for who they’ll for voter for, that’s determined by what the ‘Fox round table’ is thinking for that day. “Drudge says Santorum might surge? Then that’s my guy!”

  • nuclear139

    First let’s be clear I don’t like Santorum but he is now my favorite to win the nomination. This is because everybody is coming for Mitt from here on out and I don’t believe that Romney’s poll numbers will hold up once concervatives take another look at him. Huntsman will make a great VP but he can’t win New Hampshire and after over six months in the state look at his numbers it’s pathetic. No one will take aim at Santorum like in Iowa and he will fly under the radar until South Carolina and Florida by that time Romney will be damaged goods and Newt, Perry and Huntsman will be out. Santorum will win because nobody cares to attack a candidate they don’t deem as viable or as a major threat.

  • nuclear139

    nt

  • thirstyboots

    Other than that, I don’t thin you managed to understand my comment.

  • clowngirl

    There are so few delegates allotted at this point that it would just be silly to call Romney “Presumptive nominee” while the rest of us are still sorting out who we want to challenge him.

  • lineholder

    His position on right-to-work, within a state that has faced NLRB challenges this year, will not go over well with the people there.

  • nuclear139

    No one truely loves Mitt except for you and that’s a problem because concervatives don’t feel the same way. Romney has seen nothing yet neither from the Democrats who only has begun to clear their collective throat with attack ads and from the candidates in this race. The next few weeks will be the worst experience his campaign will go through from Republicans as Newt, Huntsman, Paul and Santorum will unload on him with tens of millions of dollars in negative ads.

  • nuclear139

    There is Perry who last time I saw was at 10% in the state and then there is Newt who is not doing well either on top of all his personal baggage. Santorum despite opposition to right to work legislation will win because social concervatives and tea partiers hate Romney and will go for the next alternative. The only way Santorum loses is if Perry and Newt sink him in South Carolina which will destroy his candidacy and make Mitt the nominee by default.

  • septembergurl

    tracking and CNN — that show post Iowa Perry at 0. Santorum has a boost, about what Huck got in 2008. He’s on track to get 8-10%. Santorum, Gingrich and Huntsman are all close within a point or two so the battle for third & fourth will be fierce as it was in Iowa.

    I do think that, as in Iowa, Paul’s strength is not what the polls would indicate and entirely possible he drops to third, as happened in Iowa.

  • thosjefferson

    Every complaint about Romney has been aired repeatedly. In the first debates, Perry tried the lawn care company attack. Gingrich, Santorum and Perry regurgitated the Romneycare attack. There’s nothing on the flip-flop fallacy to add to what McCain did 4 years ago. Everyone’s heard it a million times and Romney’s explained everything a million times.

    And not only fellow Republicans, but the DNC and the NYTimes and all the media have pursued these attacks.

    Not to mention many on redstate.com, Rush Limbaugh, the evangelicals in Iowa, and the Occupy people, who seem to have more in common than they admit.

    Newt and Perry faced a few weeks of criticism and collapsed. Santorum will as well, once we better understand his DC connections and the millions he’s earned from them.

    So Romney has already been a target for far longer than his competitors. He’s been a target for far longer than Obama, for that matter, having gone through previous highly contested campaigns.

  • clowngirl

    So there’s no reason that Newt ( or whatever not-Romney is most popular ) can’t still have a Super Tuesday surge and become dominant from then on out.

  • ayrnieu

    http://www.newt.org/news/letter-supporters-gingrich-urges-them-stay-positive

    if you read it as “I’ll have happy positive ads. Not those nasty negative ads.”, then I’m afraid that you’ve bought into a fake issue promoted by people who hate you and anyone you’d ever vote for. “Staying positive”, for a Republican, versus a Democrat, just means “not saying anything about your opponent, ever.” Simple facts will always be a “new low” that the candidate is “stooping to”. Meanwhile, if the Democrat ever wants to viciously and personally (and brainlessly) attack the Republican, he need only read aloud from any newspaper. Or just stand and smile in mock-unawareness as the hounds pass him. Campaign ads should be truthful, candid, serious, tasteful – but not “positive”, not unless you’re campaigning for a would-be Kindergarten Class President, where the high stakes are “who gets to say that he’s Kindergarten Class President?”

    I read the letter as “OK, OK, I understand your complaints. See how very well that I understand them? I understand them better than you do. Here, I’ll even tell my staff to not act like a Certain Candidate’s staff. (But pay attention, Certain Candidate: I’ll still be quick to respond to you.)”

    … not that I like that letter. The Clinton and Obama campaigns might’ve been hilariously disingenuous when they attacked each other under the pretense of “better us than the Republicans, better now than in the general!”, but it’s not funny when a Republican pretends that his primary attacks against the eventual nominee won’t be dwarfed by the output of the entire media. But it isn’t “Read my lips: no negative ads.”

  • thosjefferson

    It’s bizarre that NHP & S are spending all this money attacking Romney instead of Obama, but it shows that they’re more anti-Romney than anti-Obama.

    The best thing for Romney is having the anti-Romney people attack him for being too reasonable, too willing to adapt to changes in the economy, too willing to consider multiple perspectives to solve problems and fix things. That’s exactly what successful business people do and it’s what most Americans want right now. It’s the exact opposite of the overly ideological Obama.

    So these so-called “negative” ads are making Romney more and more attractive to most Americans.

  • ayrnieu

    Just sayin’. Argumentation is a process. That outcomes like this are even thinkable is why we should have _arguments_, instead of phony counting-the-seconds ‘debates’ in which people are discovered to like Pepsi and enjoy mountain climbing. The absolute best chance for Romney to make the absolute best case for himself is right in the wake of the most damning and thorough attack on him. Otherwise, what’s he going to say? That he abstains from caffeine?

  • youngconstitutionalist

    I think Romney will probably be at 30% nationally by the time South Carolina rolls around if this trend keeps up, and that will put him at around 25% in SC, if they continue to lean anti-Romney. The problem is that, as we saw in Iowa, that might be enough for him to win if things go his way (imagine a three-way split and then add in the 10-15% Ron Paul or bust vote).

    One of the Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry bunch needs to drop out or become a non-factor. The most logical one to drop-out is Perry, but that won’t happen. He is also the most logical one to be a non-factor, but it’s unlikely that will happen either if he drops every nickel he has on South Carolina. That being the case, one of several things needs to happen to get the conservative field down to two contenders who can face off in South Carolina:

    (1) Santorum can take-off in New Hampshire and get 20+% of the vote (and hold Mitt Romney to 40% or less in the process). This will make it difficult for Perry to move out of his poor polling position and make himself any real threat to the anti-Romney, which Santorum will have basically locked up.

    (2) Gingrich can take-off in New Hampshire. It is difficult to see this happening, but if he does it, then it will put him in position to fight whoever the other non-Romney will be in South Carolina.

    (3) Perry can beat Newt Gingrich in New Hampshire with 10% or more of the vote. It is incredibly difficult to see this happening, particularly since he basically isn’t campaigning there, but it could happen if Gingrich and Santorum are damaged bad enough there and the anti-Romney vote needs somewhere else to turn, and they can only see Rick Perry, particularly if he has solid performances in the debate. It must be said, though, that Rick Perry’s chances, because of his poor performance in Iowa, lie largely in what the other candidates do between now and SC.

    (4) Huntsman surges and steals much of Romney’s vote in New Hampshire, pulling a Santorum. This will put the “electability” and “moderate” vote in the GOP up for grabs, and since the conservative wing outnumbers that wing, there can still be three conservative candidates to their two (and, then, of course, the Ron-Paul-or-bust wing).

    The most likely one to happen is (1) followed by (2), but I can see (3) happening depending on how the debates turnout. The worst thing to happen, though, would be for option (5) to happen: No conservative candidate emerges on top after New Hampshire. This happens if the Santorum-surge stops before hitting twenty, Romney gets 40+%, and Gingrich gets in the teens. At this point, this is the most likely outcome, and it basically assures Romney the nomination because it is difficult to see how any conservative would be able to emerge before South Carolina or even Super Tuesday clearly holding the conservative standard. If this happens, it is entirely possible that Romney will sweep the primaries obtaining only 25-35% pluralities along the way. It will be the saddest, most pathetic, and demoralizing process ever, for either party, but it could very well happen.

    Long Story Short: We need to rally behind a conservative standard bearer. In order for that to happen, someone needs to pick up that banner in New Hampshire, or pull off a miracle before Super Tuesday.

  • Common_Cents

    in debates. Perry got under his skin before.

    I think that’s Perry’s only chance, and it is probably going to be a sacrifice since Perry polled at 0 in NH? Perry is unelectable. He won’t get one independent in a general.

    I wonder about the Gingrich/Santorum talk in ganging up maybe included Perry as a Sac fly attack on romney? Perry all but packed it in. Perry did not say ‘assess his campaign’, he said assess IA and determine whether there is a path to continue.

    Gingrich has a shot w/ independents as he has harped on taking on the DC establishment. Gingrich has called for firing Bernanke (some red meat for indies and Paulistas).

    Perry could do his patriotic duty and blast away at Romney and get under his skin, while Gingrich doesn’t get too nasty and waits for Santorum to fall off. Then it’s Gingrich/Romney 1on1 til the end.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    Perry has a better shot in the GE than Santorum, and at least as good of one as Gingrich. I haven’t made up my mind on who to support, but to say Perry can’t get independents just isn’t correct, particularly if the reason is that Gingrich goes after Washington harder. That line won’t be credible in the minds of many coming from the former Speaker of the House turned lobbyist.

  • sethellis

    All I’ve heard this cycle is hit harder. Each time the attacks from the base have become more viscous. Yet Romney remains. What makes anyone think this time is different? This is the very definition of insanity as it was laid out by Einstein.

    You can attack Romney to the lowest of lows. It won’t make a dent in the most electable argument because there is no viable alternative making Romney the winner by default. Santorum shows that being not Romney is not quite enough to win. To beat Romney someone must show they are more presidential.

    The strategy of relentless attacks that some here pursue is exactly the opposite of what can actually succeed.

  • lineholder

    based on the fact that I grew up in the state of SC and still have numerous family members living in the state. They are ticked off to the hilt about the way the NLRB has attempted to over-ride their right as a state to maintain right-to-work provisions, and they aren’t going to respond well to ANYONE who supports those kinds of policies.

    Whether their interest as Social Conservatives will overcome the current attitude on this particular matter remains to be seen, but I wouldn’t count on it happening. Seriously.

    As a matter of fact, I wouldn’t count on Santorum doing well in NC either, which I where I currently live, because people of my state are somewhat ticked off ourselves about the way the DNC and Unions are dealing with the Convention that is to be held in Charlotte later on this year. And NC doesn’t have nearly the Conservative influence, much less Socially Conservative influence, within the state that SC has.

    And it sounds like you’re counting Romney still being on solid ground by the time SC roles around. Don’t count on that one either, because that may not end up being the case.

  • morstar150

    He has run the worst campaign I have ever seen. I don’t even think he is in it for real.

  • texashistorian

    from then till now is that in 08 Romney didn’t really get it until it was down to he and McCain, and of the two, he was the one conservatives ended up going with because McCain was just awful. Now that he is on the left side of the candidate spectrum, it’s going to start earlier and be more intense, and come from more places and be much more visible. Why?

    Because while we political junkies are well aware of what’s been happening, we are in the distinct minority of voters. We have heard it all before, but many have not, or if they have, have not paid attention real closely. Now that their votes will be asked for, it will resonate more clearly and loudly.

    As I noted above, time will tell, but honestly, Mitt has gotten the softest touch of all of them thus far. We’ll see how he fares after the next month of high profile bashing that is about to happen.

  • notpropagandized

    Texans and others that like his record and positions look past his accent, expressions gestures diction and other quirkinesses. Unfamiliar observers see him as a hick redneck nativist and frankly are embarrassed to even consider him. It’s too bad b/c he’s best for what ails us by a long shot. Think of looking for a prom date, Perry’s the ugliest one available judging from perceptions that are a barrier to reality. It’s a shame for sure. I don’t see that situation changing. But if we could administer a nationwide short term memory eraser (you know, Will Smith’s flashy thingy in Men In Black), then we’d be back in business.

  • http://www.writeinryan.com ragnarthepirate

    It’s all there for anyone to see. Romney is an actual flip flopper, so people are selling real flip flops to point this out.

  • nepanyrush

    He is one of several candidates vying for the nomination. Why this constant talk about 75% of the candidates do not want Romney? Why would this logic apply to each of the other candidates?

    Look at the latest national Rasmussen numbers. 29% of Likely Republican Primary Voters want Romney and he has a 68% favorability rating, the highest of all the candidates. Clearly, he is the second choice of many candidates and his numbers will climb higher as others drop out.

    (For the other candidates, Santorum is at 21% of likely primary voters, with a 63% favorabiilty rating, and Gingrich is at 16% with a 52% favorabilty rating. Paul (12%), Perry (4%) and Huntsman (4%) all have higher unfavorabilty ratings than favorabilty ratings.)

    The real issue is why has Perry stayed in the race. Santorum is a great candidate. He was very articulate in the debates, and actually is a great candidate, having three times defeated Democratic incumbants in a Democratic electorate. His talk after the Iowa results was very inspiring. Perry is a dead man walking. Even in South Carolina, he is only at 6%. His staying in the race is just what Romney wants. Someone needs to talk to him about dropping out for the sake of getting a conservative candidate.

    I hope that Redstate stops the bashing of Santorum now. For days, once Santorum took off, it was one front page attack after another on Redstate. If you do not want Romney, he is really the best hope at this time, and, being from PA, I can tell you that he is very authentic. He will go to the mat for his principles.

  • clowngirl

    You say that as more candidates drop out, Romney is likely to absorb a little of their prior support.

    That may be true.

    BUT

    As more candidates drop out, it will also take a larger percentage of the vote to acheive a plurality.

    Eventually, we’ll almost certainly be done to 3 candidates (including Paul)

    Ron Paul is unlikely to ever get more than 20% again, if that (except in VA which royally screwed up its own primary) which means it will almost certainly take more than 40% to win.

    Don’t see Romney managing that ( except in maybe the “Mormon belt”) unless Santorum becomes the only alternative and people are uncomfortable with his lack of executive experience.

  • thosjefferson

    Every Republican voter 4 years ago heard all about the so-called flip flop issue, and the Democrats have run more anti-Romney ads already this year than against all the other Republicans combined. Romney has been on the cover of several national magazines; he’s been compared to Obama in the national polls for a year (and done by far the best of all the Republicans); and he’s been in the national news at least since the 2002 Olympics.

    I doubt the NH voters will be swayed in the least by Gingrich’s goofy ads, except that Gingrich will plummet in the polls as a result. No voter likes to see this type of revenge on display.

    But at least it will help insulate Romney from these types of attacks when the DNC copies Gingrich’s ads down the road, as they are doing now with McCain’s 2008 ads.

  • clowngirl

    They aren’t throwing mud – like the Romney PAC’s less than truthful ads in Iowa. Newt is doing a compare/ contrast. Romney’s record vs. his.

    It’s undeniable that Newt’s record of accomplishments when he actually held elected office was MUCH more conservative than Mitt Romney’s.

    It’s not dirty or underhanded or even really negative to emphasize those facts.

    And, IMO, it DOES present Newt as someone who will be a good President.

    All this talk about Newt being “enraged”, “unhinged” etc. is utterly ridiculous. He isn’t any of those things.

    Being angry about being slandered by a massive number of mudslinging ads is natural and right.

    And none of what he is doing now looks like a Kamikaze attempt to hurt Romney.

    The only plus about this whole silly narrative is now whenever Newt highlights some of the reasons Romney wouldn’t be our best President, the press publishes them for all to see.

  • Samsara

    No disrespect intended, I voted for one and I will vote for the other if I have to.

    And I apologize for posting MSM Milbank.

    It?s just that this description of the “endorsement” made me laugh out loud and I thought I would share.

    Washington Post:

    McCain “grimaced when he was introduced, and as Romney delivered his own stump speech, an increasingly impatient McCain pulled up his sleeve and fidgeted with his bracelet. McCain gave his endorsement address without mentioning Romney?s Iowa win until the end. ?By the way, we forgot to congratulate him on his landslide victory last night,? he said, laughing. Romney ignored him.

    Then came the questions: First, one from an Occupy Wall Street infiltrator needling the candidate about his belief that ?corporations are people.? A second questioner wanted to know why Romney flip-flopped on universal health care when he was governor of Massachusetts and why he would not increase health-care costs. Later, a Chinese American woman accused Romney of saying ?degrading? things about China, and she complained that ?after 20 years of Reagan trickle-down economics, it didn?t help me. My tin can is still empty.?

    Romney sat through most of the ambush with a tight grin and raised eyebrows. At length he attempted to challenge the woman to name a place where income is higher than it is in the United States.

    The Occupy Wall Street guy began heckling. ?The U.S. has the highest income inequality in the entire developed world!?

    Romney tried to regain control. ?Excuse me,? he said. ?You?ve had your chance.?

    McCain walked toward the Occupy guy. ?Be quiet,? he said, menacingly.

    The woman, no longer in possession of a working microphone, began hollering.

    ?For those who didn?t hear,? Romney offered, ?she says she loves this country and don?t put any Asians down. I hope I haven?t put any Asians down.?

    The woman?s muffled shouting continued. Romney tried to answer. A baby started to cry.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-out-of-control/2012/01/04/gIQAacGSbP_story.html

    I hope they both had a better day today. :)

  • hobiecat

    I remember, before Perry’s first debate the media and some of the RNC insiders were claiming he and Romney were the only two real candidates. Maybe their expectations were to high. The dirty little secrit is that even the RNC thinks Romney is a loss to Obama but all they want is to control the legislature, and I guess Mitt makes that possible?

  • texashistorian

    Distinct minority. It might surprise you, but there are a lot of people out there who vote who don’t know all the things we know by frequenting places like Red State, Townhall, RCP etc. What they get for news generally passes for a Sunday paper, or a nightly newscast that lasts half an hour. I am not saying that they haven’t heard it, but primary voters will be engaged and inundated with this stuff, and unlike the past 2-3 years, will actually start paying attention.

    I know, I don’t get it either; how can they not care? But I see it every day in my job, among my friends, at my church. Otherwise intelligent, aware folks that .just don’t pay real close attention to politics until voting time draws near.

  • clowngirl

    or – if there isn’t time – before SC.

    I’m surprised Newt hasn’t suggested it yet. He keeps wanting to debate Romney which is not going to happen — but I would imagine Santorum would welcome the exposure. feel up to the task and probably say yes.

    It would be a chance for voters to hear in depth discussion from the two leading conservative alternatives — and past Lincoln Douglas debates (Gingrich/Cain and Gingrich/Huntsman) have been friendly and well received.

    Seems like a win/win/win. Both Santorum and Gingrich would get some positive exposure and be able to showcase their substance. (With Gingrich, of course, outshining Santorum) it would demonstrate the type of substantial competition Newt has been trying to bring about, and it would underline the fact that Romney is still avoiding any debate that puts him one on one with Gingrich and requires him to answer in depth.

    And voters would appreciate the chance to explore the two “front runners” competing for the Non- Romney, Non- Paul vote.

    Also, seeing Newt looking very statesmanlike with Santorum would hopefully put to rest some of the “angry irrational Newt” narrative that some of the media is pushing so hard.

  • aj_0000

    Check out Daniel Henninger’s piece in the WSJ, “A House Divided”. He has finally recognized that Romney is dividing the party. Turnout for the Iowa caucuses was lackluster. If you subtract the increase in independents brought in by Ron Paul, Republican turnout was down from 2008. Two years after the Tea Party brought massive enthusiasm and victories to the Republican Party, the force-feeding of Mitt Romney to the electorate is destroying all of it. I’ve been criticized here for saying I will not vote for Romney if he is the nominee.

    People should be listening instead of trashing people. I am not alone. Not remotely. If any of the other candidates (except Huntsman, who is even more liberal) was the nominee, I would unquestionably vote for them. Even Ron Paul. But not Romney. He is Obama in sheep’s clothing. He is everything that’s wrong with the “leadership” of this country. I will not support it.

  • Common_Cents

    And then one in SC jan 16? Gingrich should keep publicly challenging Romney, just to make romney look like the weakling he is. If gingrich consistently does it, it will grate on romney.

    Gingrich can say to Romney, if you disagree with my ads I”m running against you, come debate me.

    I think Santorum will fade away on his own. Newt doesn’t need to take him on as the knives will be coming for Santorum soon enough.

    I agree if there was some time and good coverage, any debate/discussion exposure always does Gingrich well. The Huntsman one was good, but not sure anyone saw it! ;)

  • clowngirl

    I’m hoping for some kind of game changing moment this weekend. Either Newt giving the debate performances of his life, Romney getting rattled and making a major error, or both. :)

    and yes, 3 debates in the next 2 weeks certainly bodes well for the former Speaker!

  • nancysabet

    The following report is from my friend, Bettina Viviano, who was just a part of Gov. Rick Perry’s Strikeforce in Iowa. I encourage ALL of you to read it as it is a first hand report of what really went on there and who Rick Perry and his wife are as people.
    ——————————–

    I just got back from Iowa…I had the best time I have had in years. I can’t tell you what it was like to be there with the people from 32 states who spent their own money driving, flying, whatever to get to Iowa to support Perry. Governor Jindal, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Steve Forbes, you name it, were all there. The results of the caucus don’t deter any of us. It’s a libtard state that voted Obama in 2008 and the Democrats were the ones voting Santorum and Paul at the caucuses. I spoke at a caucus and won it for Perry and beat the Romney votes by twice as much. If people get to know who Perry is, they vote for him. He has a long road, and when he almost quit it was horrible. It was on the same day that he had come to the volunteer meeting and spoken and the excitement was so huge that the media even couldn’t hide it. It was a packed room with people standing all along the walls, and waiting to get in. Every news outlet was there and my friend overheard the Fox news guy say “why haven’t we been reporting on this? Perry has more support here than anyone.”

    That’s why I find it odd he finished so low, but none of us care. We are still in it for Perry until the end. I met one of the people who is vetting Santorum now. Santorum has never been vetted because people didn’t take him seriously. The guy I met said there is worse stuff than Cain or Newt in Santorum’s past. We will see. It’s sad to see people just go from candidate to candidate without truly vetting them. Santorum will blow up eventually and if Perry stays around long enough it will be Perry and Romney at the last debate and then people get to decide what version of America they want. I could be wrong, but either way for me it’s Perry to the end. No one else makes sense.

    I didn’t have a computer to report everything when I was there. And we were so busy. I have never seen anything like it. We knocked on doors all day, posted signs, phone banked. I know the support Perry had, so I will never trust these numbers. The Paulbots were in full force and in one precinct I went to there were ZERO votes for ANYONE ELSE…the entire precinct was Paulbots and I would say 1/2 of them were Democrats. Also, in my precinct there were Democrat Romney voters. The Precinct Leader at my caucus was the Romney speaker and I still beat her after I spent 15 minutes talking about Perry. The Romney chick even congratulated me after. If you just discuss FACTS about Perry, he’s an easy sell.

    We had such great stories on the ground…a ton of them, but here are two actually.

    The first is that we met a man who traveled to Iowa from Wisconsin to support Perry and he only has 1 year to live because he has lung cancer. The only thing he wants in life is to see Perry in the White House before he dies. He got to meet Rick and Anita Perry and they immediately took him on the bus with them and then the night of the returns, even after they had the bad news that Perry was only 5th and Perry gave that speech…they STILL found this man and gave him the name of their own personal cancer specialist to help him. That’s the kind of people the Perrys are and why I will take a bullet to get him to the White House. Do you think Romney or Newt would do that? After a bad day, take it upon themselves to find this man just so they could help him with his lung cancer? It was unreal. When the man was telling us the story, the three girls I was with and I all burst into tears. I feel like the crazy lady from California who was always crying.

    When I met Anita Perry I was crying. She was so sweet. She put her arms around me and spent a long time talking to me and thanking me for going to Iowa. I can’t tell you what good people the Perrys are and how much they deserve to be in the White House. They care more about other people than themselves and they are constantly doing kind things for people that no one ever hears about.

    The other great story is that when one of the Perry people knocked on a door in Iowa, the man said that none of the other candidates had come to talk to him and he was so impressed. The next day the man showed up at the volunteer training session and became a volunteer to go out and get votes from his neighbors and family for Perry. It was just that kind of week with all kinds of miracles.

    There were so many amazing moments. I wish you could have been in the room when he spoke to the volunteers. He is even better in person and he is so Presidential. But on top of it all he is a great man. He made a BEELINE over to me when he saw me crying and gave me the biggest hug. He is so genuine. It’s ALL REAL. That is why I trust him with my life and my country. There is simply no one else to vote for. Which is, again, why none of the Perry supporters will quit. Ever.
    From my FB. Nancy Sabet

  • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

    What a beautiful testimony. Especially the end when Perry comforted her.

    This has emboldened me more than ever. Let him run his race!

  • avagreen

    for this inspiring story.

    It’s a wonder that Fox can keep their employees on the ground so insulated from the truth, isn’t it? Maybe those guys can go back and spread the word to some of lower echelon people…….doubt the higher ups would give a dime’s worth of thought or time being concerned about the lack of coverage that Fauxe Noos gives. (I’m gonna start calling them that as that’s what I’ve heard, more or less, for years.)

  • carolina

    Someone I can truly feel good about voting for. Thank you for posting this.

  • carolina

    Someone I can truly feel good about voting for. Thank you for posting this.

  • snappy101

    I don’t know if I’m more upset with Romney or the Republican TV media (including their panelists and guest analysts) shilling for him. Between Dec 1 and Dec 18, the NYT reported that Romney got 126 minutes of air time (guest appearance) on Fox News. This compared to 37 minutes for Santorum, 51 minutes for Paul and Perry, 52 minutes for Gingrich and 76 minutes for Bachmann during that same period. It wouldn’t be so glaring if at least ONE other Republican candidate came close and that doesn’t even include all of the blathering about Romney. I’m so fed up with Fox News shilling for Romney that I actually watched CNN caucus night coverage.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/24/us/politics/rick-santorum-fails-to-connect-in-iowa-but-he-keeps-the-faith.html?_r=2&pagewanted=2&ref=politics

  • tngal

    I mentioned a couple of days ago the 8 point swing betweent first and second place would cause a reocunt in most normal races. Now, a person comes for (RPaul supporter no less) and says
    theres a “20-vote discrepancy” from the numbers he wrote down from his caucus and what was reported by the Iowa Republican Party.

    Of course, that would overcome the 8 vote difference.

    BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE!

    There’s also the possibility Mitt actually won by A SINGLE vote, due to a 21 vote count in his favor.

    Caucuses sure are funny things.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/202677-iowa-gop-officials-shoot-down-reports-of-problems-with-vote-count

  • annie54

    I have been checking out FOX Business lately. The Judge really put it to Romney last night. I watched CNN caucus night coverage, also, and will continue. I even watched Hard Ball last night. At least, we can get information against Romney, et al,l on the other cable networks. ‘thought I would NEVER say that!

    FOX has really sold out and is worthless coverage if you want the truth.

  • geoph

    When we have to turn to CNN and Chris Matthews for (more)”reliable” information on Republican candidates. I can sympathize with needing to fill a 24 hour news cycle, but the shift from a news network to more of an entertainment orientation has certainly hindered Conservative news distribution.

    Ah, I long for the days when Fox was the Conservative alternative to the MSM on TV.

  • williamjameson

    because thus far Romney’s trend has not been his friend.

  • ihateliberals

    This si the fault of the GOP making up its mind. The GOP has the opportunity to attack the media and support the conservatives and they chose not to. The GOP Elite for whatever reason decided along time ago they want a moderate as their candidate and that moderate would be Romney. This is the same thing they did with Bob Dole and then John McCain. The RNC was infiltrated during the Bush Administration when Michael Steele was made the Chairman and he decide the the party was no to be the party of conservatives. The RNC now is chaired by a no body that stays hidden for the public. Most Republicans don’t even know his name. i have to look it up just to include it here. His name is” Reince Priebus” and if I ever saw him on TV I wouldn’t know it. What kind of leadership is this? What kind of leadership throws out the very people that put the Republicans in the Majority of the House? What kind of Party tells a group they aren’t welcome anymore? The lack of support of the Tea Party conservatives is killing the party. It is biting the hand that feeds you.

  • znjs

    It’s an average of the latest of every major poll within an reasonable time period. In fact except the CBS poll from the middle of Dec (they had him getting 20%) no other poll has him at less then 27%.

  • williamjameson

    run polls and most are not scientific polls. You made a good point, I tend to see polls as a glimpse in time rather than direction till a trend truly changes.

  • tngal

    RomSantGingPaul all in double digits. Others not so much. With primary two weeks away, lower tier has little time or space for goofs or gaffes. I think its romney’s and gingrich’s state. As santorum won’t be able to keep the wolves at bay.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/south_carolina/election_2012_south_carolina_republican_primary

  • ihateliberals

    Very deceptive practices by the Party to try to keep Romney the front runner. I think Iowa has shown how the real people feel. When you take a vote like that all the polls in the world can’t cover it up.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Those will be the top 4 in NH as well: RomSantGingPaul.

    “Rick Santorum who two months ago had one percent (1%) support among likely South Carolina Republican Primary voters now is running a close second there with 24% of the vote. ”

    Actually, you can argue 2 man race, if Romney and Santorum are the 1 and 2 candidates in NH and SC.

    Rick Santorum is getting the “not-Romney” vote and is now leading Gingrich in SC. Not sure about your Santorum comment about wolves, but in fact Santorum raised several million dollars this week and will be much better funded than Gingrich.

    This race is quickly consolidating. If Santorum can beat Romney in SC he has a chance to stop Mitt. But if Mitt wins in SC, he’ll be 3 for 3 and will put it away in FL.

  • ihateliberals

    The left is the Left no matter whether it is Republican or Democrat. If we don’t get a Fiscal conservative back in the White House we will eventually go totally broke. Romney if elected has no intention of Repealing Obamacare or being conservative. Being conservative is only a farce he uses to get elected. I’d like to know one TRUE conservative that has ever come out of the New England states? Romney is a Massachusetts Liberal Republican. He was the original architect of Obamacare.

  • ihateliberals

    I have been a Mormon most of my life and all of the people I know at church are conservatives. While Romney is more conservative than Obama he is still Massachusetts Liberal Republican.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    http://tammybruce.com/2012/01/a-warning-from-canada-for-the-gop-dont-ignore-the-grassroots.html

    Canada’s conservative party ignored the base repeatedly in the 1980s and 1990s and bsically went out of business, ala the Whigs. If the GOP keeps nominating people like G. H. W. Bush, Dole, McCain and Romney, we will eventually tick off the base so much they will abandon the party.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    http://tammybruce.com/2012/01/a-warning-from-canada-for-the-gop-dont-ignore-the-grassroots.html

    Canada’s conservative party ignored the base repeatedly in the 1980s and 1990s and bsically went out of business, ala the Whigs. If the GOP keeps nominating people like G. H. W. Bush, Dole, McCain and Romney, we will eventually tick off the base so much they will abandon the party.

  • tngal

    When I said “woves” I definately meant wolves. Not just one. Cain rasied a boatload of bucks after florida. Cain surged. The wolves had to be let out. he could’nt be allowed to generate more enthusiam and money. They couldn’t get after him on voting record. Or call him a crappy businessman. Or call him dull. He held on for over a month. So they let out wolves. Newt came up the path and had a serious surge. He too raised big money during the surge. he could outtalk Obama, had the experience, and was a serious threat. Everybody knew his baggage, but they had to find something. ooh, Freddie Mac. He lasted about as long as Cain.

    As a conspiracy theorist, the wolves to me are a combination of MSM, which is getting fed negative stories (sometimes unsourced) on our candidates by those who want the conservatives taken out leaving, a mod to stand alone at the end of the day. In the case of Newt I think the O machine helped there as well.

  • carolynr

    What makes total common sense. Let’s just think about Iowa for just a moment…pragmatically. Let’s also look at the past behavior of Obama…his modus operandi. Let’s mix the the old guard GOP with their surrogates and the Fox News people who are playing the Republican candidates both sides to the middle to appear to maintain their fair and balanced bs., i.e., Santorum or Romney with Gingrich added in for the spice or ratings…if you will.

    OK…who arrived in Iowa the day of the caucus…Well…it was Obama I believe. Democrats and Indies were allowed to vote. Do you think that just maybe the Democratic machine has suggested to their loyal followers that they change their voting status to Independent? Makes sense…doesn’t it? That way, the Republican justification that we must win the middle is born out by the early states. Set up. Then the Democrats also voted in Iowa. Now…to take out Romney and make the party look like they were in total disarray…why not vote for Santorum…the most unqualified person for POTUS. Doesn’t this sound like Obama’s game of chess. Add to that the fact that his media buddies are all to cooperative by giving that narrative. Republicans will state: we have to win the middle. Can you say…replay McCain.

    Now for the establishment Republicans…you know…the greedy ones. They can’t lose the tea party…and they are following the lead with Obama’s stage of the Indie can beat Obama…so they split their support…one for Romney, who I believe they do not want and the other for a Conservative…that way they keep the tea party movement.

    Why are they not for Perry…he wants to dismantle this mess…why they would lose all their influence…so let’s shut him out on their talking head station…Fox. If he does appear…be sure to point out his shortcomings but never praise the accomplishments. Talk about mind control. That’s what one of the precinct captains wrote…she voted this way because Fox reported it!!!

    Pat Caudell (sp) was right…the Democrats are the party of corruption and the Republicans are the party of stupid. We have to get to the Republicans and make our point that this is about saving the country…not saving the Congress’ meal tickets.

    Why would Santorum come out of the blue with his resume. There is no good reason. Gingrich is a better debater than Santorum…why did Santorum do so well in Iowa? Because the Obama Machine engineered the entire deal, having their people vote for Santorum. What are the real Indies left to believe? The party is in total disarray…so why bother to vote…the Republicans don’t know what they are doing…so why bother. Further…if we (The Democratic Machine) get them jacked up enough about Romney…they won’t go to the polls. Either way….WHO WINS….OBAMA. This is the game plan…and somebody better let the rest of the world know what is going on.

  • samfox

    more on Mitt.

    Jack Hunter on Mitt:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3etUOq7hVE

    http://www.romneyexposed.com/2011/06/20/an-open-letter-about-mitt-romney-from-conservatives/

    Will the real romney stand up
    http://www.newsmax.com/Murdock/Romney-Vietnam-abortion-ethanol/2011/06/24/id/401323

    Mitt & his health care in MA-
    http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v30n1/cpr30n1-1.html

    Here is more on Perry:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fpN96akUPs

    http://www.newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh127.htm

    http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/09/08/rick-perry-exposed-as-a-globalist/

    SamFox

  • antisesquipedalion

    clothes pins, that is. youll need them when you vote for Mitt Weeny

  • clowngirl

    I wouldn’t assume every Mormon would vote for Romney just on account of his faith.

    Am encouraged to hear most of your friends from church are conservative. Perhaps the strong support from the LDS community in 2008 came about from Romney being (falsely) billed as the conservative alternative to McCain and won’t materialize this time…

  • ihateliberals

    to keep from smelling all the BS. All i have read today is Blah, Blah Blah Santorum and Blah blah blah Romney and then there was blah blah blah blah blah Gingrich etc etc etc. I think that Iowa proved that this thing can go any where now and until Super Tuesday nothing is going to be settled. At this point it is anybody’s game and that was proven in 2008 by McCain who at one point had no money and was about to be out but the GOP wnated him and back he came. I hope this time that it is the people who decide for the candidate and ot the GOP or the press or the Democrats. I like Rick Santorum but he isn’t going to be the nominee for many reasons. When you have a Republican caucus that allows any Tom Dick or Harry to vote this is what you get.

  • thirstyboots

    Once it goes down to Romney vs. Paul vs 3rd candidate, Romney will be easily winning majorities in most states and polling well above 50% nationally.

    Just like when it became McCain vs. Paul vs Huckabee.

    Romney is already at 37% in South Carolina per the new CNN poll. As always, South Carolina will coalesce around the establishment candidate. He’ll win running away and the primary will basically be finished.

  • bob08034

    As a South Carolina resident, I am certain that once people in this state find out that Santorum is pro-union his numbers will tank. Bachmann will probably get more votes than Santorum…

    We’d probably vote for Obama if the alternative meant losing the Boeing plant. ;-) And yeah, I do realize Bachmann is out of the race…

    I’m tired of outsiders going to Washington and not getting anything done.

    Newt Gingrich, for all his faults, was Speaker the last time the Congress had a nominally balanced budget. He has also demonstrated that he can work with the other side to reform big government programs (welfare).

    Romney is the Republican version of Clinton. Which is both why the media thinks he’s electable and why most Republicans don’t want him.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    or even a small slice of them sit on their hands this November or vote third-party, then Romney’s a dead duck. If Romney supporters were smart enough to take the long view they would recognize that nothing but defeat lies in their future, whether in the primaries or in November.

    The fact is that Romney is so repulsive to conservatives that nothing he can do will prevent several percentage points of the conservative vote from refusing to support him. He simply can’t win.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    or even a small slice of them sit on their hands this November or vote third-party, then Romney’s a dead duck. If Romney supporters were smart enough to take the long view they would recognize that nothing but defeat lies in their future, whether in the primaries or in November.

    The fact is that Romney is so repulsive to conservatives that nothing he can do will prevent several percentage points of the conservative vote from refusing to support him. He simply can’t win.

  • clowngirl

    You said that he gets 15% of the second choice vote. So, it would follow that if ALL of the other candidates drop out –that only brings him up to 41% and there’d be an opening for someone new to come in the race.

    How do you come up with the notion that if 2 candidates drop out (say Perry and Santorum) he’s suddenly doubling his vote totals?

    I’ll take this opportunity to remind you that Gingrich, not too long ago, was polling at 50% in Florida with 7 candidates in the field. Romney has never come anywhere close to that. And there’s no reason to believe Newt won’t recover.

    Let me put it hypothetically: If, for some bizarre reason, Perry and Gingrich unexpectedly drop out before South Carolina so it’s Mitt vs. Santorum and Ron Paul. You honestly think he’s going to win with AT LEAST 50% or 60% of the vote?

    Romney is at 37% in SC in one poll and at 27% in another.

    It’s not consistent, and he’s about to get a lot more scrutiny.

    Up till IA the other candidates were generally attacking each other rather than Romney. That’s about to change.

  • clowngirl

    It wasn’t a question of ” momentum” it was mathematically improbable, then impossible for anybody else to win.

    Romney is going to have trouble accumulating anything like that for quite awhile.

    Just winning South Carolina. would not remotely compare.

    I agree with Speaker Gingrich. The field will gradually coalesce around a conservative alternative and that person will win.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    He projects WEAK every time he appears in public and speaks. Americans look for strength in a President. They want to know their President can go eyeball to eyeball with Putin, Ahmademajad, the Chinese leader or others on the foreign stage. Romney doesn’t project that at all…he projects WEAK and WIMPY.

    Most Americans don’t do WEAK and WIMPY for President.

  • clowngirl

    Which I would generally rank as more reliable than CNN/Time

    That’s pretty much in keeping with a mid twenties ceiling…

  • trelane

    As I’ve been saying for a while, Perry may look like a prettyboy to the Texas teenage gals, and a macho cowboy to other southerners, but to the rest of America that same image is practically toxic.

  • thirstyboots

    He is the 3rd choice of some voters too. How hard is this to understand?

    Yes, if it’s Romney vs. Santorum vs Paul, Romney will win with 50% of the vote in SC.

  • thirstyboots

    After Super Tuesday McCain had 680 delegates, which is little more than half of the delegates needed to win.

    It’s the momentum. People in this site have been grossly misunderstanding the importance of it (hence the fantasies about Perry getting back and on how Perry would be more competitive in SC than Santorum).

  • thirstyboots

    I don’t care about your over-emotional bitterness. I’m not even a Romney supporter. I was just analyzing what polls internals are showing and how the race will develop. Strictly horse-racing.

    Your reasoning has no use whatsoever because in that case we would never nominate anyone – no candidate will get 100% of the vote in the primary, so your logic can be applied to anyone. I mean, if Romney doesn’t get 40%/50% of the republican voters, do you want to nominate the other guys who apparently can’t get 80% of it?

  • joshdunn

    If conservatives want to sit out this election, they do so at their own peril.

    Conservatives liked Herman Cain because he was a businessman. Romney is a real businessman. Romney made decisions at Bain that sent venture capital to companies like Home Depot and Domino’s Pizza and got them off the ground while Cain was trying to see how many waitresses he could nail.

    Obama had no business experience. How’s that working for you, America? Santorum has never run a business. He knows nothing about it. Gingrich has never run a business. He’s done some lobbying for Freddie Mac, but he was more of an employee for them than an independent contractor.

    The GOP does not have a bloc of 40% to 50% who will not vote for Romney. To even suggest that indicates that you might be playing for the other team. At this point in 2000, George W. Bush did not have 50% of the party behind him and he only had one legitimate opponent to beat, and that was the moderate, but straight-talking McCain.

    Romney will consolidate the GOP into one solid, beat-Obama group and the liberals will be forced to go back to the drawing board and see where they went wrong in Obama’s one term.

  • joshdunn

    He/she is simply reading for this week’s liberal talking points which are: “Conservatives hate Romney, therefore they won’t vote for Romney and Obama gets re-elected despite 40% approval ratings. Yay!”

    The liberals have their heads in the sand because Obama’s approval ratings are lower than George W. Bush’s ratings in 2004, lower than Clinton’s approval ratings in 1996, lower than George Bush’s approval ratings in 1992, lower than Reagan’s approval ratings in 1984, and lower than Carter’s approval ratings in 1980. They are preparing to try Truman’s desperate campaign-against-Congress strategy. It is a risky strategy. That is why no sitting president has successfully done it since Truman. (George Bush tried it in 1992 but failed.)

    If Obama thinks that he can drive a wedge into the GOP using surrogates and internet trolls, bring it on.

    We are not scared of this guy.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    You take out the 20K Dem and indie voters Ron Paul brought to the polls in Iowa and GOP turnout was dismal; much lower than in 2008.

    Romney is not a uniter; he invokes strong feelings in people. A few like him but many immediately gag at the thought of him being President. Plus, his performance speaks for itself. After 4 years as MA Gov., he had a 30% approval rating and retired because he knew he would lose if he ran again. Moreover, Romney was a venture capitalist working in a financial firm, not a businessman, and he’s never really run anything either.

    Your last statement that Romney would somehow consolodate a beat-Obama bloc is a pipe dream. Obama is personally likeable to a majority of Americans and they will stick with him unless the GOP draws a sharp contrast between him and a conservative alternative. A conservative can sell the case that Obama’s economic policies have failed and that a small government, low tax, pro-growth policy is the answer. Since Romney is for big government, a VAT and government run health care, he can’t pass the laugh test in making that case.

    Dream on if you think conservatives will unite behind Romney.

  • joshdunn

    Mormons have generally voted conservative in the primary and Republican in the general election since about 1952.

    Because Mormons have supported Republican presidential nominees from Eisenhower to McCain, I would expect that Evangelical and other conservatives would support a Mormon for president if their only other choice were a liberal democrat.

    Apparently, I underestimated the rawness that exists between the two groups (Mormon and evangelical). The two groups have so much in common if they could just set aside their differences on a few doctrinal issues. It is the agreement to look past doctrinal differences that brought peace to Europe after hundreds of years of war between Catholics and Huegonauts/Calvinists/Roundheads/Lutherans.

    Don’t get caught up in the “it’s us against them”. There is a “we” that includes values-based people of all religions and philosophies.

  • joshdunn

    Especially if you look at his record as governor.

    Why don’t you check it out for yourself and then we can talk about the areas where you still feel that Romney governed as a liberal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governorship_of_Mitt_Romney

  • nicephorus1phokas

    Say your opponent wants Obama to win. Well, to be honest, if it’s between Romney and Obama, I don’t think it makes a whole lot of difference who wins, so I guess I’m indifferent, but I’m definitely not an Obama-fan.

    Liberals, minorities, unions and other Democratic groups will be energized next year because they are fighting to preserve their hard fought gains from the 2006 and 2008 elections. They also have seen the impact of conservative Governors like Scott Walker and John Kasich and will fight hard to take back ground.

    In response, the GOP will have a divided, dis-spirited base with, quite possibly, a credible third party alternative to which they can pledge their vote as a protest vote.

  • joshdunn

    Especially not in a race where there are 6 viable candidates running.

    Watch what happens to Romney’s numbers after Huntsman, Perry, Gingrich, and Santorum drop out (in that order). Romney should win in South Carolina at this point.

    That is huge.

  • joshdunn

    He was the conservative alternative to McCain/Giuliani in 2008, which is why he was endorsed by conservative Senator Jim DeMint, conservative broadcaster Hugh Hewitt, and conservative columnist Ann Coulter. He was also tacitly supported by FRC’s James Dobson.

    The candidate that the evangelical right was trying to block in 2008 was the moderate, flip-flopping McCain. Pat Robertson was especially outspoken about the fact that he would never, ever support John McCain for anything (after McCain led a mutiny on Bush’s attempt to get the senate to use the Constitutional Option (aka the “Byrd Option”) to get more conservatives onto the federal courts.

    I’ve been a conservative my entire adult life and I’d have an easier time supporting Romney than any other candidate for president at this point. I liked Huntsman in the past but I now realize that Huntsman does not have enough conservative support to get through the GOP primary which is an important pre-requisite for becoming president.

  • clowngirl

    You said that after Super Tuesday McCain had more than 50% of the delegates he needed TO WIN.

    Even if Romney wins New Hampshire and South Carolina by large margins (which he won’t) he won’t even have 5% of the delegates he needs to win.

    On top of that MAJOR difference, there’s 2 other big things you’re missing:

    1. When Romney dropped out, even though it was still theoretically possible for him to come back, there weren’t nearly enough pro Romney states for him to even come close. Huckabee supporters largely hated him and loved their candidate and they weren’t going to drop him and vote Romney just to beat McCain Romney Huckabee divided the vote enough that McCain would easily get a plurality in most of the remaining states.

    So there was no realistic path for either of them. This time the race may narrow to one non-Paul contender before even Super Tuesday.

    2. In 2008 most of the states were winner take all.

    Not the case this time. Not for quite awhile.

    Momentum is not everything, and Romney never seems to gain all that much.

    But we’ve seen that for those not named Romney, momentum can materialize quite quickly.

    Besides that, with regard to momentum, there’s more than a month between Florida and Super Tuesday. Plenty of time for Romney’s momentum to cool. Plenty of time for the non-Romney crowd (whose persistence in wanting someone else you willfully ignore) to unite behind the non Romney candidate.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Keep going… I may need to pull the same act later.

  • clowngirl

    before Cain dropped out, before Bachmann dropped out, probably even before Tim Pawlenty dropped out.

    And yet, it’s taken until now for Romney to hit even 26% in National Polls.

    3 candidates dropped out and his numbers barely moved.

    Meanwhile we’ve seen Gingrich bounce up to 40%, nationally Perry go as high as 38% …even Cain, who has never held any elected office, demonstrated a higher early ceiling than Romney.

    You say that Romney’s the third choice so if you add the second and third choices together it brings him to 50-60%

    Really?

    how committed are these voters to Romney as a third choice. It’s altogether possible that Rick Santorum as he gains prominence will take some of those third place voters. Or that as Romney’s many flaws are talked about at greater length Gingrich will regain both his first and second choice popularity.

    Are you really taking as Gospel that Romney’s 2nd and 3rd choice voters will remain committed to him if their candidate drops out?

    You keep acting like I’m some idiot, but I don’t really see anybody backing up your viewpoint…

  • nicephorus1phokas

    I’ve never heard any evangelical of note oppose ROmney because of his religion. In fact, many evangelicals who won’t support Romney will gladly support Huntsman, who also happens to be Morman. They see Romney as a liberal, big government type who is also wimpy and insincere.

    Much of the bitterness in this primary actually comes from the Romney folks who also insert his Morman faith into the discussion at every opportunity.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    I’ve never heard any evangelical of note oppose ROmney because of his religion. In fact, many evangelicals who won’t support Romney will gladly support Huntsman, who also happens to be Morman. They see Romney as a liberal, big government type who is also wimpy and insincere.

    Much of the bitterness in this primary actually comes from the Romney folks who also insert his Morman faith into the discussion at every opportunity.

  • nicephorus1phokas

    because Mormans believe in the Old and New Testament. Romney would be particularly concerning about you violating the prohibition in Exodus 20:16 and Matthew 19:18 with your statement about him being a conservative.

  • avagreen

    How much of this is from Romney?
    How can a man who calls himself a Christian………….

    http://www.businessinsider.com/iowa-caucuses-herman-cain-endorsement-2012-1#ixzz1iPIc8XpI

  • avagreen

    ??

  • jakeofalltrades

    Should afford enough ladies of the evening to keep him distracted.

  • tngal

    in double digits. Others in single digits. Although Santorum is down from the Ras numbers earlier today and Romney took off like a rock star. Both Ras and CNN were like voters and Ras used more people than CNN did.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/sc/south_carolina_republican_presidential_primary-1590.html

  • avagreen

    ……but

  • pttx333

    There are a whole lot of shenanigans being play right before our very eyes. Food for thought ….

  • Scope

    Hope you are having a good day. Cain refused to tell Blitzer earlier that he won’t endorse himself at an event he is keynoting the Thursday before the SC primary. First of all Cain is not on the ballot in many many states, as he suspended his campaign without qualifying in many states. He is not fundraising, and he doesn’t have any organization anywhere, except some of his die hard supporters, which I believe have moved on since he suspended. Cain is doing the very same thing that Palin did for such a long time, he is throwing crap out there just to keep some in suspense, and to increase the Cain talk. He is pimping himself yet again because he has lost his daily multi-TV appearances. Palin refused to say she wasn’t getting into the race until it was obvious she was out of time.

    Cain’s huge ego is in need of a little messaging, among other things.

  • thirstyboots

    And once Romney wins SC he’ll be the only one with cash to compete seriously in FL. And after that, it’s all over.

  • pttx333

    the trolls out in droves.

    Oh, yeah, that Cain … still trying to sell more books and massage that massive ego of his. Just like Palin with her strip tease routines that became so nauseating. Just color the both of them as RINOs and be done with it – that is what I’m doing. Where I previously thought that each of them might hold some good/valuable position in a new Republican administration, I no longer think that.

    I still wouldn’t discount the above post, though, now that I think longer on it. Pfffffffft to the perpetrators!

  • thirstyboots

    I’m fairly happy to stand alone as long as I’m correct and I’m confident I am.

    People still haven’t run out of non-Romney to stick too. Once they get to know Santorum, some of his current supporters will abandon him and settle on Romney to. Same for some of the undecideds. Then as others start dropping, some of their supporters will go for the Romney camp too.

    I mean, just look at the polls internals. Unlike the others, Romney is actually popular amongst republican primary voters. That’s why he’s the 2nd and 3rd choice of many. The idea that 75% of the voters don’t want Romney and will settle for anyone but Romney is completely bogus.

    And just after only a single primary, Romney is already gaining in the polls.

    Look at this:
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

    The two polls published since mid-December, he has a 8 points lead.

    It’s taken until now to hit 26%? Yeah, but he’s in the high 20s in every of the last 4 polls.

    He’s leading in South Carolina already. He’s running away in New Hampshire.

    Barring a scandal or a major gaffe, it’s basically impossible to stop him now. Even more difficult considering the lack of resources of the other candidates.

  • thirstyboots

    I meant he has more delegates than McCain at the same point.

    McCain didn’t win because of the delegates he racked up before. In fact, polls 4 years ago showed the same thing: that McCain was the 2nd choice of the large majority of Romney and Huckabee voters. The idea that Romney and Huckabee were dividing a voting block was a fiction, just like it’s a fiction that the non-Romneys are dividing a voting block.

  • clowngirl

    You keep going on with all this Romney-is-unstoppable type stuff and seem to bash any candidate who’s ever challenged him.

    It prompts the obvious question: who IS your preferred candidate?

    I don’t buy your theory.

    The consistent resistance of nearly 75% of the party is fact, not fiction.

    People are casual about who they mark as a second choice. As evidenced by Romney reportedly polling as the most common second choice at numerous points throughout the primary season and yet hardly gain when multiple candidates drop out.

    Which means one of two things (or both)

    1. The race is very fluid

    2. People are generally even less committed to their second choices then their first.

    Your theory that as candidates drop out voters will flock to Romney is contradicted by all the data we have at this point.

    Namely candidates HAVE dropped out and voters haven’t flocked to Romney.

    As Erick has pointed out Romney has only been the “front runner” in between the emergence of other front runners.

    You seem to be predicting that no other candidate will climb up in the polls – a theory that, once again, is totally inconsistent with what we have seen in the race to this point.

  • clowngirl

    By my calculations there are only a total of 878 bound delegates that can be by February 6th.

    There are no winner take all states yet.

    That means for Romney to EVEN TIE McCain – in terms of the number of delegates he had after February 6th, Romney would have to win every single state with at least 77% of the vote.

    McCain was very handsomely rewarded for pluralities. Romney will not be.

    And if Rick Perry stays in the race there is no way he’s winning Texas.

    Texas alone represents 155 delegates Romney would have little part of.

    I like the new proportional system in that it almost forces a candidate to be at least the consensus choice of his or her party.

    Romney is not.

    Not at this point

    and (more than likely) not ever.

  • thirstyboots

    You say that people aren’t really committed to their second or even first choices in support of a bizarre theory that 75% of republican primary voters are united and committed to never vote for Romney as long as there’s someone else but Ron Paul facing him.

    You may not want to see it, but Romney is actually slowly inching in the polls. Just like he got 25% in Iowa when he was polling below 20% when Gingrich was leading – which means that many of Newt’s former supporters actually went to Romney. Just like he’s suddenly in the 30s in South Carolina. And his national numbers are slowly growing. People used to say his ceiling was 22%. Now it’s 25%… but he hasn’t polled at 25% or below in almost a month. In a couple of weeks, maybe you’ll still be writing the same post, but you’ll be using 30% and 70% as the thresholds, not 25% and 75%.

  • clowngirl

    If you aren’t supporting Romney why the constant pro-Romney postings and the bashing of anyone who might beat him?

    Again who ARE you supporting?

    Are you saying that you aren’t supporting Romney because, while you want him to win, you don’t actually giving him money?

    Yes, Romney has slowly INCHED up in the polls.

    Nobody has ever said that ” 75% of Republican Primary voters are united and committed to never vote for Romney” that’s a staw man of your creation.

    You ignored (meaning did not even address) any of the posts I raised. That does not fit with my view of productive discussion.

    Your posts are disingenuous, often blatantly factually wrong and simply annoying.

  • APA Guy

    …then you try to walk that support back when you realize how unpopular he is with 75% of the party. If you support him, just come out and say it instead of all this subtle crap you are trying to pan off.

  • clowngirl

    And from what I’ve read Newt,overall, has the highest percentage of voters who have said they aren’t open to changing their minds.

    I don’t know the numbers on how many Romney supporters are totally committed to their candidate – but I am confident it is less than 100%

    I’m even more confident that those who are committed to Romney as a second or third choice would be less than 100% . I don’t even think they bother polling that.

    I, at one point, would’ve marked Romney as a third choice. He has since dropped to 5th. Which means that at this point — yes, I would take any other candidate except Ron Paul over Romney in the primary.

    That could change again but I doubt he’ll bounce back to higher than fourth.

    And I am not especially fickle. I’ve had one consistent first choice since May.

    Other voters have been less decisive.