« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Nominee

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  March 7th, 2012 at 04:46 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Many political analysts compare 2012′s Republican Presidential cycle to the Democrats’ go of it in 2008. Barack Obama deployed a delegate strategy while Hillary Clinton went for big state wins. It worked to Barack Obama’s favor. This year, it works for Romney.

Both took a while and had some ups and downs, but ultimately Barack Obama prevailed. After Ohio came in tonight, it is clear Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee if Newt Gingrich stays in the race. Gingrich is now only serving as a spoiler to Santorum.

The big difference between 2008 and 2012 is that in 2008, David beat Goliath. The base of the party rallied to the David who took out the machine no one thought could be taken out. In 2012, Goliath is beating David and no one ever really cheers for Goliath.

Barring a rapid Gingrich exit from the race — he cannot win outright given the states remaining, including Texas — which would suddenly reset the Santorum coalition for a one on one match against Romney, Mitt Romney is the nominee. Frankly, even if Gingrich exits, Romney will still most likely be the nominee.

He will be the nominee having lost the South, Appalachia, evangelicals, conservatives, and blue collar voters. He will go into the general election deeply distrusted by his own base while having to woo independent voters. This is not a dazzling position to be in to beat an incumbent President.

Were I Mitt Romney I’d be wondering how I spent 5.5 times as much money as Rick Santorum and barely won Ohio. I’d be wondering who on my campaign staff gets fired first. Mitt Romney has been running since 2006, has the best organization, and the most money. He won his home state of Michigan by less than 3%. He won Ohio barely after pouring in money. A win is a win is a win. But with each Romney win, he comes away even more badly bruised.

The rest of March will be just as brutal. What a mess.

Tags: , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • davesinsanantonio

    nt

  • texastaxpayer

    But this isn’t last year and here we are. What a disaster. Our congress is despised and certainly no match for the Reid Obama team. Our primaries are the punch line to a very very bad joke. Most insulting of all however the GOP is about to nominate a candidate I truly cannot support. For the first time in my adult life I am no longer a reliably republican voter.

    Most frustrating for me is that not a single Romney supporter can even state a valid reason for supporting this man. Truly it seems they all just don’t support Newt or Rick or Ron. When forced they try and cherry pick his record but anyone with 5 minutes experience with Google can see through that. His flip flops “don’t bother them” even his outright lies they seem fine with. His background of chop shopping businesses is “creative destruction” and they flat out ignore the Medicare fraud and under funded pensions he left the tax payers on the hook for while making millions personally. When really pressed for a reason to support him they respond with some variation of “he can beat Obama”. How? With what? A failed governing record and a history of business practices that would make Tony Soprano blush?

    I guess what were seeing here is the power negative advertising has on the uninformed. Romney has only been able to win in states he has flooded the airwaves with negative ads and driven down participation in. Something tells me Mitt is going to get a lesson on how effective this strategy is again in November when Obama unleashes his billion dollar war chest in all 57 ;) states.

    I guess we deserve this after all you reap what you sow….

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …just as, as a Perry Posse member, Perry should not have, either.

    As I typed yesterday, until/unless you divulge what happened in SC, it will be difficult to capitulate.

  • nocontest

    beat Romney or any of the other candidates. You are a typical republican who
    doesn’t want to vote for Romney so why would an independent?
    Landslide and for good reason. As Erick mentioned so politely what a mess.

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

    unless you want Romney to be the nominee, then Newts is not helping. His ego his to large to likely understand, but he needs pushed out. One man is funding his campaign. He is helping Romney now. The establishment and Romney wants him in now. Its universally excepted Newts serves to help Romney.

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

    but I cannot defend him against the flip flop, the dirty campaigning, or the rich guy out of touch charges. I’ll defend what he says he will do, but if someone says, you don’t know he will, I’ll have to say your right. If I was an moderate independent, I’d never support Romney, but I’m not, so unless Gingrich’s humbled himself like Perry did for him, this is over, and Romney is it.

  • The_Gadfly

    that might re-ignite interest from disaffected parties. But if Romney fires himself, he no longer has a campaign and it’s way too late for other candidates to step in.

  • texastaxpayer

    I am afraid Texas is too far away to save him. We need one or the other to quit. I would prefer Newt but I doubt Santorums in much of a mood to step out as he has been running quite a bit better of late than Newt. If we don’t do something Mitt is gonna wrap this up and then you loose a large chunk of Texas in the general. People around here are not supporting that *insert choice words here* liberal and I don’t mean Obama.

  • mixplix

    We voters are in this game of the candidates voicing our opinions but I as a voter this November will vote republican as I did the last time. It’s a shame all the millions spent on these primaries goes to the media.

  • texastaxpayer

    But I dare not mention his name…. Not just yet anyway…. Let’s see what happens….
    ;)

  • goodgovernance

    What a mess.

    We’re in the worst of all situations, now, this sort of no-man’s land where we’re guaranteed a bloody war of attrition for weeks on end.

    No one’s managed to topple Romney. But Santorum is doing well enough to stay in the race, apparently. I heard some of the pundits last night predict he’ll stay in until June.

    Romney is hemorrhaging badly, and really needs to shake up his campaign. But because he’s doing well enough to be ahead in the delegate count, Romney will be loathe to make any changes, because his current strategy is (barely) working in terms of the numbers. I heard Matthew Dowd predict Romney’s staff will deal with the rest of the primary campaign by emailing each other Excel spreadsheets – a perfect symbol of the completely soulless and money-driven campaign Romney relies on to a fault.

    I really wish Mitt Romney would wake up one morning and have the epiphany that wanting to complete your father’s unfinished legacy is no reason to want to be President of the United States. The job’s much too important for that. Think of how much better of we’d be if he’d come to that realization. But since that likely won’t happen, we’ve done everything we could on our end to create the perfect campaign environment for Obama.

    It is going to be a long eight months to the general election. And I suspect a long four years after out in the wilderness.

  • tngal

    As one Russian woman said about her vote:

    _____
    “Voting yesterday, I felt like I was choosing the least dirty toilet in a crowded train station.”
    _____

    I wish I knew her address. I send her letter saying I feel your pain.

    We’re not quite as bad off as they are, yet. Hopefully we can place a few good men and women in Congress to help null whoever sits in the oval office come November. But given how Obama has been circumventing congress to get stuff he wants, I suspect that will be the rule of thumb going forward, no matter who gets elected.

    http://news.yahoo.com/russias-putin-faces-protests-poll-triumph-050653321.html

  • mixplix

    Being from Iowa puts you in the class of the working people who know what honest sweat is from honest work, not stress trying to impress an abusive boss. That parchment on the wall will get you an interview but your skills will get you the job of repairing the car of government not driving it. Good luck!

  • falconrap

    with this thinking is that polling in Ohio showed Gingrich’s exit would help Romney. The reality is that Santorum has a problem picking up enough of Gingrich’s former supporters that it might not do anything for him. When you look at what happened in Georgia and South Carolina, where Newt was able to spend time and money, and not have Romney carpet bombing him, Newt won huge. In fact, Newt took a majority of Tea Party supporters in Georgia. The problem with Newt isn’t electability, as everyone has claimed, it’s his lack of funding because all of the heavy donors are backing Romney, mostly, or Santorum. If Gingrich was getting the money from the donors, he would likely be winning a lot more states.

    The only thing that can save this election year is if Mitt were to have an honest moment with himself and come to the realization that, not only is he tearing up the party, he’s threatening our chances of winning not just the Presidency, but the down ticket races as well. Everywhere he’s carpet bombed turn out goes down. Wherever turnout has been high, Newt has won, for the most part. It’s really sad what’s happening here. Mitt should man up and exit, even though he might still be able to squeak out the nomination by spending boatloads of money. Buying the Presidency is NOT the way to get into office.

  • rulken

    It’s true we are jumping into a whirlpool of statements thrown out by all the candidates these days. Our heads are getting ready to explode, with trying to figure out who is telling the truth!
    Frankly I have the time to research everyone of them and I have surprised myself, with the results. I really started out thinking, that Michell Bachmann was going to be our best hope of getting some fiscal responsibility back in the white house. ( I still favor a lot of her policies), she just didn’t have the money, or backing early on to make her a serious contender though.
    Then Newt caught my ear in the early debates, and has been a serious contender ever since. Although Newt has more baggage than the other candidates, he has proven to be more forth coming with opening up his life to the public than anyone else. ( Oh,,, if Obama only did this! He never would have voted into office!). We unfortunately have a lot of billionaires in America that seem to have no morals, and even fewer scruples. They are packing Obama’s war chest for the election of the century.
    Getting back to Newt Gingrich, he seems to very methodically, take apart those problems that we all want to be corrected. Even more amazing, Newt has the ability to instantly access from memory, what most of us have to refer to out notes and articles of past!!??
    Then he gives a down to earth, common sense, solutions that no other candidate has been able to do to date? So why do we keep focusing on Mitt, and Ron?
    Newt may not be as young, and handsome as the other two, but I don’t believe that’s the reason why he hasn’t done as well as the others.
    People have paraphrased what others have said about Newt, but not accurately, every time that some one said that Newt wasn’t liked by his fellow congressmen, and women, when he was the speaker of the house. That’s not a bad thing! Although they would have loved us to believe that was the case. Newt stepped on a lot of toes while he was speaker, and paid the price of being rejected for it.
    Lets not forget, that it was Newt, that balanced the budget four years as speaker, and that was with a democrat in the white house! Do you think that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid hated him for it? You can bet on it!
    Newt knows foreign policy, and he knows even better how to fix this economy, I do believe better than anyone else.
    Yeah,,, politics are dirty, and Newt knows the history of the big players, and he has proven that he’s not afraid to go after them, and hold them accountable.
    That’s the kind of guy I want in the white house, some one that will bring sanity back to our nation, and put us on a solid economic footing once again!

  • denoff51

    …..if everything I have been reading at Red State over the last year is true and if Romney is the Republican Canidate for President, then we have lost the House, the Lib/Progressives will have a Super Majority in the Senate and Obama will win all 50 states in this Presidential Election. I guess the only thing left to do is to either move to Easter Island or buy a gun, tons of food and wait for the end of America to come about. I remember a time when people in this country were optimistic and happy. I guess Doom and Gloom is the new order of business.

  • texastaxpayer

    Of course I live in Texas and have quite a few guns….lol..

    I just hate seeing what’s happening to our country and party. For my part I will do everything in my power to ensure my children have an opportunity to grow up in a happy optimistic country like we did. Of course it may take a revolution to achieve it. But hey nobody said it would be easy….

  • trutexan

    and I can hold my nose in the ballot box just like in 2008 when I was voting for McCain because of Palin. To rally the base, that’s the only way.

  • dkd458

    If the establishment pushes Romney on us in the primary he had better win in the general or the party is over. The establishment insults us at every turn. The party establishment blocks conservatives at every level. Tthe only reason there is not a separate tea party is fear that Obama will win a second term. If Obama wins there is no reason to take the establishment abuse, conservatives will leave the Republican party and create a new party. It will take time, and the fear that they would not be time to start a new party and win against Obama is the only reason it hasn’t happened already.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …regarding this key-point.

    http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2012/03/07/super-tuesday-romney-and-santorum-limp-along-tea-party-claims-first-scalp/

  • burke

    So, obviously we’re going to have to fight hard in the battleground states. But Romney’s going to have to spend time and money holding red states like Georgia and Missouri. Missouri in particular is a big problem; McCain won MO by just a handful of votes. Obama will be spending money and using surrogates to turn out Dems in red states where he lost by 5% or less, if only to help spread Romney thin.

    It’s hard to swallow this now, but we do need to be donating money to Romney once the primary is over if we want to win.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …for reasons detailed elsewhere.

    I quoted you [and corrected typos in your signature-section], but I emphasized the need for The Newt to remain a national force.

    http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2012/03/07/super-tuesday-romney-and-santorum-limp-along-tea-party-claims-first-scalp/#comment-8031

  • mikelindell2

    Only the Newt will do. I don’t want a big gov’t, big labor, big spending “conservative” who will be so marginalized for his fringe statements that he will drastically damage the party.

  • 1stRichard

    Romney is establish R, this camp has little experience taking on the far left other then compromise. Those more willing to take arms and fight, from Paul to Santorum are being disenfranchised. This camp is a ?must have? premier combat veterans to defeat financial disparities and to stop the propaganda from the left. If the ?nastiness? continues and these two camps are divided in the end with Romney wining the delegates with a minority, what a mess this could be.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …as I explored in greater detail elsewhere:

    http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2012/03/07/super-tuesday-romney-and-santorum-limp-along-tea-party-claims-first-scalp/#comment-8031

    The discipline must be trained on precisely what Sarah said last night, regarding the ability say-it-like-it is in an attractive fashion.

  • mikelindell2

    None of the rest will do. No one else has a better shot of beating Obama either. Just because Santorum is not Romney doesn’t mean he’s any better than Romney. There’s only one small gov conservative left in this race.

    EE, you told Perry to drop out to help Newt, he did and endorsed Gingrich in doing so and then you don’t even vote for Newt today.

  • pieter

    This election year will not be won with republican money but rather their ideas and clearly articulated counter to the sitting president. So, perhaps a nominee produced from a convention is not beyond the pale. I still believe Speaker Gingrich will serve our hopes best in this scenario. If that path is to be successful, Palin-Perry and the other supporters are required to stump for him in TX, KS and the south.

  • greenpoint

    Unless you look good in blue, do not hold your breath waiting for Romney to drop out.

    Gingrich has to go NOW. Last night he gave a rambling endless victory speech celebrating a win in his home state. Unlike Romney Newt only has one home state and he carried it. Big deal!

  • pieter

    Would a nominee produced at the end of August still allow for sufficient time for an effective presidential campaign?

    I believe so.

  • Ausonius

    That is my view of our Primary here.

    In 1968 Nixon rose from the ashes by marketing himself as The New Nixon.

    Tide and Cheer the detergents do this every so often. :)

    If Romney wants any chance of “firing” up the base, he must fire himself first.

    Symbolically.

    Romney must immolate himself in the fires of a Conservative Inquisition: the old Romney, flip-flopping, HealthCare-lite, sort of pro-abortion , Rockefeller RINO Romney must be burned at the stake, completely repudiated, a acontract signed in blood. (symbolically, although the real thing would make a statement.)

    Romney must then unequivocally repudiate BIG BRObamaCare, massive spending and deficits, and promise for the first time actually to reduce the bureaucracy in Washington, to reduce government interference in American lives, and then to prove he is not after power, promise to resign after one term, like Rutherford B. Hayes.

    Yes, I know, we all have our fantasies! :)

  • mikelindell2

    He can articulate and frame each issue best. Equally important is the fact that he has the best record to match up with Obama. Romney’s job creation record in MA is non-existent and Santorum doesn’t have much he can claim. If it’s Newt, it turns into an election of 4.2% unemployment VS 9%, balanced budgets VS trillion dollar deficits, entitlement reform VS runaway entitlements, getting huge things done even with a Dem president VS whining about gridlock (which will be a key Obama argument this year and would be negated by Newt explaining how he actually got things done).

  • greenpoint

    “wanting to complete your father?s unfinished legacy is no reason to want to be President of the United States. The job?s much too important for that. Think of how much better off we?d be if he?d come to that realization”.

    Hey, it worked for Bush! But we are not better off for it so you are right.

  • pieter

    The unfortunate truth is that unless he maintains his viability, he will not have the momentum to last. The other possibility is that the electorate will awake from their apparent stupidity in the later winner-take-all states later this sumer.

    Voting for Romney, in my opinion, is evidence of mental defect.

  • jules187

    Does anyone imagine that folks give a hoot whether the individual mandate is a state or a federal one? When that penalty tax kicks in and lower income folks see money set aside for groceries or utilities confiscated by the government, it won’t matter what uniform the thief wears.

    I have real concerns about a Romney nomination. He is a decent man, generous, sociable, biz savvy, but he is shakable–not a quality I seek in the president. Go back and look at the expression on his face during the debate when Rick Perry kept interrupting him. That look is panic.

    He is the wrong man for this job.

  • Viet71

    Romney’s plastic and boring to me; untrustworthy and not conservative enough to others.

    He’d be far, far better than Obama, and his VP could could carry the conservative banner down the road. Could.

    Moaning and groaning over Romney, if he gets the nomination, will be cathartic to the Right and hand a victory to the Left.

  • texastaxpayer

    Just curious to see how you validate that statement….

  • greenpoint

    No one can disagree that Newt is brilliant. But this isn’t an IQ test- it’s an election. After all these months, he’s managed a solid victory in South Carolina and another .a win in his home state. Unlike Romney, Newt is now out of home states and he will only siphon off conservative votes from Santorem in places like Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana etc. It’s bad enough that Romney will get delegates in all these states due to proportional allocation of delegates. Do we have to reduce the anti Romney vote even further?

  • pieter

    Over 40% that voted for him had reservations. He has spent liberally for the results enjoyed this primary, how does this bode for the coming election?

    His success is entirely premised on his inevitability. What a crock sold by establishment politicos and the media.

    Romney is about as substantive and exciting as laundry lint.

  • vtdelacy

    Santorum had the overwhelming support of the party base and conservative leaders across America. It really left me cold to find that he was not even included on our primary ballot here in Virginia. If RINO Romney gets the nomination as it seems is just about inevitable now for sure, the nation is at great risk of being destroyed the rest of the way by another 4 years under Obama which we could not afford to see happen. Something went very wrong this electoral cycle and my party had better learn to stop going suicidal by getting RINO after RINO nominated to our ticket for the presidency! Does anyone REALLY believe that Romney of Obamacare L:ite fame is going to do a THING to overturn Obamacare? How naive, since his Massachusetts health care plan was the precursor and model for that disaster in the first place!

  • pieter

    MA uber alles. What a novel template to impose on a national level. Oh wait, we got that with Obamacare. Good grief, what is the electorate thinking that Romney is the answer?

  • Viet71

    Obama’s the most dishonest president. His base even hate him for it. It’s a character flaw. A feature of who he is. He’s a con man.

    Romney is fundamentally honest. True he flips and flops. But he doesn’t set out to deceive in major ways, as Obama does. He’s a pol but not a con man.

  • Viet71

    n/t

  • pieter

    I would argue that he has forgone the “fundamentally honest” mantle for political expediency. His campaign is rife with lies about his own acts and those of his competitors.

    I would pick another premise for your support…

  • vtdelacy

    It’s too bad Perry wasn’t able to stay in the race. He was the best nominee we had. In his absence, Santorum was the next most reliably conservative candidate. With so many conservative leaders turning out to CPAC to support Santorum and then the endorsements given to him by Limbaugh and Dr. Dobson on top of that, I have to wonder how this nomination process ever got so rigged to make Romney the nominee of our party. It doesn’t pass the smell test.

  • pieter

    It is rigged. I couldn’t agree more.

  • malvernpa

    Every candidate has done their best. They have created the best organization they could, the best fund raising effort, the best ads, the best management of talent and the best spending available to them. They have all had their chance. The primary is what it is and my guy bowed out some time ago. They all have there attributes and their flaws But know this. The next president will have 2 SCOTUS appointments that will impact America for the next 50 to 100 years. It is time for all of us to accept the process and the collective wisdom of the primary process. If Romney wins then I am a Romney guy. There is NO wisdom in whipping a dead horse. If your guy is out of this race then you will need to work all the harder and suffer much to prevent Obama from giving us a 6/4 liberal court. We can even take the Senate and just think back on how many times we have wondered why our side let this or that SCOTUS nominee through to the court. If Kagen and Sota do not scare you enough then you are part of the problem. Once this is over no more talk of holding your nose. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, not the shooting kind but a war for the soul of America and even if you do not like your general you had better fight like hell. We are fighting for the next generation now. For all of us who have grand kids we know what to do.

  • onemansopinion

    I see both Santurum and Romney setting the conservative cause BACKWARD! We need someone who can communicate and lead. I would rather go down fighting for someone I can believe in. That is Newt.

    It’s not just “smartness”, it’s leadership, communication and experience. If you see a leader in either Romney or Santurum, then perhaps we just see things too differently.

    The “hold your nose and vote for the nominee” strategy has gotten us where we are today.

  • renl57

    …to give what we consider to be valid reasons for supporting Romney.

    But you keep dismissing those reasons, because you’re not on the same wavelength as we where America’s situation is concerned.

    I support Romney, because I believe he’s the most qualified to:

    a) fix the economy, which is still in deep doo-doo despite Obama’s propaganda; and

    b) run the Executive Branch efficiently.

    To me, those are valid reasons to support a candidate: Competence on economics and the private sector–the main problem we face today–and proven executive experience in turning around failing organizations and making them work.

    The problem is that this may be what Romney’s supporters are looking for, but it’s evidently not what you’re looking for.

    You see 2012 as a titanic battle between freedom and socialism, and you want a candidate who will fight on those stark ideological terms.

    As a Romney supporter, I just don’t see 2012 that way. I see the economy as a problem to be fixed by a competent manager who (unlike Obama) puts the private sector first. And by fixing that problem, restoring full employment and prosperity, he and the rest of the GOP build credibility with the public for lots more stuff later on.

  • bs61

    in the exit polls yesterday for ‘understanding what the average American’ faces. That’s pretty large, I’m not familiar with how theiir past polls have played out so take it for what you will. I wish that he would take it to the media and speak out more against O personally.

  • malvernpa

    6/3 liberal court

  • texastaxpayer

    I am always curious when someone says Romney would be better than Obama on what they base the statement. I personally disagree with you as Romney has shown an aversion to honesty second only perhaps to Obama. But I appreciative you answering all the same. Are you a vet? I ask because of your screen name.

  • pieter

    What do you believe should be the course of the primary, vote your principled conscience or Romney as the inevitable nominee?

    I don’t think I could live with myself per the latter.

  • Viet71

    That’s not a character flaw. Screwing your base, as Obama has, is a character flaw. Obama has shafted his base very deceitfully, knowing they have nowhere else to go.

    Not a big Romney fan here. Being in Connecticut, which will go for Obama, I won’t (and won’t have to) vote for Romney. Thinking about writing in Sarah Palin.

  • Viet71

    no text

  • countryroad2012

    When I read the comments, I think to myself this was the same stuff they were saying about Regan way back when. The fact is that people voted for Romney and he won. No one held a gun to their heads to vote for him. You may not like it but a majority of people voted for Romney. Santorum and Gingrich have to convince people to vote for them and they have not been able to do that.

  • AceInTX

    I refuse to give up the fight….Santorum or Gingrich or Paul does not have to beat Romney outright…They just need to combine for enough delegates to prevent Romney from getting 1100 +/- delegates so we’ll have another shot at it at the convention….

    After 2008, I refuse to believe we’re stuck with another loser against an eminently beatable President who makes Jimmy freaking Carter look like a genius in comparison.

    Damn the establishment for putting us in this position…Damn them all

  • Ann_W

    Looking at candidates in an election and trying to project how they will behave is a crapshoot people come to a different conclusions That doesn’t mean they have a “mental defect”. You are lowering the level of civility in this country when you call names instead of making your argument.

  • pieter

    Lying is a character flaw when an electorate is asked to have faith and trust in a candidate. Romney is an abject failure in this regard. He has propped himself up with money and lies.

    Your views in this matter are practical but unnecessary. Consider what you lose by forgiving such behavior.

  • snappy101

    Why not say what it appears Romney’s real problem is. He wins large urban areas. I don’t understand why the news media breaks down every other demographic but doesn’t address urban versus suburban/rural when it comes to his support. Those urban counties are going to vote Democrat in the general election.

  • AceInTX

    Ron Paul for over 40% in VA for Pete’s sake which tell me there are a good 30% of VA voters who couldn’t stomach the idea of voting for Romney.

    How does this play into the general election strategy?

  • joereagan

    As of right now:

    Romney: 368
    Non-Romney: 312

    Romney is heading for a razor-thin delegate majority.

    Up until the voting started, the contest was proceeding in a fairly positive, respectful, issue-based manner. The Republicans were making themselves look good. Every candidate got a chance, some rose and fell, and by the time Iowa drew near, voters had begun to settle on Newt Gingrich. He had run a positive campaign and positioned himself as a statesman, strictly avoiding attacking the other candidates, while displaying a strong grasp of the issues. He was way ahead of Romney in the national polls, and was tied with Obama head to head.

    Then the Romney campaign and the GOP elite decided to destroy the party. Romney did it to win, the GOP elite did it to kill of the Tea Party and re-establish their dominance. And they’ve succeeded. Romney is winning, while being increasingly loathed by conservatives and independents alike. The GOP elite have their control back, over a shrinking and dying party with a base that’s been carpet-bombed into disgust and apathy.

  • Ann_W

    They couldn’t figure out how to get on the ballot. Shouldn’t you worry about a campaign organization who can’t figure out how to even get in the game? It says a lot about organization and priorities.

  • joereagan

    Is that his campaign strategy in the primaries has been to drive down conservative turnout with negative ads. And they expect us to respond to that by showing up in November?

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

    Pols can state less than the whole truth. That is fair. But when they state known untruths, this would be what we call sin! Baptist speaks…

  • texastaxpayer

    I just don’t see how a 47th out of 50 ranking instills confidence in his economic prowess? He has had exactly one job similar to the presidency and that was governor of Massachusetts. It is in this role you find his greatest failures. His social (Romneycare) and environmental (carbon caps) policies drove billions in deficits and cost tens of thousands of jobs. You are right the economy is in trouble and we need to do something. But Romney has already been given a shot during a growth period as a chief executive and he failed, miserably so. I read his “plan” and frankly it was more of the same. Fiddling with minor tax rates, progressive breaks in cap gains though nothing targeting the biggest investor groups and nothing to slow the growth of entitlements the largest contributor to our debt. Romney offers nothing new in a time we can’t afford more of the same.

    I won’t get into his business record “turning around companies” or his patently dishonest campaign. Honestly I shouldn’t have to, if economics are why you support him. Please do some research and then compare his plan to Newts. One has a chance the other may as well have been written by Obama.

  • Ann_W

    How did they force all those people to vote for Romney? Was there a gun involved? Or were people simply making the best choice they could think of between three very flawed candidates?

  • pieter

    Do you not find it odd that the signatures were gone over with the unprecedented level of scrutiny that occurred this election cycle?

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

    the record is clear

  • Ann_W

    Do you “lose by forgiving such behavior” as repeatedly lying to and cheating on your wife and not supporting your children and lying in a campaign? Or is it just one candidates lies that count in this case?

  • texastaxpayer

    Thanks for the service. I appreciate your sacrifice.

  • paco12348

    I was sorry to see OK going for Santorum. Have nothing against him but I wanted Newt. I also think Newt is the best one to voice the problems facing America. All of us recognize the problems with the economy but Newt is the only one seeing the considerable danger from the Liberal Federal Judges. Like he said, it won’t matter who is President if we don’t change the Judges or get rid of them. They give the Left everything they want. America is filled to the brim with people and Organizations working to change America, to get rid of the Constitution and to destroy our Freedoms. If we don’t have a President that understands all the dangers facing America then it won’t matter our much our economy improves.
    Newt is the only one speaking to all the dangers. The Republican Leaders do not want Newt because he will shake up BOTH Parties and let the Nuts fall out. When ANY Party seeks to choose the Candidate for the People, it’s a Party that has grown arrogant and dismissive of the people. The Republican Party committed that offense when they pushed McCain and now Romney. I don’t like being led or dismissed.

  • texastaxpayer

    ;)

  • westcoastpatriette

    We have to keep Santorum and Newt in the game to prevent Romney from getting the requisite number of delegates. It is totally doable, too.

  • joereagan

    Voter turnout has been way down from 2008. The Tea Party was already built around people disenchanted with the Republicans. Romney and the elite did just enough to destroy the other candidates and convince those voters they had no option and should stay home. If Romney and the elite had not done what they did to Gingrich in Iowa and Florida, Newt would be CRUISING to the nomination. The massive turnout in South Carolina is what this race would have looked like without the destruction of Gingrich.

    Once that was done, there was no time for another candidate to rise. Conservatives (Perry, Palin, etc) had rallied around Newt, but once he was done in that was it. Santorum was the last man standing, and that’s why he still gets the conservative protest vote, but it’s too late for him to pull it together.

  • pieter

    What exactly is Romney going to point at to indicate that he is the answer for what ails this nation? The money he got from the taxpayer (fed funds) for the olympics, romneycare, appointment of liberal judges, or perhaps his support of planned parenthood?

    He is not the answer.

  • pieter

    Unlike some, I believe in those that admit weakness, seek forgiveness, and continue the painful journey of life with an attempt at humility. Those that continue to hold his trespasses against him are not of the understanding that is Christian.

    His daughters have forgiven and I assume so has the Lord.

    Let it go.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    1) Learn what a Jacksonian is. Where their habitats typically are, what they believe in. Watching him reach out to rural, lower-income conservatives or Reagan Democrats is like watching the NYT Magazine paly a game of “Conservatives In The Mist.”

    2) He needs to mend fences with “Nuke” and get him onboard as a Veep. This will take several weeks of butt-kissing and ingratiating. Use Newt’s ego as a fulcrum. Make the man feel wanted and very important. Praise his vast intellect and reading list.

    Do that, and continue spending Santorum into the dirt, and Romney could emerge in charge of a relatively united GOP.

  • joereagan

    Right now Romney is winning a thin majority of delegates with four candidates in the race, in proportional contests. The time for Gingrich or Santorum to consider dropping is around the beginning of April when the winner-take-all contests come up. Unfortunately, most of those states are liberal states that will go for Romney now, and Obama in November.

    In short, it will be extremely difficult to deny Romney a majority, but his majority will be very narrow. Half the delegates at the convention will not be there for him.

  • JSobieski

    Given that his negative ads outnumbered his positive ads by more than a factor of 20 to 1, I think we all know that Romney’s “accomplishments” are a thin read.

  • Ann_W

    Who are the elite anyway? They are always out there doing horrible things, though.

    I remember before Iowa and before Florida people kept saying Romney had no passion that he needed to show that he was tough enough to win. Then he did what it took to win– what the nominee will face in the general election– what Newt did when he wanted to win SC. Now all of a sudden Romney is too mean and evil. If anything Romney said was untrue Newt would run a counter ad and it would get people fired up. He never was able to actually explain what was so untrue about the ads. That’s not destruction, it’s a political campaign. It ain’t beanbag.

  • JSobieski

    He is winning voters who have been political hostages for years

  • Ann_W

    If the campaigns were organized enough they could have done what the Romney and Paul campaigns were able to do.

  • pieter

    “unprecedented level of scrutiny”

  • acat

    In prior years, if a candidate had 12,500 signatures, they’d be spot-checked, a few thrown out, and the candidate would be on the ballot. If a candidate had 15,000 signatures, they’d skip the spot-check.

    This year, if a candidate had 12,500 signatures, they did a line-by-line check… but if a candidate had 15,000 they still skipped any checking.

    The numbers didn’t change, but that was never the point, eh?

    Mew

  • tgm317

    Romney is a Moonbat !

    (See www.boortz.com – search MOONBAT.)

    Romney is a Moon bat of the Jerry Brown, Govenor of California, order.

    Romney was Govenor of TAX-UH -Chusetts and that is too Liberal.

    Romney has been continuously running for President for more that 6 years and STILL can not find a majority in the primary voting.

    We have seen the current President default on his campaign promises.

    We have seen the current President inherit a bad economy and deficit and inflict more debt on this country than all other Presidents … combined.

    We have seen the current President bow before the Saudi King.

    We have seen the current President apologize to radical nations for policies of the United States.

    We have heard the current President say that our economy should suffer as bad as European economies.

    We have read books, written by the current President, that proclaimed a devotion to Marxism and Fascism..

    And on & on & on & on …. and we still haven’t awakened to see that politics and life as we have know them are under attack.

    Apparently, as a nation. the Citizens of the United States do not believe empirical evidence when it is laid bare before us.

    Now comes Romney … telling us that he can be all things to all people.
    Now comes the RNC …telling us that Romney is the answer!

    NO!

    Once elected a president is in office for the duration.

    Romney is a Moonbat!

    No!

    If a President goes completely nuts, we can only standby, slap our heads and say, “Why didn’t we see that?

    Romney is a Moonbat!

    Let’s stop the insanity!

    There is no good argument for electing Romney.

    Romney is a Moonbat!

  • scook84

    I will not be supporting RINO’s again. Not now, Not ever. No Mitt. No How. No Way.

  • Ann_W

    My only point.

  • Ann_W

    nt

  • goodgovernance

    I can just see the greatest convention ever happening this summer in Tampa. Mitt, rising from a pool of fiery molten metal, first too brilliant to look at, then cooling down to… THE PURE, UNALLOYED CONSERVATIVE! All trace impurities burned away!

    Would be a heck of a show!

  • acat

    …but yeah, I think that’s our option.

    Mew

  • Ann_W

    ;) Seriously though, I’m sure there were models of how much of a cushion you need to make sure you had the required number.

  • Ender

    Mitt Romney was well down in Ohio for the last few weeks and only came back to parity in literally last few days. People were saying that if he manages to come back from that deficit he will be all set. Now he came back and won, but the goal posts have been moved, and people are saying he didn’t win by enough.

    The people who are making these arguments think that no one will notice. I hope Newt stays in to spite them.

  • texastaxpayer

    but the scrutiny rules were changed. Essentially putting Perry and Gingrich signatures in the hands of Romney’s campaign chair to be “validated” while Mitt could fill pages with Mickey Mouse if he chose as his weren’t going to be checked at all.

    Hey I am sure that was just a coincidence like Romney’s campaigns implication in Nevada moving up its date, Florida being proportional and then winner take all and Michigan’s reallocation of its delegate.

    How do these crazy conspiracies theories get started anyway?

  • pieter

    I suggest people honestly look at the candidates, vote their principled beliefs, and let it be sorted out at the convention.

    In this modern era, it is reasonable that the general campaign can be won after a convention by someone of Speaker Gingrich’s vision and eloquence.

    Romney as the inevitable will never fire up the base or the independents. Romney will assuredly be a worse failure than McCain.

  • Ender

    2

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Romney hasn’t been forced on people by the establishment, he has been forced on them by the voters. Forty one percent of the people who have voted cast their votes for Mitt Romney. For Santorum to have more votes than Romney he would need to nearly all of Newt’s votes. Santorum and Gingrich have a math problem now, the winner take all states left are: California, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, Utah, Washington DC, and Wisconsin. That is 388 delagates and a more than likely Romney sweep. In addition, there is a very good chance Romney wins in Connecticut by a large enough margin to flip it to winner take all. Those 413 delagates put Romney most of the way home. Now look at Santorum and Gingrich both sitting just north of a 100 delegates and then look at that list of winner take all states. There is simply no scenario this side of Fantasy Island that equals Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum or Ron Paul as the nominee of the party. Does anyone seriously believe a brokered convention has an outcome that would lead to a nomination of Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum or Ron Paul? I would have wished the voters had chosen differently but they did not. Mitt Romney will win the nomination and I pray he defeats Barack Obama in November.

  • acat

    The cushion, in previous years, was 12,500.

    As most campaigns pay their signature-gatherers, there’s a cost difference between 12,500 and 15,000 that, unless there’s a clear reason, they won’t want to spend.

    The Paul campaign is much better at finding and organizing volunteers – college-age folks, mostly. The Romney campaign has, as their VA campaign chair, the guy responsible for changing the rules.

    There’s no clear smoking gun indicating rules were broken, but it sure looks like Romney’s campaign had a clear handle on the margin they needed to clear .. one has to wonder where they got it.

    Mew

  • Ender

    I think it is time for Romney and Newt people to make up.

  • salemst

    Erick, Romney won Michigan by 8%. The 3% margin was only because Santorum, Michael Moore, and Obama got enough Democrats to vote to swell their numbers to 1 out of 9. Without Democrats, Romney wins by an impressive 8%.

    Romney beat Santorum in Ohio with Catholics roughly 40-32% and tied with conservatives. I don’t see where you say he doesn’t resonate with them. As for blue collars, they’ll vote for the nominee over Obama. There’s only one group within the GOP base Romney can’t win. We know who they are.

    No candidate is perfect. You and I are both across the board conservatives on economics, defense, values, illegals/anti amnesty, and pro ptivate sector jobs creation. The difference is I live in Massachusetts, saw how Romney governed versus how he campaigned in 2002, and trust he’s a reliable conservative. You don’t.

  • texastaxpayer

    Nt.

  • shocka

    and if Obama Light (Romney) gets the nomination I would vote for him, but he will definitely shell out a lot more money because people like me won’t do any more than vote for him. He can’t forget the grassroots volunteer.

  • rabun1016

    “His background of chop shopping businesses is ?creative destruction? and they flat out ignore the Medicare fraud and under funded pensions he left the tax payers on the hook for while making millions personally.” Sorry, pal, you have the wrong blog.

    You don’t need to like Romney, but thousands of people invest their money and try and make more by improving inefficient businesses, and doing it all legally.

  • texastaxpayer

    The curiosity is killing me..

  • pieter

    I would if such were presented as instances where they admitted their sin(s) and soulfully asked for forgiveness. Perhaps you can give me examples where the other candidates did similarly to Speaker Gingrich. I would think Santorum has a couple…

    My point was that Christians should not hold the matter of infidelity as a decision point. He has been forgiven by most of those that matter.

    Perhaps you do not believe in forgiveness. Last I checked it is the centerpiece of our relationship with the Lord. It is hope and renewal in a life of pain and weakness.

  • acat

    as moving the goalposts (or otherwise shifting the argument) is something the Romney supporters are rather notorious for.

    Romney won Ohio and Michigan and Florida .. all “do or die” States, and continues to gain delegates fastest. However. Romney is doing so by out-spending by more than 5-1, a feat he cannot sustain in the general election, and he’s not getting much of a margin with all that spend.

    The conclusion is he’s not a strong candidate, and if he’s our nominee the general election becomes Obama’s to lose, as Romney has no chance unless the economy remains bad and Obama makes several unforced errors.

    It’s not that the goal posts are moving, it’s that Romney is doing the bare minimum and is getting past the goals on technicalities, rather than on clear, indisputable victories.

    Mew

  • JSobieski

    With the exception of New Hampshire, Rommey seems to be winning primaries/caucuses in states for which he has no shot of winning in November.

    Romney will get crushed in Michigan in November. In Ohio, he relied on Democrat areas for his victory over Santorum.

    I will vote for Romney in November if necessary, but I think he is the least electable nominee in my lifetime.

    You don’t appeal to moderates by putting squishes out there as candidates.

    You can appeal to moderates by putting out candidates who have personal qualities that impress moderates/independents for reasons having nothing to do with ideology . This is what Obama did in 2008.

    You can also appeal to moderates by trying to move the entire in a rightward direction, like Reagan did in 1980.

    Romney is incapable of doing either option worth a lick, and will be wrapped around like a pretzel in the debates with Obama given Romneycare, cap and trade, etc.

    We are in serious trouble.

  • liveforadrenaline

    But texastaxpayer above mentioned how he has a bad record on the economy.

    In my mind, he won’t do what is needed in running the government, either.

    Right now, we are in trouble, not because the government is not being run efficiently, but because it has grown out of control. Whole departments need to be axed. The mission has to be changed. The scope has got to be set 180 degrees. Running it efficiently would mean that he can cut a few ounces when tons need to be cut. It’s not enough, and not even close.

  • JSobieski

    It is clear that even marginal Romney supporters find his advertising blitzs to be annoying and dispiriting.

  • texastaxpayer

    Pointing out Romney has a history of ripping of tax payers is not an indictment of an entire industry. It’s an indictment of the sleezy business practices of one man Mitt Romney. So try the “anti-capitalist” crap with someone else PAL…

  • Ender

    As Romney will be fighting for a completely different set of voters – voters who are not hard core conservatives or evangelicals. It’s difficult for Romney to battle Santorum and Newt among those two groups because they are perceived as more socially conservative. Independents and voters in the center are the types of voters Romney can get because he’s gotten them before in MA.

    The point is Romney has to grind out these victories in constituencies more favorable to his opponents, but against Obama it is a completely different fight because the constituencies he will be fighting for are much more favorable to a former governor of MA.

  • SoFiMil

    and causing a brokered convention?

  • JSobieski

    After years of people running on a platform of executive brank inefficiency and a broken economy, the platform of efficiency and fixing the economy is absolutely BRILLILIANT.

    Eliminating capital gains taxes on people making less than $200k is similarly BRILLIANT.

    Repealing Obamacare because it is working pretty well as Romneycare in Mass is also BRILLIANT.

    We had better hope that Romney is purposely running a stealth campaign of generic cliches, and that his intentions are actually serious.

    Smart money says such hopes would be futile.

  • Scope

    and something I expect only Romney and Paul supporters to spout.

    All the way up through the 2008 primary, if a candidate got at least 10,000 signatures, they made the VA ballot. If you got less, you didn’t get on the ballot. Before this year, NO signatures were verified at all, as the VA GOP who reviews the signatures didn’t have the ability to verify any signatures. They were not hooked into the VA voter database at all. That was absolutely verified in a public statement by the previous VA GOP chair. When the VA GOP hooked into the system, there were a high number of errors detected. That was one of the questions that was brought up by some here in VA, the question as to the systems reliability. Of course the GOP chair said that it was working fine.

    Again, as per the VA GOP chair, an email was sent out to the candidates in October, suggesting that they get at least 15,000 signatures to escape needing verification. From what I’ve read, that was the first communication with the candidates as to the new verification process.. The signatures were due into the state in early November. Of course when you have the Lt. Gov., who is close to the VA GOP chair as he helped Bolling win the LT. Gov. election in 10, and he “loaned” Romney his campaign team, he knew what the requirements would be even before they were announced to the other candidates. As you can see by the VA primary results yesterday, Ron Paul has a very active organization in VA. Romney didn’t wipe Ron Paul out in VA as was predicted. Paul’s healthy showing in VA is a smack in the face to Romney, especially as he was endorsed by the VA Gov. who spent a lot of campaign time with Romney. Not only does it show a weakness for Romney in VA., it also shows a weakness of the Gov. and the LT Gov who are both banking on a president Romney to further their political careers.

    Rather than just spouting the same meme coming from the Romney and Paul supporters that the other campaigns were disorganized and incompetent, try looking at the actual facts as they played out. But, just as the Romney people have no great reasons to stick with their guy, other than buying into the “inevitable” garbage, the games played in VA will be gladly denied as well. Romney doesn’t have the first ounce of principles or facts that he has stuck firmly with, and neither do his supporters. Birds of a feather.

  • Ender

    in 2008, so how can you make your point??? It’s easy to say things while ignoring the facts.

    Current vote total without 100% counted: 1,180,000+
    2008 Primary: 1,045,000

    Yet if we listen to you the turnout went down. Can we please argue using facts?

  • rabun1016

    One thing you usually find is that people who write dozens of entries a day have very little worthwhile to say. If they would read a little more and write a little less, it would benefit them and all.

  • liveforadrenaline

    Watching that new “Doomsday Preppers” show on National Geographic channel.

    Although I know that sticking my head in the sand is wrong, I’m just not seeing a path upward yet. And I think a LOT of people are getting discouraged. Hopefully something will pop up to give some hope, soon.

  • pieter

    “We know who they are.”

    I’m fairly certain that conservatives are having difficulty swallowing this bitter pill. Did not the Bush clan fix us of our willing acceptance of moderates?

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Energy…for all his faults Romney is solid there, Lisa Jackson won’t be running EPA out of Al Gore’s office. Here is one article on the move Obama’s EPA led by Jackson is starting to make on fracking.

    http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/environment/story/2011-12-08/epa-fracking-pollution/51745004/1

    Obama has clearly stated in the past he would regulate coal fired electrical plants out of business and his EPA led by Jackson is leading the fight there, Dr. Steven Chu said 5 dollar per gallon gas hurts but dependence on oil is worse. Obama would rather turn the Department of Energy into a venture capitalist already to the turn of over a billion dollars to failed companies like Solyndra, Abound Solar, and Beacon Energy. His budget calls for billions more in “investment” in the boondoogle. Meanwhile, his EPA attacks coal companies and oil and gas companies with regulation after regulation. Obama for his dream of green energy America has no problem with Americans paying higher at the pump or to heat their homes. He thinks nothing of the loss of jobs in those industries. Romney is not the best the Republican Party has to offer but he will be the one left standing and I pray that he defeats Barack Obama in November.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    I still think the winning gambit for Romney is make Rand Paul the VP nominee.

    He pulls in the Ron Paul votes (or at least keeps Ron Paul from openly running for office).

    He pulls in Tea Partiers since Rand is one of them.

  • texastaxpayer

    But you could try and escape from the guy holding the gun to your head making read my posts and free yourself from my mundane ramblings…

    Just sayin….

  • liveforadrenaline

    Because he has no track record of being anything other than Progressive.

    He’s maybe just a little less socialist/Marxist in his idealism, because he’s a strong supporter of capitalism, even though he supported cap and trade and free market health care and crapola like that.

    His tax plans and everything else play into the hands of progressives, and in my mind, the Republican party is no better off than just taking people like Lindsay Graham or Lisa Murkowski or Scott Brown and throwing them in the White House.

  • liveforadrenaline

    “didn’t support free market health care”

  • liveforadrenaline

    Any state that requires 400 signatures in each precinct or whatever it was at such an early date needs to dump that reg or statute by next election.

  • pieter

    Is the only argument of Romney’s viability is that a prolonged primary will assure another 4 years of Obama?

    I find it hard to believe that he is the best candidate. It is harder to argue that he’s sufficient to beat someone that does not differ significantly with the president whether comparing policy or integrity.

    I agree with earlier statements that Romney as the nominee is a disaster regardless of possibility of a convention determination.

  • http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

    Thank you, Mitt Romney, for ensuring four more years of Barack Obama.

    The die is cast. There will not be enough of America left to recover after this loss. We will certainly have to secede or revolt and establish a new nation in order to obtain individual liberty hereafter.

    I want to punch whoever started the canard about Romney’s electability. Nearly anybody would have been better.

  • unclefred

    If there was/is a candidate for whom you would work were they to be the nominee, then you need to work for whoever is selected.

    In 2012 we must elect ABO, and if that means all out activism for someone we don’t really like so be it. Four more years of Obama, and you won’t recognize our country, and if we are able to restore it, that restoration won’t happen before your grandchildren are grandparents.

  • http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

    … than to imagine that a TP Vice President gives them anything but a slightly higher profile. The office of VP has very little influence, and under Romney, it will have none.

  • uncmike

    but will vote for Newt when my state’s primary comes aroud since Perry is no longer an active candidate. The perceived “flaws” of Gov. Perry seem to me to pale in light of the remaining crop of candidates (yes, Newt included) and I still believe Perry would have really been the best candidate based on a real, visible and long record of conservative accomplishment.

  • joereagan

    You’re just not very smart, or very poorly informed. By “elite”, we’re talking about the RNC, politicians in Washington, House and Senate leadership, party insiders, political operatives, and so forth. They all unloaded on Gingrich, particularly before Florida. Sadly, Fox News (meaning Roger Ailes) is also firmly in that camp.

    As for running ads, you’ve got to be kidding. When your opponent has enough money to run 50 ads for every one of yours, you can’t counter the lies. And there were many, many lies in those Romney ads.

  • APA Guy

    Do you honestly think that President Mitt Romney will submit budgets adding $1.5 trillion per year to the national debt?

    Do you honestly believe that President Mitt Romney will allow gas to remain at $4-5/gallon?

    Do you honestly believe that President Mitt Romney will turn his back on Israel?

    If you do, I feel a sorrow for you. You have given up on the country entirely. Many of us have not.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Ohio, I know it doesn’t fit the narrative you want to tell but Romney won big in Hamilton County which delivered the 2004 election to George W. Bush, people forget until a big win there W was actually losing his reelection bid and thus John Kerry would have been the 44th President of the United States not Barack Obama. He also won the rust belt counties around Akron and Youngstown which was frankly an upset. He won the battleground states of Virginia, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida. Large LDS populations actually give him a firewall in the West. Does anyone really believe Georgia is in play or Tennessee or Oklahoma because not even in his wildest fantasies does David Axelrod believe the deep South is going to vote for Barack Obama at the end of the day when all the musis stops and you have to make that A or B choice. Now back to Hamilton County, Ohio – no county in the US is more important to a Republican running for President and Mitt Romney rolled up a huge win there vis a vis Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich. The better question is has Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich shown any strength outside of states/counties that my Austrailian Shepherd, Sydney, would lose to provided she ran as a Republican (and she would, my pride and joy is a smart girl).

  • liveforadrenaline

    And the problem is that our country is becoming more democracy and less of a republic.

    At this point, I don’t see ANYONE in Washington representing my conservative beliefs.

    Why?

    Because NONE of the conservatives actually have any power there. No one sits as Chair of any important Committees. No one can get bills to the floor.

    For all the yapping of a Ron Paul or a Michele Bachmann or whoever, none of them have any teeth.

  • http://www.plumbbobblog.com Plumb_Bob

    “How did they force all those people to vote for Romney? ”

    By floating a lie about his electability.

    Romney is arguably the LEAST electable of the serious candidates.

    Note that I do not consider Ron Paul a serious candidate.

  • joereagan

    It is either dishonest or ignorant to deny what has happened. Elites in Washington and in the media have poured out every ounce of influence they have to push Romney, and Romney has outspent all of his opponents by massive margins. To claim that he’s the beloved choice of the people is laughable garbage, and beneath contempt.

  • miconservative

    but has not completely closed the deal. I believe is main problem is his message. Romney seems to be a bit of a robot, feed the data in and he spits it out. That is fine and dandy if the data going in is good. Unfortunately for Romney the data going in is terrible and has won him no love or super committed support from nearly anyone. He has been completely reduced to blistering negative attacks to push back opponents and eek out wins because he inspires no passion.

    As soon as he has secured the nomination he needs to fire his entire message team and bring some people in who know how to connect with real people, and not just on a gutteral negative level. Or at least he needs to bring in new people and layer those he already has.

    I think Romney and his team have done an incredible job on opposition research, but spent little time putting together a compelling reason to vote for Romney. Since he doesn’t really stand for anything he has tried to stand for everything. Still don’t know what the compelling reason to vote for him is.

    As they said on SNL this weekend….he is the candidate of eeeeh…I guess.

  • Common_Cents

    Of course it looks much worse now, since we’ve been on a GOP circular firing squad and haven’t really spent a minute focusing on obama.

    Another 4 years of an extremely radical(we haven’t seen anything yet) obama in a 2nd term should scare the hell out of every American.

  • AceInTX

    we haven’t even awarded half the delegates yet and we’re crowning Romney!

    Romney has yet to win a single souther state and he’s lost most of the swing states to Santorum. Once again the establishment, (Those are the guys we keep being told doesn;t exist…you know…the ones who set the primary schedule)….once again the establishment has rigged the game with big blue states front loaded so the most liberal Republican will build a giant delagate lead early…and leaving big red states to vote last.

    This is what I see happening if people refuse to buy the, “Romney has won” meme….Gingrich will roll in all the souther states, and Santorum will roll in Texas and catholic states denying Romney the delegates needed to win the convention.

    Of course, the RNC committeement are free to vote for whom they want and they can force Romney down our throats at the convention…(most of them have endorsed Romney)…but like the Dem’s super Delegates…I think they’ll be too afraid of the rank and file to pull such a naked power move and work to find a consensus conservative if we can get it to a brokered convention.

    I’ve said before the establishement controls the conventions and conservatives will lose in a brokered convention…but at this point…I’m ready to start praying for one in order to avoid a Romney nomination because I honestly believe if hew is our nominee…it will be the death of the Republican Party at a minimum and the Republic at worse.

  • miconservative

    Alaska, Idaho, Arizona.

  • nepanyrush

    So far, among 22 states that have voted, Newt has won 2 states, and they happen to be his home state and the adjacent state. In many of the elections, he has not even been in second place, but 3rd or 4th. With proportional voting in much of the southern states, I do not see any scenario where Gingrich could possibly win. At this point, EE is right in that Gingrich’s only role is as a spoiler, costing Santorum any shot at winning.

    Some polls show that the bulk of the Gingrich voters would to Santorum. If accurate, Santorum would have won Ohio yesterday and might have won Alaska. Even Georgia and Michigan might have been in Santorum’s column. If Gingrich continues, Santorum also will not have a scenario to win.

    I realize that Santorum is not a favorite on RedState. He posted a column on RedState critical of the Gingrich idea of a moon base and Santorum was excortiated by the readership. Early on, there were articles after articles, including from EE, blasting Santorum. But at this point, Santorum is the only candidate with a shot against Romney. At some point, conservatives have to make a practical choice here and give the Gingrich the hint that he needs to withdraw.

    I don’t dislike Romney at all — I think he is more conservative than most give him credit for, or at least trust some of those who have supported him the past or present (Coulter, Rush, etc.). But I have experience with Santorum and think he would be a great president, great candidate, and is a true conservative. I would love Santorum’s picks for the Supreme Court and I think he can appear to the blue collar workers and the Reagan Democrats and beat Obama. But he will not get a chance should Gingrich stay in the race.

  • unclefred

    If Romney offered the VP slot to Newt, I think he would do what he felt was in the country’s best interest.

    However, because of the content of the negative ads that Romney’s super pac has run against Newt (or Santorum for that matter) I doubt that adding either of them as VP is a option for Romney.

    Offering Newt a cabinet position say head of the DOE would be a right fine idea though and would play into the whole $2.50 a gallon theme.

  • Scope

    you would look at what areas in Ohio had a higher voter turnout. I don’t have the Ohio numbers, but in other races such as Fla., voter turn out was down in all of the areas that Romney won, but was higher in areas that he didn’t win. If you looked at the map filling in last night with Santorum purple, and Romney Red, geographically it would have appeared that Santorum was winning most of the state. The Red areas that gave Romney the advantage were the most highly populated bigger city areas which most often vote for Democrats. So what big gain was it for Romney to win the Democrat strongholds, but lose the rest of the state? The results of Ohio prove that the bellewhether state will be won by Obama. Santorum actually has a better chance of winning Ohio over Romney in the general.

  • irishgirl

    That leaves a mark.

  • miconservative

    Romney won MI by 3%. You don’t know who those dems voted for. If it was dems that put Santorum over the top, why did Santorum win all the GOP congressional districts and Romney win all the Dem districts? (with very few exceptions.

    Dem turnout was not up in Michigan as opposed to years gone by, in fact it was about exactly the same or lower than what should be expected. I wish the Romney team would shut up about this and move on. You won Michigan for Christ sake, take the victory and be happy.

  • Common_Cents

    As we go into winner take all states, they have to have outright wins against romney. They need some pact to either split up the states and each focus on beating Romney in different states. Divide and conquer could yield more delegates than romney and have leverage at the convention.

    Otherwise, they’d have to go at each other til one drops. If Gingrich can win AL and MS next week, he’ll get a boost once again. I think santorum will throw whatever money he has in the ring this next week or two to try and close out Gingrich.

  • pieter

    I do believe he is an emblem of a status quo that needs to be discarded.

    Do you honestly believe that his interests are not to serve his cronies rather than what is best for the future of this republic?

    Speaker Gingrich challenged a sitting republican president over taxes. Both Santorum and Romney are “team players”. I don’t think any of us are on their “team”.

    I choose the guy who steps on toes, gets hated, and has a vision suited for the welfare of our grandchildren.

  • liveforadrenaline

    So he will be sucking a lot of the Libertarian branch of the Tea Party vote, anyway.

  • unclefred

    I think that Rand Paul’s ability to articulate the TP message directly to the president and represent that in cabinet meetings etc would have far more influence on Romney than you imagine.

    However, I think that we are better off with Rand Paul in the Senate, than as VP.

  • Common_Cents

    I probably am not alone in that assumption. I see reports that Gingrich losing support could benefit Romney.

    I’d support Romney if Gingrich gets out. Mitt has a shot, Rick would not.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    and stay above the Washington slop, he needs his version of Darth Cheney. He needs a helper who will gleefully crush somebody’s nuts and feed them to his pet Pekineese. Gingrich is totally that guy. You never would want to end up on his s**t-list.

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

    Ummm, no. Romney has cleaned Santorum’s clock with Catholics at every opportunity. Santorum carries Protestants.

    While I really don’t like Romney – at this point I’m a Newt supporter – we can probably hold the House with him at the top of the ticket. Put Santorum there and we it’s gonna be ’64 all over again. The guy is a cheap empty sweater who will cost us not only the WH, but the House and give O a larger margin in the Senate. You’ll likely see a SCOTUS nomination and putting Santorum at the top will insure a hard left nominee and you can kiss ever getting Roe overturned off for another generation.

    Santorum == as stupid a nominee as Republicans have EVER put up. Makes Dole and McCain look pretty good.

  • liveforadrenaline

    Why do you think he will start now? Why do you think he can get us to a balanced budget?

    I do believe you are right about him lowering gas prices.

    I do believe you are right on him helping Israel.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and that is the fact that signature-checking was done by the party, rather than by state-officials.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …but i agree that perry shouldn’t have dropped-out, if possible.

  • Scope

    are the same constituencies Obama already won nationwide in 08. Obama has a huge media advantage, money advantage, incumbency advantage, and a likability advantage. Romney is sinking with Independents while Obama is regaining them at least to a degree. Romney has yet to prove that he can rally the base of the party to his side.

    From some of the exist polling data from Ohio, Romney won a plurality with older over 65 voters, the most affluent voters, and the highly educated voters. If I am not mistaken, they would fall into the 1% category. They also fall into the widely touted highest income tax category, which the Republicans like to scream is the smallest percent of tax payers. How can Romney win the smallest number of voters? There are a heck of a lot more middle to low income earners in sheer number who so far are not supporting him. Half the country is receiving some sort of government check and they will vote for the liberals to keep redistributing the wealth their way. That’s a no brainer.

  • jon11

    TN, where i am born and raised, voted for an obnoxious, angry, big labour take- one- for the team catholic last night.

    for a lot of people here, sadly, and i know them personally, the mormon thing is something they just can;t get passed. So i get that mitt didn’t win here.

    Its stupid, but i get it.

    What i don’t get is why my state chose santorum over newt.

    anyway, erick is right. this is a mess.

    neither newt or santorum can win at this point…based on delegates. Its proportional so even when rick ekes out a win romney gets as many delegates and santorum gains no ground.

    but they can stay in and blow it for the party, which is what they are going to do.

  • kentucky

    Romney is doing very well in urban/suburban areas, and poorly in rural areas this primary season. Urban/suburban swing voters were very important to Obama in 2008. If some of those votes are taken from Obama, does anyone think he will make up for it with gains in rural areas? I sure don’t. In fact, he’ll probably do worse in rural areas this time because 2008 was an especially rotten election for the GOP, with voter anger toward Bush and a crashing economy.

  • capedconservative

    Only two candidates running for president have chosen a path of “government knows best” and that government should be able to dictate the actions of the people…. Obama with ObamaCare and Romney with RomneyCare.

    Willard will NOT CUT SPENDING…. He is a big government politician just like Obama. All the insider republicans want is control of the chairmanships so THEY can determine where the dollars will go.

    Willard will NOT REPEAL OBAMA/ROMNEYCARE. As stated plainly by two of his underlings.

    A candidate that is DIFFERENT from Obama would have a chance. Romney is simply a different flavor of Obama. The anti-Obama enthusiasm will be lost on him as a candidate. We will have turnout worse than the RINO that beat him last time. Not much of a campaign platform to be just a little less of a socialist, big government candidate.

    Romney is very likely to cause not only 4 more years of Obama, but NOT gaining control over the senate and loss of the house because of miserable turnout.

    CC

  • redstateneck

    While the media outlets would prefer a horse race for easily manufactured news, its over mathematically. Santorum is vetted for 2020, gets own show on fox or EWTN. Gingrich sells more books and increases speaking fee. Palin sees her fifteen minutes in the spotlight end. Romney wins in landslide with Republicans taking the Senate. Soul of America saved.

  • liveforadrenaline

    To be any kind of influence to a man who has lead countless business meetings and influenced a bazillion companies and whatnot. He hasn’t even gotten himself appointed as ranking member of any Committee in the Senate.

  • filobeddoe

    “We’re taking this victory all the way to the White House.”

    Anyone want to tell me what this actually means. It’s true Mitt. Flowery language that’s meaningless.

  • pieter

    Also from the Volunteer State, but not necessarily ashamed of my fellow Tennessean. I noticed the turnout was thin and that there were no political signs or folks waving the like. If anything, I’m ashamed of myself for not doing more to support Speaker Gingrich.

    The least I could have done was hold a sign. I didn’t. The shame really is mine alone.

  • johnt

    A little to much pessimism here. It may be that Mortimer Snerd could whip his dead ass. His talks are repulsive, he opens his mouth and his popularity continues to go down. Yet I see signs all over the place from our side that all is lost. No answer for that but that Republicans, conservatives and Normal People are buying into the crap the media is pushing, and by a process of osmosis the weak minded, media infected, are falling for it.

  • drothgery

    Everyone has won non-competitive states (because most states aren’t competitive in the general). Only Romney and Santorum have won competitive or fringe-competitive states, and Romeny has done better there.

  • salemst

    Democrats were 1 in 9 votes. Santorum won close to 60% of them, Romney around 15%. Without Democrats voting–and it wasn’t Romney encouraging them to vote–Santorum loses by 8%.

    A solid Romney win. As a staunch across the board conservative Romney supporter–I take the win gladly.

  • texastaxpayer

    Soul of America saved….lol

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

    Mitt doesn’t measure up with bold solutions.

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

    t

  • shadowmane

    break it up and sell it off? That’s what his history is. You really want a guy in the White House with that mentality?

    If this idiot gets the nomination, I’ll vote the down ballot. He’ll not get my vote. And I live in North Carolina… which the Democrats and their apologists in the media call a swing state. That’s one less vote for this idiot, because I refuse to vote for him.

    As a Romney supporter, I know you can’t understand that. However, when your guy gets trounced in a landslide, and we get four more years of Obama, don’t look my way for an explanation. I’ll just shrug and tell you I told you so.

  • pieter

    I can forgive what many consider his obnoxiousness. I prefer that to other serious flaws demonstrated by the president and the other republican challengers.

  • circlegranch

    I was never clear about what happened in FL. Maybe someone here can illuminate the facts. ??

    When FL chose to move up their primary, then-sitting RNC Chair, Michael Steele, warned they would be penalized if they did, and the penalty would be that FL would no longer be a ‘winner take all’ state with respect to delegates. FL ignored the warning, their primary was moved up and the wheels were set in motion to unseat Steele. Yet, before he was voted out of his office Steele signed, if memory serves correct, a declaration of sorts that in fact penalized them and changed the way delegates were awarded. In fact, the day of the FL primary, as pundits on all networks were frothing at the mouth with exit polling data showing Romney as the clear winner, Steele was putting out news releases that while still the RNC Chair, he set forth the rule that FL was no longer ‘winner take all’. His voice was silenced on the subject before the polls closed. What happened?

    Steele was apparently banned from Fox News when he was voted out as Chair (the establishment didn’t want his voice to be heard amongst Republican voters?) and is a regular now on MSNBC but the FL issue seems to have never been sufficiently resolved.

  • 1spark

    We as a party should focus on our Senate and House seats in jeopardy more intensely now that we know who will get the nomination.

    I really doubt Mitt Romney can mount a successful campaign against Obama.

    We have to make a push for a bigger majority!

  • Scope

    Right here-

    “Before this year, NO signatures were verified at all, as the VA GOP who reviews the signatures didn?t have the ability to verify any signatures.”

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Let me try this again, “Elites may have poured” but voters are the ones who took a drink. I didn’t say they loved the taste just they found it less bitter than the alternatives. Mitt Romney this cycle has received over 3 million votes, more than a million votes more than his nearest competitor. He has nearly 300 more delegates in the bank than his nearest competitor. People who identified themselves as Democrats in Michigan and Ohio primaries actually went overwhelmingly for Rick Santorum. My point is this, the problem for the anti-Mitt crowd is a large portion of the Republican electorate are voting for Mitt Romney and have rejected the alternatives. I don’t believe Mitt is their beloved choice but that matters little because he got their vote.

  • pieter

    What would be telling on many levels would be a poll as to whether this primary should go to the convention for determination.

    I think the support for Romney and Santorum is weaker than most would admit.

    A poll would make it clear one way or the other.

    Should the nominee be determined in the August convention?

    Is Romney as the nominee a good thing for our nation and party? I would think that if many believe that the convention is preferable than the answer is “no”.

  • Ausonius

    TV image, dude!

    Always remember Nixon won the debate against Kennedy on the radio, but lost it on TV.

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

    and Santorum is obviously the better vehicle at this point. Time is running out before Mitt’s big northeast delegate days.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    where I was born and raised. Some voted for Newt, some for Santorum. They’re not bigots. They didn’t vote for Mitt because he’s a moderate. They voted for the candidate they believed was more conservative. They just couldn’t get past Romneycare, and when it comes to repealing Obamacare, Santorum is more believable.

    Romneycare is an albatross that Romney hung around his own neck.

    I also had relatives who voted in the Dem primary only because of local races.

  • pieter

    For those that believe the convention is poor choice for determination:

    Does an extended primary hurt the chances of our eventual nominee?

  • Ausonius

    As my grade-school students say! :)

    Some heavy metal riffs roaring in the background, a few red-white-and-blue explosions in the distance: I can see it now!

    Still…

    If Romney wants to “seal the deal,” he needs to repudiate his flip-flopping, repudiate MittCare, repudiate activist government, and swear on whatever book he wants to swear upon, that he and a (we hope) Conservative Congress will repeal the idiocies of the last years which his own party of RINO’S has been complicit in advancing.

  • Locked and Loaded

    in the closing paragraphs of this post is the very definition of putting lipstick on a pig.

  • Locked and Loaded

    in the closing paragraphs of this post is the very definition of putting lipstick on a pig.

  • pieter

    Funny.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    in exactly those same colorful terms, I do agree.

    By the way, did you hear the verdict this am in the government/gambling corruption trials? All defendants found Not Guilty. This is disgusting. No threadjack intended.

  • Scope

    as put forth in the 2012 Green Papers released by the RNC.

    It clearly states that any state that has their primary prior to April 1, 2012, must proportionally award the delegates. Because Fla. went in Jan. this year, they also lost half their delegates. The Green Papers provide a link back to some old rules being considered at that time, which claimed that Fla. and AZ would award their delegates on a WTA basis, but that rule was not adopted in the current ruling.

    I don’t know about AZ, but I do remember hearing that the Fla. GOP chair claimed that Fla. was already punished enough with losing half their delegates, and therefore would be a WTA state. I remember Preibus warning way back when, before Fla. decided to move it primary date up, that he would not be able to change the rules, as they were the rules he had to abide by, and they would in fact lose half the delegates. I don’t believe that he has made any statements as to proportional delegate awarding in Fla. or AZ.

    I believe that conventional wisdom holds that if we get near to the convention, and no one has gotten the delegate count required, or if the delegate count is close between two of the candidates, that the Fla. and AZ delegates will be split proportionally. I don’t believe that very many think it will go all the way to the convention. If Romney racks up the number required, and no one else is even close, he will keep all of those delegates as it would appear to not matter at that point. That’s my understanding of it all.

  • annie54

    n/t

  • redstateneck

    Brother Paul has already made a strategic alliance with Romney. Half of Gingrich?s money is actually from Romney?s camp. Newt knows exactly what he?s doing. His dilution of the bumpkin vote to assist Romney is noble considering the vicious attacks Romney made on him early in the campaign.

  • texastaxpayer

    Romney advocated an identical set of policies as governor. He passed legislation capping carbon emissions like from a coal powered power plant for example. In fact Obama used his “consultants” to craft his cap and trade bill. Further romney was one of the loudest proponents of green energy subsidy for companies such as solendra. His record is almost identical to obama in every way concerning regulation. This guy has been running for president for 6 yrs now your ignorance of his record is unexcusable.

  • pieter

    I think Santorum lacks the accomplishments that Gingrich already possesses. I think his squishy answer as to why he supported certain bills as a “team player” is evidence that he does not have the will to be principled about issues that concern us. He should have just admitted that he was wrong to abandon his core beliefs and move on…he didn’t, just equivocated which is worse.

    Too big labor-govt for my tastes.

    But I agree, I’s sooner vote for Santorum than Romney.

  • texastaxpayer

    A little pot calling the kettle black there it seems…

  • redstateneck

    With the tone change towards his fellow republicans, the message has been sent. “No hard feelings boys, but the professionals can take it from here.” The Romney folks were even telling the networks to update the data. The amateurs have done well polishing Romney. He’s ready now to send a clear message and contrast himself “with him who must not be named”

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    ‘Bama will have overpriced casinoes, organized crime and a three-fold increase in its alcohol consumption on every reservation that gets an Indian Gaming Casino. I’m glad we’ve settled that pressing issue, now back to our non-threadjacked programming :) >

  • redstateneck

    Its and established fact that voters vote against people not for folks. Romney’s folks know this. They produced the “Willy Horton add” and the Its morning in America. The Romney folks are professionals.

  • Scope

    I think. I’ve said this before, and still believe that while Romney is in any race, his money to buy complete destruction of any candidate that threatens his nomination will in fact be carpet bombed big time. Romney, having complete support from almost the entire R side in Washington, the pundits, Fox et all have been willing partners to his crimes, so to speak. That has been going on since months before the first vote was cast.

    Perry was intelligent enough to know that he couldn’t fight the Romney thug machine that will stop at nothing to gain the nomination. Absolutely nothing. Had Perry stayed in any longer, he would have been very damaged and weakened if he had any future aspirations for higher office. I truly don’t believe that Newt or Santorum have any great desires for future political aspirations, especially Newt. Perry had to go back home with some semblance of credibility to remain an effective Texas Gov. Perry is still young enough to run for the presidency again in 2016 should Obama win re-election, which I believe he will with the current crop of candidates, and the very weak showing of Romney.

    I was very disappointed to see Perry drop out, but after a week or two, I saw the wisdom of his decision. He will surely accomplish much more in his future than selling reverse mortgages on TV. Perry now has national campaign experience, he started getting much better and sharper in debates, and hopefully he has a much better idea of who to trust and take advice from in any future run. He will be prepared for the Rove’s in his future and will find ways to combate a media that mostly ignored his existence.

    What did you think of Palin saying that there is nothing to fear of a brokered convention, and that she would be willing to step right up if asked? I almost puked, but caught myself with the understanding that as many have said, it is all a game to build the Palin Inc. empire and nothing more.

  • Ender

    The voters that Romney won in those cities and suburbs are Moderate and Conservative Republicans, not Democrats. Running up the number of republicans would help run up the popular vote, which is all that matters to win a state against Obama. Those people who voted for him in the cities and suburbs would vote for Romney in November as well. No doubt plenty of independents too. Romney doesn’t need to concentrate on the Middle of Ohio and the voters who are conservative, they are not going to vote for Obama anyways. He needs those swing voters in the suburbs.

    Winning in democratic strongholds means he can potentially shave off a few points of Obama margins in those places because he appeals to the centrists there.

  • Ender

    Romney can fight for the areas that went Democratic in 2008 and shave off the margins there. It helps.

  • Spartan4Life

    Far from it. He is, however, the only candidate who is NOT an avowed Socialist America hater who has demonstrated the ability to mount a nationwide campaign.

    Look, all of you out there in fantasy land who think Rick Santorum has the remotest chance of being President of the United States of America have to put your hookahs down. The guy is a lightweight loser. Santorum can stay in the race and keep reminding everybody what we don’t like about Romney but in the end what is he going to accomplish? He would lose his home state by 15+ points in the general.

    As for Gingrich, he IS damaged goods. Every time I see his wife on the stage with him I think, “Oh, there is the woman he had a six year affair with while married to someone else.” I know that is not the Christian way to think but I can’t help it. The “optics”, as the MSM likes to say, are bad.

    And for either one of these guys to be acting holier than thou as dyed in the wool Conservatives has such a ring of phoneyness. Their liberal transgressions are just as bad as Romney’s in both cases. They are pulling the wool over Conservative eyes just to advance themselves and a pox on those that allow themselves to be fooled.

    I don’t think Santorum or Gingrich care one whit about the Republican Party or about Conservatives. They are just using them to self promote.

  • AceInTX

    .

  • arthurjake

    I would like to see max voter turn out by the base voting for conservatives for other offices in the general but voting for none of the above for POTUS. That would at least send them a message.

  • renl57

    How do you know that Gingrich would have been “cruising”?

    In national polls he’s got a 25% approval rating–as bad as Nixon just before he resigned.

    And all over the right-wing blogosphere, there were a lot of reservations about his candidacy coming from *conservatives* who remembered his flakiness and his lack of executive experience and his checkered personal history and his ouster from the House Speakership.

    Go read the archives of RedState from that time period. There was no “cruising.” There was, as elsewhere, quite a vigorous debate about Gingrich’s qualifications or lack thereof.

    Like I said: Nobody told the GOP base to put all their chips on Perry. And when that failed, nobody told the GOP base to start jumping from candidate to candidate without vetting any of them: Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum.

    The truth is that GOP base conservatives never had a credible champion. That’s the problem. So they just don’t have a dog in this fight anymore, and that’s why Romney is the one who’s cruising.

  • colonelflagg

    Which is what we’ve been saying for weeks. Newt needs to get out while we can still save the party from Romney. Otherwise it deserves to go the way of the Whigs.

  • arthurjake

    I dont and electing him will only hurt the conservative politics. I just dont think people ever learn from the constant RINOs we elect. He will do more harm than our constantly caving House is doing now.

  • AceInTX

    he’s won 3 times as many states as Newt and has the only chance to defeat Romney though it’s not likely…Newt is simply too far back to catch up. At this point though, If Newt stays in…maybe the combination of Newt, Paul and Santorum’s delegates will stop Romney from getting to 1100.

    As for Catholics, If Santorum plays this righ, he can win over catholics as well by emphasizing this contraception mandate…I think truth be told that’s as much a reason for Santorum doing so well in the mid west as he has because he’s pulling in a combination of Protestants and Catholics. My evidence is anecdotal and I’d like to see some hard numbers in the states Santorum has won…but I’d be willing to bet Catholcis went fofr him after the Dems opened the mandate can of worms.

    So you’d take Romney over Santorum and you think Romney would be a sure bet to give us a good SC nominee?

    Goit some ocion front property I’d like to sell you in Oklahoma Becker…you’ll love it!

  • pieter

    I believe in Newt Gingrich but that doesn’t preclude there are valid reasons to vote for the other candidates.

    Did you vote issues, past accomplishments, viable vision for the future, the not-Romney? This is a weird election cycle, perhaps more psychological than principled. The media and the politicos haven’t made it any easier.

    Why did Palin wait so long to endorse? Does she hope for a brokered convention?

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    I am going to assume you are talking about 4 companies from the Renewable Energy Trust Fund that was set up in Massachusetts. The trust fund was set up before Mitt Romney’s election and the legislature did not bring up a bill to dismantle it after his election. At the time Mitt was Governor, the trust fund was 150 million. During Mitt’s time in the Governor’s mansion 4 investments were made from the trust fund totalling 9 million from the trust fund. One of the investments was in a company that agreed to build a plant in Mass. The second was an investment of 2.5 million in Evergreen Solar that the state made money on. The other two if I recall were fuel cell manufacturers that went belly-up. As a comparison, Deval Patrick tentrupled the states bet from Romney’s more conservative one and the state got hosed. The largest withdrawal from the trust fund was 17 million to balance the state budget which you can only imagine the environmental lobby went nuts over, so Mitt Romney’s largest environmental investment was actually to remove money and balance the state’s budget. At no point did Mitt set up an agency of the Massachusetts government to drive the green energy competitors in fossil fuels out of business with unprecendented regulation. At no point in the face of a budget shortfall did Mitt Romney propose cutting health care to veterans while ramping up green energy subsidies. In fact, he did the opposite. Mitt Romney is not perfect (Lord, knows truer words were never spoken) but he is better than Barack Obama on energy which is the point.

  • texastory63

    Denying Santo the win in Ohio.

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

    is learned, then maybe we can teach the next one.

    But Obama’s defeat would unleash major capital from off the sidelines and spur a major recovery. We need that.

    I am for Santorum, but it is imperative that we all vote for whomever the GOP nominee turns out to be.

  • texastaxpayer

    ;)

    Now if only romney was a republican…..

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Dennis Kucinich’s career in Congress was ended yesterday.

  • winning2012

    My guy didn’t win, but I’m ready to move on and fight Obama.

    No one here can honestly say they believe Romney is not going to get the nomination, the delegate math is impossible. At best, you MIGHT get Santorum on the ticket, but even then, is that a real victory? I think Romney would put a Rubio or McDonnell in a heartbeat. We’d get a better conservative that wouldn’t be a drag on the ticket. Why limp this along for the 6 months just to put a Santorum as VP?

    A bloody battle to the Convention doesn’t benefit anyone but Obama and the Democrats in November. It’s especially stupid when you consider the candidates we’re fighting over.

  • aleena

    I have to agree that Rick Perry made the right decision. From the time he made the without a heart comment, it seemed as if all of the energy slowly leaked out of his campaign. If he had continued, I also feel that it would have severly harmed his career. Until this year, Rick Perry had only run for elected offices in Texas . In retrospect, he didn’t completely make the transition from Texas to the national stage. I’m sure he will learn from this experience and understand how to campaign more effectively next time. I do hope he has a next time.
    As far as Sarah Palin, I feel that she was thrust on the national stage too quickly. It was not her fault; it was John McCain’s. I have never seen the press be as vile to anyone in politics. After her short term as governor of Alaska, I think that she needs to get more experience in public life before running for the presidency. I don’t think she is trying to build an empire; I think she is just trying to get by day-by-day.

  • Scope

    you don’t have a clue as to what the voters that voted for Romney in the bigger cities party affiliation is, but Romney has done poorly everywhere with conservatives, and he is constantly losing support of the Independents. Go back and look at much of the reporting from last night. The areas that Romney won in Ohio are Democrat strongholds, as opposed to the majority rural areas that tend more conservative. That is what makes Ohio a swing-state. VA is considered a swing state because the most populated areas in VA are in the NOVA area which are heavily Democrat areas with large populations. Geographically the state of VA is much larger than just the NOVA area in square miles, but the areas with high population density such as NOVA favor Democrats by large majorities.

    I would like anyone here to give me a list of the major cities in any state that don’t lean more heavily to the Democrats. I’m sure there are some, but they are very far fewer than conservative leaning cities. Even the most red states still have their share of Democrats and they tend to be city dwellers who live close to their state government nanny provided services such as public water, public transportation, street lights on every corner major police and firefighter support and on and on.

  • Ann2012

    I started writing on RedState to support Newt, but now I can see that he is letting his own self-interest and ego come before the Republican Party.

    Rick Perry did the honorable thing so Newt could win, now that we have had enough states vote it?s clear that a majority of conservatives think Rick Santorum has a better chance against not only Obama but also Mitt Romney.

    Isn?t Rick Santorum offering Newt something if he steps down? Something like a very important role in the administration or even VP. He has to be I would think, and if not, Newt call him and ask for what it is you want in exchange for your endorsement.

    Make him an offer he can?t refuse.

  • rmike

    After Romney has won Ohio and 5 other states, it is obvious to anyone who has paid slight attention to politics that he is going to be the nominee. Santorum and Gingrich have no real chance of getting enough delegates. What are the reasons for them to stay in the race? To feed their egos? To “make a point” just like Ron Paul is doing?

    The longer the race drags out, the more damage we are going to do to the eventual nominee. I repeat, the goal is to beat Obama, not to find the perfect candidate that will uphold ALL the conservative ideologies and make EVERYONE happy. For those who are still not seeing the light, please consider it again carefully what your priorities are. I hope you will then realize that putting all our supports behind Romney to fight Obama in November is the best strategy.

  • pieter

    The smear campaign directed against the Speaker is beyond belief.

    He’s temperamental and unstable. Well he kept it together enough to reform welfare, balance the budget and fend off tax increases from a republican president. Yep, down right insane.

    He’s morally deficient. Was. Sought forgiveness. Glass houses.

    He’s sat down with Satan herself. He admitted that it was the stupidest thing he’s done in recent memory.

    He’s sold out to the GSE fount of our economic ruin. No evidence that he used his influence to enable F&F to screw the taxpayer. The amount awarded to his firm is laughingly small when considering the time-frame it was paid over.

    That’s about it. Crazy. Sinner. Dumba$$. Capitalist.

  • texastaxpayer

    ;)
    It will no doubt be painful but neccessary.

  • pdawk

    McCain and Hillary had a death match that ran into June. McCain was actually leading the polls most of the spring and into the summer because he had the nomination wrapped up. Dems were freaking out over the fact that their two superstars were beating each other up and had gone super negative.

    Obama had Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, and Tony Rezko pop up. He made a comment at a fundraiser in San Fran that blue collar workers are bitter because they cling to their guns and religion. Obama was getting absolutely killed by Hillary in the rust belt states and in large liberal states.

    Somehow he managed to win the nomination on a delegate strategy and move on to the general election against McCain. Obama didn’t bother running against McCain, he ran against Bush because the election ALWAYS comes down to the sitting President.

    When it comes time to make a decision in November swing voters are going to sit down and make a decision on whether Obama has been good enough to get another chance. If the economy sucks and gas prices are high, then Romney will win. If the economy improves and gas prices go below 3 bucks Obama will be tough to beat. Independents who decide elections vote with their wallets and this year will be no different.

    End of rant.

  • Ausonius

    Yes, and we will see if people in Toledo and northern Ohio have any sense left and retire Kaptur to a farm in France, where her socialism can be put out to pasture.

    Kaptur has been in Congress for 30 years, and is another supposed Catholic who stabs her religion in the back by goose-stepping with Dems on abortion, and whose policies have in part helped to depopulate her district and her state.

    November should be really interesting!

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

    would supposedly be better for the conservative movement and ultimately lead to a shift in the public mind that could restore America. We need a recovery and Obama’s defeat would at least lead to that.

  • renl57

    …with base conservatives who want red meat.

    Romney doesn’t do red meat. Being from New England, he’s more of a “baked scrod” kind of guy. And so am I.

    We Romney supporters believe Romney can turn this economy around and bring back an assertive foreign policy in places like Iran. And by so doing, demonstrating to the voters that the GOP can run things better than Obama did.

    But base conservatives believe that this is some apocalyptic fight between freedom and socialism and want a crusader to lead it or else the nation is DOOMED!

    We Romney supporters aren’t out to fight Civil War II against the Left. Rather, we want to make the case this way: We can fix the economy where the liberals failed.

    I’m a conservative because I believe conservative ideas work better, not because I believe liberals are scheming to wreck the country and take away our freedoms.

    When Reagan ran against Carter, Reagan’s theme was NOT “Carter is trying to wreck the country”–even though arguably the country was in worse shape then than it is now.

    Reagan’s argument was, “Carter has failed to make things better, and it’s time we had new leadership.”
    That argument worked.

    That’s Romney’s argument too.

    But if you don’t believe that–if you really see Obama as a deliberately dangerous Marxist/Socialist/Muslim/Alinskyite Manchurian Candidate out to deliberately wreck the country–then don’t vote for Romney. Seriously. Stay home on Election Day.

    Because even if Romney is elected President, you won’t like his Administration. His Administration will be devoted to businesslike competence, not leading some Glenn Beck-style ideological crusade against the Left.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Oh I think Marcy Kaptur will return to Capitol Hill to serve her what 16th term as a Representative of the people of Toledo, but they won’t both be going back which was a piece of good news and Kucinich went out with the same style and grace that has marked his entire career #sarcasm.

  • texastaxpayer

    This defeat Obama obsession has driven many of you stark raving mad. When you set Obama and Romney’s record side by side you may find something you don’t expect…

    Taxes Romney raised them Obama despite all his bolstering hasn’t.
    Environmental Regulations Romney is identical to Obama here including supporting cap and trade, subsidized green energy and sweeping regulations he passed as governor.
    Healthcare Romney not only passed socialized medicine first he provided the blue print Obama followed.
    Economically Romney rated 47th out of 50 during a growth period for the country. Obama truly did inherit a bad economy and after following Mitt’s suggestion on everything from TARP to stimulus which Mitt is on the record supporting where does he rank out of 44?
    Deficit spending Romney’s policies cost billions in unfunded liabilities sound familiar?
    Job creation Romney’s policies cost tens of thousands of jobs sound familiar?

    Besides rhetoric the two are identical. I am beginning to wonder if Romney supporters aren’t just the bigots they accuse his detractors of being. What other possible reason could there be to actively support the mirror image of the president you claim it is so important to defeat?

  • Ann2012

    We need Rick Santorum to win the nomination because Mitt Romney as the nominee will be as interesting and as successful as our other moderate candidates, Bob Dole and John McCain.

    Maybe there?s a good reason the Democrats call us ?The Stupid Party? since we have so much trouble figuring out how to win.

    Here are a few clues to help ?The Intelligence-Challenged Party?:

    1. Make the base happy or you?re destine to lose, pure and simple.

    2. Money only works against those with less money. Obama will have equal or more money than Mitt Romney.

    3. Don?t depend on a failing economy to help you, because if it starts to improve you?re toast.

  • Scope

    I don’t understand it but Romney did beat Santorum with the Catholic vote last night. Santorum got the larger support from the protestants and evangelicals. Go figure

    Gingrich has no earthly possibility in winning the nomination, or even from keeping Romney to gain it faster. The only states where Gingrich has been able to do much has been with southern states such as SC and Ga. His win in GA was because it was his home state, and he put all his eggs in the GA basket last night. His win in SC was before he tanked in the polling.

    Gingrich isn’t going to get out, as his ego won’t let him. The only hope Gingrich has is in possibly doing well in the next 3 southern states to go, where Romney is at a disadvantage. After his showing last night, if people open their eyes and realize he came in dead last, even after Paul in 5 out of the 10 contests. Santorum’s showing last night hopefully will send him over the top in those states. I am praying for a massive initiative to force Gingrich out of the race before those primaries, including telling Sheldon Addelson to stop paying Gingrich to help Romney win the nomination. No one ever doubted Gingrich’s massive ego or quest for power. I watched a small part of his speech last night. After Calista introduced him, he took to the podium, and just stood there like a doofus milking the chants for as long as he could. It was obvious and awkward. Then he rambled on for a very long time as it’s hard to ever get Newt away from a microphone. As someone said on TV, he gave the exact kind of speech, talking about how great he is, which is exactly why he is mostly in last place.

  • redmymind

    1. BHO Lite will end up the nominee if enough people keep chanting this MSM/Fox mantra and set the national mood/expectations accordingly.

    2. BHO will soundly beat BHO Lite, if the latter is the nominee. Make no mistake.

    3. Either Newt or Santo must step down at this time if either of the two would have a chance to overtake BHO Lite. Do the math. Man up, Santo and Newt, and decide which of you will leave NOW. Prove that you really do care about your country as much as you say and swallow that pride.

    4. It’s not over until it’s over. Those who call the race for BHO Lite, whether out of glee or frustration/resignation, necessarily help solidify the myth of his “inevitability” which only ends up helping . . . BHO Lite.

  • oldmom2

    will be jumping for joy because they’re going to get nearly 95% subsidies (taxpayer money!) to pay for their insurance.

    http://healthreform.kff.org/subsidycalculator.aspx

    The thresholds are ridiculously high.

  • gwbramhall

    McCain is responsible for the fix we’re in. If he had picked
    Romney as his VP, the primary cycle would be over by now
    as it usually is and we’d be spending our time loading up for
    the war that’s sure to come in the general election.

    The national exposure squandered in McCain’s loss to BHO,
    left us with a litter of what seems in the public’s mind a bunch
    of small potatoes. Romney is the best we have and most of
    the people who are calling him too liberal now, were campaigning
    for him last time as the alternative to McCain. I fear and hope
    it will not last. I believe that many of the people are so because
    of his religion. Please, by all accounts he is great family man
    with the moral fiber seldom seen in the public world of politics.
    He has great pro-growth experience and is saying all the right
    things. We have no basis to believe he is lieing to us. Sure the
    others are fine candidates, too, but do not share Romney’s unique
    capabilities. Santorum is sincere but he cannot defend his own
    positions. Gingrich can think quick on his feet and I give him high
    marks for his debating abilities, but aside from his liberal gaffs of the
    past, the electorate is not going to trust in large enough numbers
    a man who has, in their eyes, been caught twice cheating on his
    wife and also left Congress under suspicion. Let’s put this race to bed!

  • chadosborne

    If republicans didn’t want Romney they wouldn’t nominate him.

    It’s understandable that you’re bitter and irrational because your candidate is losing but get over it.

    Obama is a complete failure, didn’t accomplish anything and if you think he’ll win you’re delusional. And by the way, he is having trouble raising money and Romney will probably be able to outspend him as well.

    You can’t have it your way every time. The majority wants clearly wants to nominate Romney. So just grow up and stop whining.

  • winning2012

    Santorum and Newt’s support has been almost exclusively to stop Romney from getting the nomination. That’s now gone out of the window, there’s simply no way Romney comes in with less delegates and is not at the top of the ticket, the delegate count is too lopsided.

    So now we’re keeping a bloody primary going for VP slops and Convention speech deals?

    Please tell me how a nasty 6 month primary to the Convention that eventually becomes Romney/Santorum (best case scenario for Rick) helps make Obama a one term President?

    Perfect GOP candidates are like unicorns, they don’t exist. Eventually we have to play the hand we’re given and stop the circular firing squad.

  • Aaron Gardner

    nt

  • aesthete

    Well, maybe not that last one.

    Meh.

  • Ann_W

    because he wasn’t on a Greek cruise last summer. He was working hard.

    If Gingrich thought they were filled with lies he should have mentioned it over and over in the debates, he had a platform there. If they really were lies people would not have accepted them. I didn’t hear him say specifically what was a lie.

  • randgeek73

    The moment that Mitt becomes the nominee is the moment that we conservatives will have proof beyond all shadow of doubt that the Republican party no longer even pretends to represent our interests. With all of the outcry over his candidacy, the low voter turnout, the close calls with Santorum and Gingrich, and the fact that they have had to funnel insanely ridiculous amounts of money into every primary just to get the votes that they have gotten, it is clearly obvious that the establishment will spend whatever is necessary to guarantee this nomination for Mitt. They will have him be the nominee regardless of what the voters think and they will do whatever gets him there…just so he can lose to Obama. The Tea Party needs to be a true Party, and not just a subsidiary to Republican Inc, and if a Romney nomination doesn’t prove that, nothing will.

  • rmike

    How can you even compare? First of all, I don’t buy into the whole liberal “Obama inherited a bad economy” nonsense. Even if it were true, Obama had 3+ years to do something about it! He did absolutely nothing!

    Second, having Obama in the White House for another 4 years will be a disaster for all other conservative causes. He will continue with the big government expansion (even if he doesn’t raise taxes, which I think he definitely will), appoint more liberal judges, and screwed up all the foreign policies (Apologize to Afghans when we are there to help them? Really?)

    I concede that I am not happy with his stance on healthcare, and there is a slight suspicion in me that he won’t be that great of a president. But he is a thousand times better than Obama. And face it, we don’t have any other choice.

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

    Mess is a word one uses when they desire to stop thinking, given that all of human history has been a mess since Eve bit the apple. Conservatives have watched non-so-called-”messy” nomination processes not lead to defeats of Democrats. The issues and choice in the Fall will be a referendum on a historical failed presidency on the economy in which record numbers continue to suffer.

    Our “mess” is the worst mess in all the world except for all the others. Keep up the free speech and contested primaries….except for Newt, of course, who should drop out! smile

  • dennis1111

    Of course Newt and Rick are both relatively conservative. Relative to Mitt that is. Should Newt or Rick get in they will mount a national campaign as the Republican candidate. The GOP will be there base. We conservatives would love to see a conservative (Newt) as the candidate. Mitt leaves much to be desired. The worst of it is the constant negative hype done on his side. Dragging down one’s fellow Republicans is a sad way to get ahead. This reminds me of a drowning man. You want to help but you don’t want to go down under the drowning man.

    Newt’s credentials are clear. Of course the press hates him-he is conservative. He has accomplished much. He could defeat Obama and change our nation for the better. It’s the vision thing. Mitt lacks that so he relies on negatives like the one I am responding to. A sad commentary indeed if Mitt gets the nomination.

    I suspect he would easily lose if the press and Dems were out of this and the candidates just talked about their views on the issues and their plans as President. Whoever wins will be the Republican nominee and I will support him. Personally I am wishing for a decision in convention. I don’t think a deadlocked convention is such a bad thing. I am tired of having milk-sop moderates with dubious conservative records, represent me to the nation. I suspect a real conservative would do very well in the General. It would be fresh and unspoiled my money and devoted interests. Best, dlc

  • texastaxpayer

    Advocate cap and trade?
    Pass restrictive regulations limiting CO2?
    Drive up the price of energy in his state?
    Advocate state and federal subsidy for green energy?
    Advocate for climate change policy based legislation?
    Perpetuate the “Global Warming” myth while lobbying against oil, gas and coal production?

    The answer to all of the above is a resounding YES. The problem Romney has is that he finds himself on the wrong side of every issue. It wasn’t until oil production became a campaign issue that Romney found his “new” support for American oil and gas. So spare me the “he didn’t increase energy while denying veterans healthcare bit”. He in fact advocated “green energy” while demanding the tax payers pick up the tab for illegal aliens health insurance. Sound familiar?

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    You mean like Obama vs. Clinton? Please suspend that stupid gland you have operating in overdrive. Hard primary fights improve the combatants. Return to your Media Matters handler and have your meme generator fixed.

  • runner12

    According to Rasmussen, it would potentially help Romney and that is not what we want to happen.

    The best case scenario is for Santorum and Newt to step up their games and try and win as many states as they can to prevent Romney from getting the needed delegate count. Thus we would have a brokered convention. It is a long shot, but it just might work.

    That being said, if Romney (God forbid) wins the nomination he must do two things to beat Obama. First, he must repudiate his own past liberal record in MA. He must admit that Romneycare was a total failure and that he regrets it. He must move to the right significantly in order to fire up the base. Secondly, he must select a Tea Party VP from a Southern State. No squishy moderates. If he does this, he may be able to do some damage control that he and his campaign have inflicted on the GOP.

    Of course, the best case scenario is a brokered convention where Mittens gets the boot and we get a Conservative candidate who can win on their own merits.

  • drothgery

    Mitt’s not a very old senator, and 2012 is not shaping up as a very good year for Democrats.

  • Shaggy_DA

    And extremely so. There is no other way to explain your complete lack of understanding as displayed in this post.

  • usedtobelib

    Geee. hmmmmm., let’s see: It COULD be that Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham , a guy named Erick Erickson, you know, conservative media sorts, have been bad-mouthing the guy to anyone and everyone on just about every show now for a year. And it could be that very conservative GOP members listen to those shows and are affected by the hosts’ opinions.

    Now, there’s your answer. Not hard.

    However, there are members of the GOP and there are even conservatives who either don’t listen to those hosts or don’t singularly swallow all they sell.

  • Stan

    for being elected can be summed up as “I suck less”??? There’s an awe-inspiring rallying point for an election!!!! The only positive is that “Willard sucks less!” will actually fit on a bumper sticker…

  • JSobieski

    We have a unique opportunity in 2012, and we are not positioning ourselves to take strong advantage of it.

    If 2012 was just another year, Romney would won the nomination by now and there would not be the nashing of teeth that there is.

    However, 2012 is not just another year, and Romney seems so particularly unsuited for the opportunity that presents itself.

    Mess? Shame? Waste? Disappointment?

    Does the precise word matter?

  • aesthete

    I guess it’s that world-renowned mind control ray that all right-wing talking heads are equipped with that’s responsible for the base not collectively kneeling at the feet of The Master, begging him to bless their children and assorted trinkets.

    Nothing else can explain it.

  • JSobieski

    nt

  • JSobieski

    A couple of talk show hosts is nothing compared to the broadcast networks and pop culture.

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

    of the possible failure of tea partiers and conservatives to capitalize on 2010 and the inept Obama, by nominating a true Reaganite, the fault more of the fact that one didn’t run, didn’t run competently or doesn’t exist? Rather than problems with the process. And that the second most probable cause that we exaggerate the % of voters even in the GOP that are conservatives that get it?

    And yes, we need a nominee that is neutralized on ObamaCare, hence my support for Santorum.. If Newt had the delegate total today that Rick, has, i would probably be for Newt.

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

    teeeaaa

  • texastaxpayer

    What are you living under a freaking rock? The liberals didn’t make up the fact that the economy crashed in 2008. The fact that I have to say that makes me seriously question your intelligence. If you want to argue that Obama has done nothing to improve it fine. I personally think his moves have all been wrong. No arguments there.

    All though Obama did do somethings. He expanded TARP which Romney Supported. He passed stimilus which Romney supported, in all fairness Mitt wanted tax cuts too (way to drive down the debt) but he did support stimilus on the record. So Obama’s major attempts to right the economy failed and where Mitt Romney approved.

    I think your right he will raise taxes, but the question is how different is Mitt Romney remember? What did Mitt do when faced with a budget short fall? He…… That’s right raised taxes and fees. So what makes you think he won’t this time?

    As far as liberal judges go Romney installed nearly three times as many liberal or “independent” judges as conseratives as governor. What’s changed? Mitt is still Mitt right? Why the lurch to the right now?

    Foreign Policy? What foriegn policy experience does Mitt have? How do you know he would be better or worse? I personally think the fact that he wouldn’t presumably bow to the king of saudia arabia would be an improvement but what do we really know?

    Ultimately the point I am making is when you take the rhetoric out and just consider their records I do not see why so many people are so sure Romney is going to be that different from Obama. His record demonstrates a level of similarity that is striking.

  • usedtobelib

    can overcome media bias?

    Romney will have an easier time winning over Dems who dislike Obama (there are plenty, esp. white working class men and an easier time of winning over college educated women and men who voted for Obama and are disappointed in THE ONE because they know he doesn’t share their long-term eocnomic goals for the country.

    Can he beat Obama? Yes. Easy? No. Do the others even have a shot at beating Obama? Not_at_all, which is why they haven’t been able to earn victories in large enough quantities in their own party.

  • Common_Cents

    There needs to be efforts on all 3 fronts. house, senate, WH.

  • texastaxpayer

    that seems to be changing now doesn’t it…. Lest we forget Mitt lost to that very old senator :)

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

    everything to one word…a mess ain’t I? yes

  • texastaxpayer

    This year I believe we are going to have to work alot harder down ticket. I know personally in my district Romney is not a DRAW to the polls.

  • jules187

    1)??? Do you jump for joy when someone confiscates your wallet?
    2)??? Do the math. Say someone earns $25,000 per year?that?s $12 per hour, not unusual for a lower income person. Using the calculator in your link, this person?s annual premium will total $6,978. IF, at 217% above the poverty line, he qualifies for a subsidy, he will still pay $143 per month. His net income for $25,000 per year is about $22,600. Now, think about surviving on that amount of income and then having the government come in and forcibly seizing $1700 per year (a number which, BTW, I do NOT buy), and tell me how overjoyed you would be.
    3)??? For this person, which individual-mandate candidate would you support?the one with the biggest subsidy or the one with a smaller/no subsidy? Do we WANT the lower income vote?

  • Ender

    was most important. The other states were not really close or campaigned much in. Thus no need to “depress turnout”.

  • joeydavis

    What majority?

    If these primary elections were typical primaries, where there had to be a 40% plurality to prevent a runoff. Romney would lose every single state in the runoff.

    It’s clear that nearly a veto proof majority 2/3 of republicans DON’T want him.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • rmike

    We can differ on our opinions. But wake up and smell the roses – we only have one candidate left who can get the nomination. You can either join the team and help to elect a conservative Republican to White House, or you can sit on the sideline and let Obama ruining the country for 4 more years. I think you are smart enough to make the right choice.

  • Ender

    that you don’t win swing states by just racking up Conservatives. That’s not enough. That’s why they are the swing states, because they go back and forth between the parties due to similar levels of support for Democrats and Republicans. In swing states you must be able to win Independents and Centrists to prevail. A lot of those indies and centrists are in the moderate suburbs.

    Romney will get the rural counties that Santorum carried, because they are already deep anti-Obama territory, but Obama is ahead in the polls on his strength in the suburbs. Romney has a chance at those people. Santorum, not so much. You can win the General Election on the strength of the rural vote alone.

  • jamesm

    otherwise he will help Romney get the nomination. Look for him to drop out after Santorum wins Alabama

  • joeydavis

    I think any of the 4 can handle b)

    a)Santorum’s economic plan is far better for stimulating the economy than Romney’s. Romney’s baselining of the minimum wage to CPI would destroy the economy. I don’t really understand how anybody whoever sat through Econ 101 or Intro to Business could think otherwise (ie, the Harvard educated MBA knows better, it’s just another pander).

    aa)Ron Paul was a successful physician. Newt Gingrich is a very successful consultant, which is what Romney’s business experience actually is.

    c) there’s far more to being President than the economy. In fact in regard to the economy the President is really nothing more than a glorified cheerleader.

    The Rombots seem to think we don’t UNDERSTAND Romney’s selling points. We do. We look at the WHOLE picture and understand he has a history of unreliable political positions from abortion to gay rights to gun control to health care to minimum wage to government earmarks… The man is historically unreliable. He MAY emphasis on the word MAY be a Republican but he’s certainly not a reliably conservative Republican.

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

    and the polls that shows the electable shift when the electorate looks to see that Romney is really a useful candidate with a terrible campaign. Don’t you thinking is odd left leaning media has been pushing for the guy who supposedly has the [sic] best chance at beating Obama. In 2010, we did not win by moving left, we moved the country right.

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

    I wish you luck as well

  • ffc99

    Romney won a number of counties in Ohio which are not, I repeat not, Democratic strongholds. He won Butler, Montgomery, Hamilton, Warren, Clermont and Greene counties in the southwest of the state. These counties all have over 100,000 people and all (with the exception of Montgomery) voted for GW Bush in 2004 (hell, the Cincinnati suburban counties of Butler, Warren and Clermont are some of the most Republican counties in the country). He won the populous counties in the center of the sate (Delaware and Franklin). Bush won Delaware in 04 and was competitive in Franklin. Mitt won Lake and Geauga Counties outside of Cleveland. Both large counties won by GW in 2004. Yeah, he won Cuyahoga, which is overwhelmingly Democrat, but to say that he only won in Democrat strongholds is patently false.

  • romeg

    due SOLELY to the fact that Mitt NEEDED and continues to need him in the race. Mitt, like most of those in the know, thought Newt had self-destructed early on. But when Newt arose from the ashes of his first crash Mitt clearly recognized the problem he posed.

    Each time he drove Newt into the ground or Newt did or said something to drive his own numbers down, Newt was able to rebound. When it was clear that Newt posed a real danger in FL, Mitt went into DEFCON 2 mode while leaving Santorum completely unscathed as an alternative to further encumber Newt in future primaries.

    Mitt operates by the Gold ‘n’ Rule: He has the Gold ‘n’ he makes the rules. He apparently believed and continues to believe that destroying the greatest threat to his campaign will assure him victory in November by delivering Newt’s supports to him.

    Well, if, and ONLY IF he’s the nominee, he will get my vote just as John McCain got my vote in 2008 but I fear that, just as in 2008, Obama will, once again, make an ass all who supported Mitt because if his inevitable Electability.

  • joeydavis

    I like Rick Perry’s record. But we all have to admit Rick Perry blew his own head off by diving off the board before checking to make sure there was water in the pool. Rick Perry was dead before any of us had anything to say.

    To me there were always 3 acceptable candidates. At first it was Pawlenty, Gingrich and Santorum (in that order). I was with Pawlenty because he was most electable. But then Michele Bachman wiped him out.

    Then it was Perry, Gingrich and Santorum (in that order). But Perry entered the campaign ill prepared and self destrcuted.

    That left Gingrich and Santorum. I like them both a lot and I sat back and watched. Santorum IS the better, more electable candidate.

    I’d happily support Gingrich if he were the nominee, but Santorum is the better candidate with the better chance both against Romney and against Obama.

  • joeydavis

    I like Rick Perry’s record. But we all have to admit Rick Perry blew his own head off by diving off the board before checking to make sure there was water in the pool. Rick Perry was dead before any of us had anything to say.

    To me there were always 3 acceptable candidates. At first it was Pawlenty, Gingrich and Santorum (in that order). I was with Pawlenty because he was most electable. But then Michele Bachman wiped him out.

    Then it was Perry, Gingrich and Santorum (in that order). But Perry entered the campaign ill prepared and self destrcuted.

    That left Gingrich and Santorum. I like them both a lot and I sat back and watched. Santorum IS the better, more electable candidate.

    I’d happily support Gingrich if he were the nominee, but Santorum is the better candidate with the better chance both against Romney and against Obama.

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

    its more like a he is winning because conservatives are splintered. I do blame conservatives for not thinking things through, this race could have been between Perry and Huntsman right now. They could have coordinated wins by telling supporters to back other candidates in the first 10 states. Romney is being this election, without his money advantage, Romney is dirt. And he will not outcomes Obama, then add the MSM and it will be Romney who is bombarded with negative advertisement, which half of will be true. Flip flop, true. Rich guy out of touch, true. A man who would change his very core to win the presidency, is also true. His own base despises him, he attracts only the liberal leaners, who are just as likely to vote Obama. Romney will move to the center, and run on his business experience. His policies will start to sound like Obama’s again. Majority, what a crock of…

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

    I believe it stems from the people. Government needs to shrink, and get out of the way. Devolution is the key.

  • texastaxpayer

    A little rough around the edges today. Been sick and couldn’t sleep last night, fatigue seems to bring out my color. My apologies.

  • joeydavis

    Gingrich supports would go somewhere between 55 and 75 percent to Santorum. That would have been more than enough to turn close Michigan and Ohio races into landslides even at the small end.

    Santorum’s voters would swing 55-65 to Gingrich (some social conservatives have a real problem with Newt’s infidelity). That would not have been enough to flip a single Romney win.

    Santorum out can not help Gingrich. Gingrich out will give the election to Santorum.

    Georgia is Newt’s homestate. Santorum (wisely I might add) did not compete there. S.Carolina is also deep south and maybe would have had a different narrative had Santorum gotten his due credit for winning in Iowa.

    Otherwise Gingrich has shown no base of support. Santorum has shown the ability to compete and compete well in every race he chooses to enter in every region of the country. S. Carolina was his low point, but he proved his southern abilities in Tennessee.

  • WillWong

    Otherwise, how would you explain that for the longest time, Santorum was lingering at the bottom until Newt was taken down by Romney and his Super PAC?

    Unfortunately, Santorum and the group of 150 Evangelical leaders who endorsed him do not think so!

  • WillWong

    next week, then I would agree with you! If it is the other way round, Santorum needs to go! I am trusting that Newt has one more Lazarus in him.

  • joeydavis

    The campaign of the “saviour” would begin in June or as soon as it becomes apparent that neither Romney nor Santorum will have the delegates.

    We would then start filling the GOP coffers with money and building the ground game as a party (many of us know how to do this quickly). The party apparatus would begin polling convention delegates (they’ll be known by then) for their alternative choice.

    We would weed the alternates down through shadow ballots until there was a ticket. Then that candidate would announce in late June, early July and start campaigning against Obama. He’d get all the undeclared delegates on the first ballot and get the nomination on the second ballot either by acclaimation or force.

    We would know the “unofficial nominee” going into Tampa. The convention would be about rallying and unifying the base. The argument against either of the 4 current candidates would be indisputable (you had 6 months of elections and a year of campaigning before them to win 51% and you couldn’t do it).

  • vastrightwingconspiracy

    You’ve nailed the reason the “base” doesn’t trust him.

    He’s not a bomb thrower.

  • krish

    Rombots, just like Mittens, are not at all bothered about facts! Romney lies in debates & stump speeches & Rombots spout the same things RS.

    Nobody wants to see his record…I wish somebody could post the McCain campaign summary of why Romney is not the guy & it went through whole political history…..

    I wish EE or one of the posters can find the link & post it so that Rombots can come here with lies!

    By the way, it will surely come out – sure Axelrod has a copy of it!!

  • vastrightwingconspiracy

    …based on the reality of a general vs. a nomination campaign.

    You’re upsetting the “base.”

  • vangoghssister

    From reading your posts, I have concluded you support Gov. Romney. If this is incorrect, just ignore the rest of this post and perhaps another Romney supporter will answer the following questions.

    In a debate with Obama, how do you think Gov. Romney would respond to these situations? Please keep in mind all winning debate cards are stacked in Obama’s favor, from the network on which the debate is broadcast all the way down to the moderator(s). Those watching the debate on TV will be those who get 98% of their news from the MSM and/or Fox. This is a very likely, worst-case scenario any R candidate would have to face.

    1. The moderator brings up their nearly identical health care laws. Obama praises the Gov. for taking up the sword for gov’t – sponsored health care coverage. He knows he cannot attack the Gov. on this issue and instead, thanks him profusely for paving the way for his own plan and for providing him the very foundation in which to build upon. Gov. Romney’s response is…?

    2. Next, the moderator goes with job creation and Bain. Obama points out, rightly, that he is responsible for creating more jobs in his four year term than the Gov. did in his four year term in Mass. He points out the 47 in 50 ranking of Mass. in job creation/growth during the Gov.’s term. He brings up all the negatives regarding Bain dismantling companies, people losing their jobs as a direct result, the money made by Romney alone as a result of these decisions, etc. Gov. Romney’s response is…?

    3. Naturally, scenario #2 above leads directly into scenario #3 – the One Percent (1%) argument, income inequality, paying a fair share in taxes, all the different ways Romney has made money, how much he has made, all the homes he owns and so on. Obama saves the Gov.’s support of the Wall Street bailouts and lack of support for the auto industry bailouts for this argument. Gov. Romney’s response is…?

    4. Now we turn to support of cap and trade, higher taxes and fees, all of which Obama likes and indicates that Gov. Romney does too, according to his record as governor. Gov. Romney’s response is…?

    5. Lastly, we come to changes of position (flip-flops), specifically Roe vs Wade (abortion), which Obama will portray as women’s health issues; minimum wage; immigration/path to citizenship; gun control; global warming; DADT; planned parenthood and so on, all of which at one time or another, they shared the same opinion.

    I know I am forgetting important issues and I’d appreciate others politely chiming in. I did not include Mormonism or the dog-on-the-car-roof as I truly believe Obama will leave those issues to his super PAC minions.

    I have no doubt that Gov. Romney is a good person, however, that will not be enough to defeat Obama. He must be able to defend himself on these positions. At this point, I don’t see that happening,

    I want to be wrong.

  • liveforadrenaline

    But poor understanding. Nice try.

    Romney simply has no experience instituting the “business-like competence” in government of which you speak.

    He has no experience with the massive deficit, the out-of-control spending, major shifts in energy policy, the trade imbalance, the impending failure of Social Security, etc. Everything he had to deal with is chump change comparatively speaking.

    He is still a neophyte in ANY Republican-centered change in government that would be successful. To portray him as devoted to business-like competence is not the same as devoted to results.

  • APA Guy

    In fact, the one thing that will have me convincing voters here that Romney is worth voting for is the fact that he stands to correct some of the Obama wrongs on the economy…including implementing pro-business policies and private sector growth. Tax reform would also be great, but I’ll take an economy moving in the right direction as a start.

  • rabun1016

    “Were I Mitt Romney I?d be wondering how I spent 5.5 times as much money as Rick Santorum and barely won Ohio. I?d be wondering who on my campaign staff gets fired first.”

    One obvious answer is Santorum did not have to pay for the negative ads against Romney produced daily by Levin, Erickson, Rush etc. Powerful free advertising directly to republicans.

    On the second point, I am in agreement with that. Stu Stevens has done an awful job managing Romney’s campaign. Just the fact that so many on this blog cannot distinguish between a state health care program per the 10th amendment, and an unconstitutional federal takeover of national healthcare means a very simple point, easily anticipated, has not been answered in a concise way people unfamiliar with the constitution can grasp.

  • lemmi

    Its not hard to understand that it is constitutional for a state to run healthcare even with an individual mandate. What I don’t understand is why anyone would want to and why Romney advised Obama on the individual mandate as recent as 2009. Couple this with Romney’s support of cap and trade, abortion, and many other leftist positions until he decided to run for president on the republican ticket. It’s hard to blame anyone for being a little skeptical.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Where Governor Romney had in a limited way supported state subsidies for green energy in at least one case to provide jobs to his state and when faced with a budget shortfall he actually took money out of the trust fund to balance the budget. Now lets look at your general points with more specifics advocate cap and trade nope : here is a direct quote from the Natural Defenses Resource Council after Governor Romney pulled Massachusetts OUT of the regional cap and trade pact

    “By taking the side of polluters to advance his own political ambitions, Governor Romney has sold out the citizens of Massachusetts and failed the country,”

    Pass restrictive Co2 – nope – what he did do is cite 4 power plants for excessive emissions under the law and he did not set regulations outside of what the law of his state demanded in an effort to close the plants down. I’d rather Governor Romney had never in his life supported a subsidy but to equate 9 million dollars in subsidies with the over a billion and counting that Barack Obama handed out (or will hand out) and to cite 4 power plants to Lisa Jackson is like comparing the nuisance created by a fly in your home to a full grown Siberian tiger. I stand by the original statement that vis a vis Barack Obama, Mitt Romney is much better on energy. As for lobbying, Romney hasn’t lobbied in his life even under Newt Gingrich’s definition of lobbying but his chief energy advisor did lobby for Peabody Coal.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Being Mitt Romney’s defender, I supported Rick Perry.

  • texastaxpayer

    According March 25, 2007?s Los Angeles Times, Romney told religious leaders in 2003 that he was ?terrified? about ?warming? and found it ?quite alarming.?

    Romney wrote then-Governor George Elmer Pataki in July 2003. ?Now is the time to take action toward climate protection,? Romney declared. He advocated a ?regional cap and trade system? for both states.

    In 2004, Romney launched the Massachusetts Climate Protection Plan, ?a coordinated statewide response to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the climate,? as his office described it.

    Romney?s December 7, 2005 press release announced that ?strict state limitations on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants take effect on January 1, 2006.?

    Though my favorite Mitt enviroquote still has to be……
    “I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people”
    See the video here…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2BpgLYryI8g

    As with all things Romney you really have to ask yourself. Do I want to be advocating for this guy?

  • AceInTX

    ..

  • rabun1016

    I don’t blame but applaud anyone for being very skeptical of Romney and all others. But, as a business guy with some employees and mouths to feed, I did my analysis and have to go with probabilities versus unibomber doctrines. I think it will be easier to convince a Romney administration of the wisdom of conservative causes than an Obama administration. Mormons I have known, and I am not one, are hard working, thrifty, honest and conservative in lifestyle. I am a tea party guy – tired of the spending, who thinks that with only seven states in play, Romney may be able to do better than the others if friendly fire does not kill him.

  • AceInTX

    I want to stop Romney…all else is secondary at this point…If gingrich staying in helps do that then I want him in…if Gingrich dropping out helps stop Romney then I want him out….whatever it takes, I am opposed to Romney as the nominee…I think he’ll go down in flames higher and hotter than McLame ever dreamed of generating

  • celador2

    As each state race goes by I am amazed by the personal density of each man on energy, jobs, manufacturing, drilling, mining and constitutional solutions. The season has given Ron Paul depth along with Gingrich and Santorum. Gingrich and Santorum have grown in stature and are not done yet imo. Voters pick up on the momentum and life they offer. The are bold, defy odds and speak to urgency of the moment. Why wait! Act now! They are relevant.

    Almost all of Ohio by a FNC map went Rick Santorum, Suburbs in South west and Lake Erie went to Romney who has a themed , paced message that is timeless in its uniformity and level , clever sound bites. That is its problem. R has no sense of urgency so never tried to scale a mountain top looking for a mine or shut EPA in frustration and desperation to survive an economy like coal and other mining.

    Even in his campaign talk tone Romney’s words say one thing like, ‘ cut, cap and balance’ and no EPA that cost a business. But , he has not made that natural energy mission his own quite like Newt and Rick have.

    Santorum does well in Wisconsin but its winner take all after April Conservatives will unite around the nominee and live to grow and fight another day even with a Pres Mitt Romney.

    And hey, the night is still young!

  • celador2

    The groups EE listed that Romney has not won– from conservatives through evangelicals and Reagan Democrats are fans of Gingrich and Santorum. In 2010 the tea party won back college educated and women. Romney holds them in a Republican primary in Ohio.

    Gingrich and Santorum have warts on policy but are overall staunch conservatives. Gingrich but not Santorum, has failed horribly in his personal life, But they have transcended their shortsightedness and are on a positive path for solutions that rocked the primaries for big turnouts super Tuesday.

    These two of the four standing could win as a ticket President and VP, in November based on their personal history , likkeability, and policies.
    They got it!

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    I see Santorum becoming opportunistically fiscally conservative since the Tea parties. Something he was not in the past. Funny but this is exactly what the conservative criticism of Romney is. But Romney has been moving steadily to the right for years now.

    As for Newt, He remains a flake, who can’t keep his mouth shut, who has very very questionable personal and economic morals.

  • celador2

    Given the lack of trust and enthusiasm the various groups that vote Republican feel for Romney a probable nominee might Romney try to reach out for their votes and support by picking a beloved member of conservative or tea party momemtum as VP? John McCain picked Sarah Palin as outreach and to get out the vote he could not reach.

    Gingrich or Sanotrum might do that job given the stake voters have in them as much as anyone like Christie, Pawlenty, Rubio on sidelines. A frontline on the ground fighter–Newt or Rick for VP if Romney is nominee is one way to create some bond and get out the support in November.

    Another outreach is a real teeth party platform, the grass roots documernt we the members write and approved by delegates at convention. It might or could be a guide that binds us more strongly than it does and incorporate Gov Perry and the Tenth scenario.

    The platform must remain important and relevant. Let conservatives write it.

  • demsaresatanic

    says it all, and your calling Newt a flake, that is almost perfect.

  • Ann2012

    I just posted this in the diary:

    http://www.redstate.com/krish/2012/03/07/should-we-start-a-rs-campaign-for-newt-to-step-down-endorse-rick/#comment-60

    But wanted to repost it here as well for a larger audience. We?ll know the truth about Newt if he does the honorable thing as Rick Perry did and step down to avoid splitting the conservative vote.

    ——————————————————–

    From what I?ve read today Sheldon Adelson (Newt?s main sponsor) is opposed to Rick Santorum because Adelson is not a social conservative. If Newt stays in the race he will be a co-conspirator (in my opinion) with Adelson to keep a social conservative from winning the presidency.

    I had such a high opinion of Newt but if it?s true that Newt would purposely stay in the race to prevent Santorum from beating Romney thereby assisting Adelson with his wishes, I will be very disappointed in Newt Gingrich, apparently he was not who I thought he was.

    ?????????????????????????????
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291126/adelsons-machiavellian-maneuvers-katrina-trinko

    Adelson?s Machiavellian Maneuvers

    Sheldon Adelson might donate more to Newt Gingrich?s super PAC ? so that Rick Santorum falls in the polls and Mitt Romney wins the election. The Wall Street Journal reports:

    In a bit of political chess, Mr. Adelson is ready to not only directly support the former House speaker in the Republican primary, but to use his cash to push Rick Santorum from his position atop the latest national polls, according to people who have discussed the matter with Mr. Adelson.

    If Mr. Gingrich could afford to continue campaigning, one of those people said, he might be able to draw off conservative and evangelical voters from Mr. Santorum, improving the chances of Mitt Romney, who Mr. Adelson believes has a better chance to win November?s general election.

    One factor that may be at play is Adelson?s differences with Santorum on social issues:

    Mr. Adelson doesn?t oppose Mr. Santorum, but he doesn?t share the former Pennsylvania senator?s socially conservative positions, including his strong antiabortion views, associates said. Mr. Santorum was one of only two Republicans who didn?t meet with Mr. Adelson in October around the time of a candidates? debate in Las Vegas, according to a person familiar with the matter.

    http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Adelson-billionaire-super-PAC/2012/02/17/id/429810

    ?Adelson is certainly giving Gingrich one more chance. But given Gingrich?s poll numbers, Adelson?s cash infusion is more about knocking Santorum from the top of the polls than it is about boosting Gingrich?s chances? Republican strategist Ford O?Connell told CNN. ?While Adelson supports Gingrich, he is concerned that Santorum could win the nomination over [Mitt] Romney.?

    ????????????????????????????

    The following excerpt was really surprising to me when it said that the donation came with the expectation that it wouldn?t be used to attack Romney:

    This is probably the outcome that Sheldon Adelson had in mind when he cut his most recent $10 million check to the pro-Newt super PAC. The Las Vegas casino magnate, a longtime Gingrich benefactor who was drawn to Republican politics mainly because of Israel and Middle East issues, has made it clear that he known Gingrich?s campaign is doomed, that he doesn?t care for Santorum?s cultural conservatism, and that he?s eager to help Romney unseat Barack Obama in the fall. His most recent super PAC donation came with the expectation that it wouldn?t be used to attack Romney.

  • demsaresatanic

    that garbage.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …regarding the potential that Mitt’s Minions muffled Perry’s Posse.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …but only nominally, because it is unfair to adjudge the personal decisions of honest/sincere people.

    Perry doesn’t care about intra-Texas potency and Sarah doesn’t care about her personal future; both honestly answer questions.

    Perry would have persisted, but was probably prevailed upon [by "pals" such as EE] who wanted to mobilize against Mitt; what they forgot is that the last-man-standing against him had to be the best conservative…and Perry has a record that far exceeds that of Santorum [and a more rugged personality...without sacrificing the "Main St." imagery].

    Sarah has been nominated for Veep and pondered running for POTUS, so why would she refuse to run if prevailed upon @ the convention?

    Color me “blue,” but sky-”blue” and optimistic that Perry will become a Cabinet officer on 1/20/2013…with the GOP’s Palin serving as Press Secretary.

  • skymutt

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/the-book-on-mitt-romney-here-is-john-mccains-ent

    Romney’s real dilemma is that if he pivots back to the middle, he is going to create a fresh round of flip flops. Those will be much more damaging than the old ones. But if he does not pivot back to the middle, does that cede the center to Obama? Quite possibly. So, I see him as being handcuffed as to his strategy in the general.

  • Ann2012

    I?ve posted excerpts from The National Review, Wall Street Journal, and Newsmax. These are not left-wing publications they are all conservative. At some point we have to not be na?ve about how politics works.

    There is no way that Newt can win the nomination at this point with the delegates he has thus far. Rick Santorum is strong in the manufacturing section of the country and in the south as well. If Newt truly cared more about getting a conservative in the White House rather than his own (or Sheldon Adelson?s) self-interest he would endorse Rick Santorum. And he better do it after the next round of southern states if Rick Santorum does well in those or he will be blamed in November if Mitt Romney becomes the nominee.

  • celador2

    I have been open in my doubts about Newt Gingrich here at RS based on his long term cruelty and disrespect to his wives and voters. When I saw others giving him a second chance I paid attention and heard someone who reminded me of John Brown 1850s in style in SC. And his energy petitions are his strong points. Newt rolls on and on with energy!

    I think Newt and Rick both want to stay as long as they can and will wait until there is no hope before dropping out.

    One of the most profound actions Newt Gingrich did this season was his outrageous exposes on GODLess judges in SC. Newt Gingrich is so outraged at judges that overstep, over reach and legislate morality out and atheism into the public square, Adelson would have reason to worry too about Newt if he is not a cultural conservative.

    I read your post and see that Adelson does not want Santorum but likes Newt over Romney for now. Thanks, its helpful knowing some opinion of Adelson’s reasons.Might Adelson also want to land with a winner so has his eye on Romney and not burning bridges?Why leak to media? Santorum may be more tolerant of drinking, smoking and gambling than is Romney though!

    IMO Newt will make a big effort for Alabama and Mississippi and go on in hopes of 155 winner take all in Texas. Neither he nor Santorum know who is stronger. It looks like Rick today after Super Tuesday. A little more work for 12 thousand votes and Rick Santoum would have carried Ohio in a whiteout. Newt got 15,000 I think but did not campaign much. Newt has donors other than Adelson and can do anti Romney ads.

    Wisconsin may be a Romney and Rick slug fest for hearts and souls Apr 3.

    if Rick Santorum wins Wisconsin then Romney can not assume the nomination for Romney is inevitable.

  • celador2

    Its too soon for Newt Gingrich to drop out before Alabama and Mississippi, He has more to offer voters and as a product we consumers can only benefit a while longer to see who wins as states vote. At some point money dries up like votes and then one of them, Newt or Rick see its time to endose the other. From strength, perspective and a lot of delegates one drops out.

    Santorum pulls in Reagan and manufacturing concerned voters. Many vote Democratic and live in upper midwest and Great lakes area.

    Republican voters alone can not win the November election. .If Santorum carries swing states in Great lakes well then Obama won’t win!

  • celador2

    If Santorum becomes president would he follow the policy wishes of Conservatives and tea party in the House and Senate and not over spend?

    Romney pushed in SC the House tea party work of art, the budget called Cut, cap and balance’ but rejected by WH and Reid early 2011. A president can do little to improve on that for 2013!

    Talk is cheaper than actions. Will any of the three work to see it through?

  • Scope

    Gingrich was given life in GA was because of Sheldon Adelson’s money, and of course he claimed “hometown boy” even though he has been living in VA before, and since leaving Congress. How many have screamed that Gingrich was incompetent because he couldn’t even get on the ballot in his home state VA? It’s kinda like the argument against Lugar who hasn’t even owned a home in IN, yet he keeps getting elected as an IN Senator.

    I don’t agree with Newt staying in with the balance of southern states, he can harm Santorum in the last few southern states that will be awarded proportionally. After that, there isn’t much delegate chance for anyone in the southern states. After April 1 we move to winner take all. With Gingrich in in Miss. and AL. he splits the vote with Santorum, and Romney will still get delegates there while Gingrich and Santorum split the conservative vote. If Gingrich doesn’t suspend now, and support Santorum in those states, there is no eartly reason that Gingrich is staying in other than to split that anti-Romney vote, and he dang well knows that can only help Romney.

    I am truly at the point where I want to believe that Gingrich wants to screw it to the Republicans because they pushed him out of his Speaker role in the 90′s that he is willing to screw over the party to make his last stand. That, coupled with an ego that should have been coralled with his ouster will do more damage to the Republican party than anyone can anticipate. Gingrich knows, because he is not a dummy, that he can screw the Republican party in this election to kingdom come, and he is willing to do it, just as much as he knows he was given credit for bringing the Republican party to power in the 94 election. For Gingrich, it’s all about power, whatever it takes, even sitting on the couch with Pelosi. Gingrich is as much a flip flopper as Romney, he just has a better way of stating it.

  • Ann2012

    Apparently he?s not a cultural conservative. His main concern seems to be Israel. And Newt has said that if he were elected president he would relocate the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on Day 1. Which in my opinion never seemed like too good an idea when we?re on the verge of WWIII in the Middle East, but what do I know?

    Also it?s difficult to imagine that a Las Vegas casino magnate with I believe over 20 billion dollars would be culturally conservative. He is opposed to Rick Santorum because of Santorum?s? pro life views.

    The interesting part about this is that Adelson who knows these candidates best (compared to our perspective of them) has determined that Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are closest to his ideology then is Rick Santorum. That alone will give someone a better insight into all three of these candidates? true character.

    You mentioned in another post: ?At some point money dries up?? but with the new Super Pac rules the money never dries up for people like Adelson.

    If my math is correct Adelson could give Newt Gingrich 100 million dollars and that would be .005 percent of 20 billion dollars. Or to make the example relative to the common person, someone with a net worth of 500,000 a donation of .005 percent is 2,500.

    And Adelson has not given Newt 100 million yet (although he said he might) he?s only given him about 20 million. So as you can see when you have people like this that can literally buy a candidate, it?s almost guaranteed that the candidate will not want to do anything to upset their donor. And that being the case, a candidate should only have donors that share the same fiscal and social ideology as they do so they will not have to ultimately compromise their positions.

    It would make sense for Newt to want to stay in for the southern states next week, but if Santorum does well, and Newt doesn?t drop out and endorse him the only thing I can infer from that action is that Newt is not concerned with getting a social conservative in the White House but rather his concern is following the orders of his new master Sheldon Adelson.

  • Ann2012

    I thought he was treated very badly by Republicans back in the 1990s. I remember that time well. However, learning that Adelson is against Santorum because he is a social conservative and that he is funding Newt at this point for the sole purpose of helping Romney is the end of the line for me.

    I understand Newt taking the money if he thought he could win the nomination process, but this far along in the process when you know that you cannot win, there is no point in staying in other than as I wrote in my last post (upthread) serving his new master.

  • greyeagle

    Unless he has a conservative VP, he will get no where.

  • JSobieski

    I love the logic of Romney supporters:

    “Only Romney can win, so if you don’t support Romney, you implicitly support Obama”

    I live in Michigan and have more D friends than R friends. I think Romney is less significantly less likely than Santorum to win Ohio in the general election. Same for Michigan.

  • JSobieski

    As was Michigan.

  • skymutt

    McCain was cruising to sure victory when Ohio had its primary in 2008. McCain already had 1,014 delegates going into the Ohio primary, and his 20+ point win in Ohio clinched the nomination. So, Ohio Republicans did not have too much motivation to vote. And it was not like McCain was so well liked that many people would have been flocking to the polls just to say that they voted for him. This time, Romney is definitely ahead but the race both in Ohio and nationally is much more competitive. So I think you may be overestimating the significance of the modest increase in turnout.

  • GregInFla

    and still not “right” enough (see his AGW position). That should tell you where he started (left of TeddyK).

  • celador2

    Maybe Newt stays in to negotiate a slot on the ticket or cabinet. I doubt he will get that anymore than Santorum although they should be considered if Romney is nominee. Both will have many delegates.

    I agree these big super PAC men and women should be of the same value system as the candidate. Adelson will move to Romney whom he sees as one who is not a cultural conservative.

    If Newt does poorly in Alabama, Mississippi and Kansas he may pack it up and live to fight another battle down the road but not as a presidential candidate.

    I fear being sold out with Romneycare being model for Obamacare. Romney has his hands full with repeal if he is serious. IF Sup ct upholds Obamacare in June or most of it that validates Romney.

    Conservatives can always use a friend and advocate but June could be a bad time with that mandate for religious hospitals and clinics.

    Ideally having a strong conservative is possible still, Oreilly says Romney has it. But, one to the right can win CA, says Rove since the CA party is very conservative, And Texas will not go to Romney. NJ, NY may, but PA–open and in play?

    At the convention after first vote the delegates can move on. Newt can release them or ask his go to Santorum, Or Visa versa.
    There is a risk if Newt drops out now the supporters will not go to Santorum but most will.

  • demsaresatanic

    don’t give up.

  • demsaresatanic

    try shooting at the tail rotor.

  • WillWong

    on Romney out there since 2008, Romney is still running for the POTUS?

    Newt’s socalled baggage are chicken feed compared to Romney’s!

    I am beginning to get despair with the state of the Republican Party! How can McCain, knowing what he knows still endorsed Romney? How can so many people get hung up with things that Newt said and gave Romney a pass over such egregious crimes against classical conservatism. How can we allow a man like Romney to be the leader of the Republican Party?

    Santorum or Newt might not have the resources to hammer Romney on his record. McCain hammered Romney in 2008 and one can only imagine what Obama with his vaunted billion dollar war chest would do with the info found in this Book on Mitt!

  • zachv

    Will be hard air for Democrats. Romney’s been around since 2008 and the political class and informed voters have already heard 95% of the damaging goods on Romney.

    I mean, Jeremiah Wright was damaging for Obama, but everyone knows about him already. It’s not going to get any traction this time around and Romney’s going to have to focus on Obama’s tenure instead of his past if we’re going to win.

    Not to mention the oppo research’s been publicly available for like 2 years now. I’d read it through awhile ago. It never was shocking to me.

  • WillWong

    Only problem was he didn’t sit long enough! Elected to the House in 1990, he left to join the senate in 1994 where after twelve years of “old boys” politics, he became a team member who learned how to take one for the team!

    America is in such a deep hole that only a visionary with a proven record like Newt stands a chance to help her dig herself out of the hole!

  • John6078

    When EE gets lumped together with George (I give up) Will and WIlliam (I picked John McCain) Kristol, he’s got to be sweating. We certainly don’t need to run a candidate like Sore Loserman.

  • John6078

    There are two things to look at. Firstly, Obama is at 45% approval in Gallup’s track for February. He was at 43 yesterday. Secondly, look at the head to head. Romney is in the best position. Obama is below 50% in every poll. You guys need to get a grip.

  • WillWong

    Smeared Newt on his relationship with Reagan based on the March 21, 1986 Special Order Speech!

    Smeared Newt on the House Ethics Scandal in the mid 1990′s

  • laodalisque

    I grow VERY demoralised reading these posts that push for Newt to exit. But every time I come to your posts it buoys me up and I have to smile. You’re the only other person on RS (besides me) whose support of The Newtmeister has never wavered. And you take a lot of heat for it. Newt’s done everything but draw diagrams of what he would accomplish in his FIRST WEEK alone, whereas the other three stooges just lob sound bite grenades in lieu of real ideas and real plans.

    Everyone keeps harping about how they’d love someone who can take the fight to Obummer; or, demonstrate ‘real’ conservative convictions; or, have the political knowhow and moxey to lead a dithering Congress; or give specific examples of his ideas and platform planks; and, EVERY TIME, the answer very plainly is: “Newt’s doing this! Newt’s already done this! Newt’s been saying this!” But it seems like Newt’s the elephant in the room that everyone’s doing their best to ignore. Everyone appears to want a candidate whose description and qualifications match Newt to a ‘T’ (hyuk, hyuk!) but no one’s willing to man up and actually own a support of him.

    I’m a white, married, 51 year old woman with a post graduate degree in Middle East History from UCLA. I’ve been following Newt’s career since I voted for The Gipper in ’80 and I see something in Newt that I just don’t see with the others. He’s been a GREAT PATRIOT fighter and staunch conservative for decades. He’s endured the worst calumnies from every sector of society. He’s been shamefully mistreated in the course of his many years of unwavering service to the GOP. And, now the treacherous, cowardly, ingrates say outright lies about him, ridicule him, and try to marginalize him. He’s never backed down and never backed away. He can be a Marquis of Queensbury verbal dueller or a brass knuckles street brawler–however you want it, because he’s got a phenomenally agile mind and a razor sharp command of the language. And he’s the kind of guy I can feel confident about taking the fight to Obummer, and then following through on all the promises he made in the campaign.

    I can’t say that about any of the others. Besides, Newt’s the only one I find it easy to look at day after day–his sweet ol’ face doesn’t grate on my optic nerves like MattelMitt’s does. I can’t even stand to look at him. So keep it up Will. I’m right there with you!

  • skymutt

    And the thing is, Obama’s going to be trying to appeal to the center, not the right, which is lost to him. Why would he want to concentrate his campaign on stuff that would highlight Romney’s moderate bona fides? I don’t think Obama will use this stuff as much as WillWong and others think.

    Full discclosure: I am an Obama supporter, mostly a lurker, not here to advocate my political positions.

  • WillWong

    such as Common cents, clowngirl, demsaresatanic, texastaxpayer, texasref, wcp, Dr. Bob, . Newt is very smart. He will win Alabama and Missisippi next week.

  • WillWong

    who gave as much as he took on behalf of Newt! :)

  • WillWong

    And that is our greatest problem with Romney as our candidate!

    If Romney tries to tack to the center, O can run ads about his recent conversion to the right!

    If Romney tacks to the right, he loses the independents!

    Here is hoping and praying that Romney supporters wake up in time and throw their support behind Newt!

  • clowngirl

    going forward.

    But I agree that working together (while still competing against each other, of course) and choosing which states to focus on could yield excellent Romney blocking results.

    Obviously each wants to get the upper hand — but neither of them win if Romney gets a majority. They have a common interest — all conservatives — heck, Americans – have a common interest in blocking Romney from the nomination.

    If necessary, I could live with Gingrich and Santorum sharing the ticket.

    A brokered convention wouldn’t be ideal under ordinary circumstances but the priority now is averting the disaster of a Romney nomination.

  • Ann2012

    I was surprised to hear that. I posted something about a contested convention below that I found interesting. I really didn?t know how it would work so I did some reading tonight and posted what I found since it looks like that is the direction this is taking.

  • clowngirl

    I fail to see that as a compelling reason for Newt to drop out.

    The only realistic option is to shift to blocking Romney and forcing a brokered convention.

    In pursuit of *that* goal, it will be helpful for Romney to have more opponents, for a number of reasons.

  • Ann2012

    With a contested convention it would be possible for someone other than Mitt Romney to win since all the delegate votes can be changed. Why is everyone thinking that Rick Santorum does not have a chance to win or even Newt Gingrich for that matter? Mitt Romney most likely will not get to 1144.

    If delegates can vote for someone else on a second ballot, and if the current sentiment at that time favors Rick Santorum then it is very likely that some of the Romney delegates will simply change their vote.

    Romney can spend all his money on attack ads ?till the cows come home and it will do him no good if we have a second ballot decision.

    http://redalertpolitics.com/2012/02/how-would-a-contested-convention-actually-work/

    The more nuanced term preferred by Republican activists looking to Tampa is to call it a ?contested? convention.

    Winning the Republican presidential nomination is all about delegates. Under current party rules, the nomination will be decided by 2,286 Americans ? including 78 individuals from the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands.

    In non-binding caucus states, delegates may vote for whomever they please. By contrast, delegates from primary states are bound to vote for the state?s voters? choice, regardless of their personal preference.

    In some states, delegates are awarded proportionally based on votes, while other states have ?winner-take-all? primaries. Finally, each states? representatives to the RNC serve as delegates who are free to vote for their preferred candidate.

    In Tampa, on the night of the first ballot, Speaker John Boehner, who, according to the rules of the RNC will chair the convention, will announce the roll call of the states. At this point, each state will announce whom their delegates are voting for.

    If none of the candidates wins the 1,144 delegate votes needed to clinch the nomination, Speaker Boehner will call for a second ballot. All of the delegates who were bound during the first vote based on their state primaries will be released to vote for whomever they please.

    If the second ballot doesn?t produce a nominee, the voting will continue until someone wins.

    ———————————————————————————-

    http://www.ehow.com/how_2276407_become-delegate.html

    Instructions

    1. Find the contact number or address of your state’s party office for whichever political party you want to become a delegate for. You’ll find links to several political party websites at the bottom of this page, through which you can access your state’s contact information.

    2. Call or write your state’s party office requesting the materials necessary for you to apply as a delegate. Since things do get lost or delayed in the mail, it’s preferable to call. Speaking to someone directly is the only way to ensure they’ve received your request. Plus, your materials can be sent immediately rather than waiting on them to receive your request in the mail.

    3. Read all materials thoroughly and carefully follow the directions for filling out your application, or Declaration of Candidacy, to become a delegate.

    4. Make note of the deadline date, which should be provided in the materials you receive. Though you should certainly spend quality time filling out your application, it’s imperative that you ensure its receipt to the appropriate address by the deadline date.

    5. Mail your application and follow up with a phone call to ensure its receipt.

    Tips & Warnings

    Make sure your voter registration reflects the political party that you want to become a delegate for.

    Be prepared to provide background information in your application. It varies from party to party and state to state, ranging from your current occupation, to any elected positions you may have held, to your previous involvement with the party.

    If you have any questions about filling out your application, do not hesitate to call your state’s party office for answers.

  • clowngirl

    Several weeks ago, Santorum did VASTLY better against Romney in hypothetical head to heads than he did with Newt in the race.

    But a lot has happened since then and Santorum’s negatives have climbed significantly.

    Now there is some evidence that Newt dropping out might directly benefit Romney.

    Many Santorum supporters here seem blissfully unaware of this and continue spouting outdated – no longer accurate – conventional wisdom.

    It is also important to keep in mind that Newt dropping out is STRONGLY IN SANTORUM’s SELF INTEREST — for any number of reasons, none of which include him actually winning the nomination.

    Before following the cue of the Santorum campaign, one should think hard about what their motivations might be.

  • skymutt

    Romney could just continue to attack and make the election nearly entirely about Obama, and evade talking about his own positions as much as possible. I think this may be his best strategy. I also think Romney has a much better chance of winning in Nov. than Newt… Newt is both well known and very unpopular in general election polls, and I do not think he will be able to overcome that. Sorry to be negative about your guy’s chances.

  • clowngirl

    First off Santorum DID campaign in Georgia. So it’s simply not true to say he didn’t compete.

    You say Santorum has competed well in every race he chooses to enter.
    “Well” may be subjective but Santorum campaigned in SC, FL, and NV and his finished with:

    17% of the vote in SC (23 points behind Newt who came in as an underdog and beat a surging “inevitable” and still relatively well liked and Santorum who was supposed to have momentum from IA)

    13% of the vote in Florida — Florida was good to Santorum eventually because it bloodied both Gingrich and Romney and took up all their time opening the door for Santorum to win some poorly attended caucuses in states he almost had to himself and therefore (with the media’s help) relaunch his campaign.

  • http://MichaelHarrington.org Michael Harrington

    Each candidate out there has those who place them third.

    Some Santorum supporters will not support Newt due to infedelity, and some Newt supporters will not support Santorum for his words and actions.

    This election is sadly all about who is least imperfect in the views of most voters, or who has the most chance against Obama.

  • clowngirl

    what is the path to victory in which Santorum (who – so far is almost even with Newt in the popular vote) suddenly magically wins 65% of all remaining delegates?

    I assume you realize that many of the remaining states are proportional — so merely winning 65% of the remaining states would not be nearly enough.

    Utah happens to be winner take all, so that’s 40 delegates Santorum has no chance at.

    Hawaii has a good number of Mormons and holds a caucus – so it’s likely out too.

    Here’s the thing:

    Most of the remaining states could be classified as “southern states”, and there are 2 states that border VA — all of these are likely to be strongholds for Newt.

    Santorum needs 65% of all remaining delegates — Newt needs 70% — since more of the remaining states could be considered “pro-Newt” and your only concern (I’m sure) is to make sure the candidate more capable of beating Romney has the best chance possible – wouldn’t it make a lot more sense for Santorum to drop out.

    Romney’s already gotten to compete in 2 home states, another where he has a house and where he’s campaigned like crazy for 5 years, and 4 unusually Mormon states.

    Santorum got the benefit of having Newt take on Romney when he was fresh and fightin’ and absorb about $30 million in negative ads and delivered a Romney who’d just driven up his own negatives and then had to refocus his campaign – kindly giving Santorum 2 caucuses and a beauty contest to have almost entirely to himself. Then Santorum gets to go into Super Tuesday being treated as the clear Romney alternative — the only guy who could prevent Romney wins in TN, OK, and OH.

    It’s hardly civil to ask Newt to drop out just when the focus turns to the South.

  • uncmike

    I can remember well the night Newt led the first rout of the Democrats back in 1994 and how I thought this country had finally turned the corner. But the RINOs in both the Senate and House undercut that progress. Newt is all you say (with some personal flaws like most everyone) and at this point is the only guy with the vision and energy to make some good things happen for a change. Keep up your support and maybe he’ll turn the tide.

  • arthurjake

    voting for a carbon copy of Obama because he calls himself a republican will change anything. I am going to get as much people as I can to go out and vote for conservatives down the board for but vote for none of the above for POTUS. I think the establishment will get the message then if that happened in mass.

  • Common_Cents

    Let’s get RS back to grass roots conservatism. We have fallen into a trap of “woe is me” and lost our way.

    Breitbart challenged us, and would call us pansies.

    What are we gonna do about it?

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

    Conservatives coalesce and make Santorum the nominee 3) GOTV and defeat Obama

    simple

    smile

  • jaykali

    That is his deal. Gingrich plays better in the south.

    Look people, Romney is going to get the Texas’s and Georgia’s and Oklahoma’s, etc. types in the general. It doesn’t matter how frustrated Erick is with his arms folded shaking his head, Romney ALREADY has the red states.

    So onto the swing states. I think Romney plays real well in Florida but then when you move onto blue collar states like Ohio/Pennsylvania/Michigan maybe not so much. And so your argument could be in theory that Santorum can deliver those states. Well he couldn’t in the primary, this was his chance and he blew it on F-ING CONTRACEPTION. I swear I don’t know what the ‘H’ these guys campaign managers are doing letting the candidate go off on tangents.

    And so Obama is going to play up blue-collar this election which also has been a sore spot for him as Hillary was much more blue-collar friendly. And so he has auto-bailouts and union giveaways to get those blue-collar states. And who knows it just might work.

    Altho Romney can easily get liberal states in the primary that doesn’t really mean he is going to flip a blue state red. He will get a couple swing non blue-collar states like New Hampshire I’m sure. But the big money is on Ohio and Michigan. It remains to be seen how well he will do there.

    Hopefully he can put together some sort of strategy to endear himself more to the blue-collar types and maybe throw a red meat bone to the base every once in a while.

  • zachv

    As a candidate Gore’s political campaigns were exactly that. He’d turn the frame of the debate to be entirely about his opponent and the said criticism of his opponent. That’s why he was so successful and became a Rep., Sen., VP and Pres Candidate.

    But one of the reason’s Gore wasn’t as successful in 2000 as he had been before was Rove taking that particular strategy into account and being able to counteract the narrative. Obama, on the other hand, is the sitting incumbent and may struggle keeping the focus of the campaign away from him like Bush (as a non-incumbent) was.

  • jaykali

    Like Arizona, etc. so we shouldn’t discount that. Obama has tried to appeal to states like Arizona with a lot of pro-amnesty/immigration talk but I don’t think it works and Mitt seems to play better in those states.

    I need to read up on the various Obama strategies but I don’t see how he can get Florida or enough of the western swing states, to me he has to get the blue collar ones to win.

  • mikeymike143

    romney the moderate is still vunerable

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

    more later

  • greenpoint

    Newt loses both Alabama and Mississippi. This is the Southern strategy?