« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Not Closing the Deal

“In five years of campaigning it is stunning to me that the Romney camp still has no clue how to play the expectations game.”

This morning you were going to read a post from me saying Mitt Romney was definitely now the nominee and it was time for Santorum and Gingrich to drop out. The post was predicated on late polling and early corresponding exit polling from yesterday showing that Mitt Romney won Mississippi. He had finally won in the south.

But the early exits changed with the late exits. The late polling was wrong. Happily I could delete my post. Not only did Mitt Romney not win either Alabama or Mississippi, but he is, as you wake up, coming in third in both. The polls were wrong.

Yesterday, Mitt Romney went on CNN and told Wolf Blitzer that Rick Santorum’s campaign was coming to a “desperate end.” That seems more apt this morning to Romney’s southern campaign. Given his poor showing, it’s understandable if you expect Newt Gingrich to call on Romney to get out.

There is a lot to review in this biggest story of the day. But the start should be a simple question: does Mitt Romney need more debates?

The Romney camp signaled it was tired of the debates. But in the Florida debates the Romney camp largely destroyed Gingrich before winning Florida. In the Mesa, AZ debate on CNN the Romney camp ruined Rick Santorum before winning Arizona and barely Michigan.

Both times the Romney campaign used good debate performances to rebound lagging poll numbers into real momentum. Then he decided to stop debating. Out of sight and out of mind, conservatives forgot why they thought he was the guy who could beat Obama.

Does he need to get back to debating?

The most striking thing about last night’s elections is that none of the candidates can close the deal. In effect, there was a three way tie, though it worked to Romney’s disadvantage.

Newt Gingrich last night proved he is neither a regional candidate nor a spoiler. His influence is headed into Ron Paul territory. Gingrich could not win the deep south. He won Georgia and South Carolina. A Catholic yankee from Pennsylvania won Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and will probably win Louisiana. Even with Gingrich in the race, Santorum beat Romney. He was no spoiler. Gingrich’s final act could be king maker by getting out and endorsing, but pride cometh before the fall. Gingrich is in mid fall. What a sad end to a brilliant legacy. But his campaign is over. All we need is Haley Joel Osment and M. Night Shyamalan to point out to him he is dead.

Santorum won the states. It was a huge victory. But even he is not closing the deal. The striking thing about the exits, which over all captured the race fairly well, is that Santorum’s voters made up their mind in the last few weeks. In other words, Santorum’s voters made up their minds as Romney was winning Arizona, Michigan, and Ohio. Santorum’s vote is not about Santorum so much as it is about stopping Romney. He needs to bring those voters fully on board and give them a reason to vote for Santorum. He is on the verge of doing so.

Were I Mitt Romney I’d be firing staff. It’s almost like God himself is toying with Romney. Maybe it is because the Romney camp says it would take an Act of God for Santorum or Gingrich to win. God seems like he wants to make it happen.

I don’t think I have seen any political team mishandle and bungle expectations as badly as Team Romney. Every time they let expectations get out of hand they lose. They did it in Iowa. They did it in South Carolina. They did it in Tennessee. They did it in Mississippi. Hell, they did it in Michigan where Romney did win, but by less than three percent.

No doubt buoyed by exit polling yesterday, the Romney campaign made sure everyone knew they could seriously win Mississippi. By 8pm, Eric Fehrnstrom was on CNN telling Anderson Cooper that no one really thought Romney would win Alabama or Mississippi. I couldn’t help but laugh in the background.

In five years of campaigning it is stunning to me that the Romney camp still has no clue how to play the expectations game. It is increasingly clear it is not a well run campaign, Mitt Romney is not a good campaigner, but he will still, more likely than not, be the GOP nominee. While all eyes were focused on Alabama and Mississippi, Romney was doing quite well in Hawaii and American Samoa.

Like sterile accountants counting pennies, the Romney camp keeps counting delegates. That can get them to a win, but it will be an uninspiring win. There is little enthusiasm for Romney with the base. In heavily Republican Madison County, MS, voter turn out barely topped 7,000 voters. In 2008, when the GOP contest was done and everyone knew McCain would be the nominee, 10,500 people still turned out to vote for McCain. Yes, more Republicans turned out to vote McCain in 2008 than Romney in 2012. That’s a problem. That’s a lack of enthusiasm.

The problem is two fold now. The base doesn’t like Romney, but the base doesn’t really like the other options either. At the same time, the base does not want this primary to end.

The roller coaster continues. The one sure thing out of this is that, though Romney is not becoming a better candidate as the primaries continue, Rick Santorum sure is. As for Newt? He is becoming less relevant.
It is time for Newt Gingrich to exit. It is time for Santorum v. Romney and let the chips fall where they may. I still think Romney is the nominee. But I think Santorum vs. Romney one on one gives Romney a run for his money he needs to become a candidate conservatives can potentially rally around.

COMMENTS

  • RJLigier

    “Hi, my name is Brian Camenker; I’m a Jew from Massachusetts.

    “And, this is Darcy Brandon; I’m a Christian from California. If you believe as we do that marriage and sexuality should only be between a man and a woman, please help us stop Mitt Romney.

    “As Governor, Romney signed ‘Gay Youth Pride Day’ proclamations, promoted homosexuality in our elementary schools, and unconstitutionally ordered state officials to make Massachusetts America’s first same-sex marriage state.

    “Romney supports open homosexuality in the military, the appointment of homosexual judges, and the ENDA law, making it illegal to fire a man who wears a dress and high heels to work, even if he’s your kid’s teacher.

    “When you vote tomorrow, please vote for social sanity and Rick Santorum, NOT for homosexuality and Mitt Romney.

    “Rick Santorum is the ONLY candidate who can be trusted to uphold traditional marriage, a straight military, and the rights of American children to have both a mother and a father.

    “This message paid for by Jews and Christians Together.org and not authorized by any candidate. To get the facts before you vote, visit Jews and Christians Together.org.”

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

    and I told girlfriend you were laughing at Fehrnstroms comment, and she said how do you know, I said because he started right when he said it. I knew that was hilarious stuff, it was to me. They tried to downplay this, but this is bad for them. I’m not sure though if Santorum can beat Romney with Newt in the race, but I think he can if he leaves.

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

    I’m a fiscal conservative, and Christian. But I also believe government needs to mind there own business, which includes half of the stuff you just na med. Why can’t a judge be gay, I care little he/gay, as long as they follow the law, constitution and such. Gay marriage, its a losing issue. People don’t like government telling others what to do unless it has to, this I think is not one of those times. You think people will stop being gay because the government won’t let them get married.

    I don’t support Romney because he lies about what he supports. But this post this me the wrong way.

  • sowa1

    we will end up with Obama. There are so many people that know only one side of everything. Those people should not vote. They did that in 2008.

  • sowa1

    hope he does because we already have a Senator who has never run a business, never was Governor of a State and had to manage a budget and has NO idea how to get this Country back in shape.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    That’s not the Democrat in me saying that; that’s distilling the angst in your recent posts and extracting the essential truth that I see in them. It shows in the lack of turnout. It shows in the posts of the rank and file here. It shows in the comments of Republican leaders in Congress who imply that they will be running the show in 2013, not the president, even if he is a Republican.

    You have been admirably honest during the primary, but more debates won’t solve the problem unless there is a fresh name on one of the podiums, and I think you know that. Prolonged campaigning will not help unless they all continue to prove themselves so unsuited for the job that someone else feels compelled to step in.

  • naraht

    To me, the nightmare scenario is *not* a brokered convention, the nightmare is that Romney has a majority, but only *with* the winner-take-all delegate results in Florida and Arizona. To me this means that we won’t know whether the convention will be a) brokered or b) Romney as a nominee because of a decision of the Rules Committee…

    And with choice b) I could see Santorum refusing to give a speech supporing Romney as the Nominee, which I think would be *worse* than a brokered convention.

  • greenpoint

    Nice people really but they don’t offset Alabama and Mississippi. 70 people voted in American Samoa. Not 70 delegates- 70 VOTERS. This victory is what Romney is selling!

    Newt needs to get the hell out today and Santorem needs to keep on winning which is what Rick will do.

  • The_Gadfly

    this is the point at which the behind the scenes movers and shakers would select someone to go have a talk with Romney and tell him that for the good of the party, he has to give up the campaign*. They would do so because you nailed it when you said the team is counting up the delegates like disinterested accounts tallying the books. That doesn’t translate to party enthusiasm in the general election when it is supposed to be all about beating Obama, the raison d’?tre for his campaign. Personally, I think this is one of the great myths of the current election season. It isn’t sufficient to BEAT Obama, we have to ROLL BACK his injurious policies. Gingrich and Santorum make those cases better than Romney. I could happily vote for either Santorum or Gingrich, but will admit neither of them seems to be exciting the base either. Maybe if one of them had the money backing Romney has, they could. But for right now spending all that money degrading Newt and Santorum is only degrading the party itself.

    *Okay, okay. In the days of smoke filled rooms we wouldn’t have even gotten to this point, but…

  • senseimitch

    So why are you calling for anyone to drop out? The results of last night only make one things clear, the voters are not excited about any of the candidates. Newt didn’t do as well as he expected but he did better than everyone else expected. I hope this goes to the convention because this is still anyone’s game. Stop calling for anyone to step down, even Romney as much as I loath the guy’s politics. Why call for Newt to step down and not Ron Paul? Because Ron is the crazy uncle? Seriously right now we have four very different voices running and losing one takes away from the debate. Leave them in and we may have a chance because picking the winner or opponents now is like giving a girl a cheap diamond, she may take it but she isn’t going to stop thinking about that black spot in the middle or dreaming about the ring she could have had…

    Regardless from my observations and from analyzing elections for the past 20+ years, the Republican establishment has already decided they want Obama for another term. To bad the voters are powerless to stop it because they don’t want to think for themselves. Just another election that proves we have only one party. We are increasingly resembling George Orwell’s 1984…

  • davesinsanantonio

    that he is a politician and not a statesman.

    Definitions:

    Statesman–someone whose primary concern is the good of the country.

    Politician–someone whose primary concern is getting elected.

    Newt will obviously NOT get elected, so for the good of the country he should drop out now and play the role of elder statesman by discussing the needs of the country and the role of the Constitution in getting us there. And also rallying the electorate to the glories of liberty in human history, and the efficacy of free markets in producing prosperity for all mankind. He would make a wonderful elder statesman if he would stay on message. He will just make a lousy politician if he stays in the race.

  • goodgovernance

    I do suspect Romney’s camp did itself no favors with the electorate when they put out the mind-boggling claim that everyone else needed to get out of the race because the math was inevitably on their side. Even when Romney still needs to get 50% of the delegates to get to 1144. It smacks of arrogance and entitlement, and it’s never a good idea to tell voters, “Vote any way you like, it doesn’t make a difference.”

    The low turnouts are extremely worrisome. What’s worse is that I think Romney will also generate about as much enthusiasm amongst independents and swing voters. His problems aren’t that he’s truly too moderate for the primaries but will be a great candidate in the general; his problem is that he just can’t connect with voters, period. There’s nothing about the guy that will reassure voters, “He gets me and my problems, and will do something about them.”

    All his advisors could come up with for a Southern strategy was to have hime say, “I tried grits and I liked them! Yum, yum! Don’t you want to vote for me, now?” There’s something really patronizing in the attitude that thought that would win people over.

  • Jack_Savage

    That your candidate is the idiot of idiots, that he was the most ill-vetted, inexperienced, radical leftist ever to even attempt to run for President, by bloodlines he is as much Kenyan as he is American and has as much love for American culture as Hugo Chavez, he is an incredible failure from top to bottom and end to end, and is such a dolt he can’t even get a baseball over home plate. He could be President for a hundred thousand years and still not have enough experience and knowledge to even be remotely considered as being qualified or getting a whiff of consideration from me.

    I am sure you have been respectful. I am sure you have been careful here. I am sure you want to have dialogue and be bipartisan and work together blah blah blah. I am sure you are a good person.

    But to be honest, I do not respect you, I do not value your opinion and your presence here offends me. This is is imply because someone who is STILL planning on voting for Obama and supporting him is either so thoroughly divorced from reality, so anti-American or so dumb that they do not deserve the benefits of this great country that they seem so intent on seeing fail.

    And as far as your comments on GOP candidates, here’s a quarter. Call someone who cares.

  • Ausonius

    Obviously, as the essay above by Mr. Erickson tells us, the Santorum campaign adapted nicely and won 2 primaries last night.

    After so many years of campaigning, how will Mitt Romney adapt to these losses?

    More attack ads on Santorum? More personal appearances? More…what?

    Will we see essays by Romney himself here on RedState? :)

    Or…are these losses irrelevant to his campaign? With Illinois coming up, they undoubtedly see a win there. They have a big lead in delegates, believe they will take California, and believe they will get a majority by convention time.

    So why adapt to anything?

  • tnguy

    then doesn’t that follow that you should be particularly disturbed about Romney’s gay youth pride day??? You don’t think gov’t should condemn what God called an abomination, but have no problem with Gov’t (in this case, Romney) promoting it?

    You have no problem with gay judges??? Personally, I’d prefer someone practicing a sexually ldeviant lifestyle not receive conservative blessings in the form of judicial appointments.

    Sorry, this isn’t my brand of conservatism. And it’s yet another reason why Romney does poorly in the south and has no chance to win come November.

    It’s bad enough when the more liberal elements of America beg for God’s furious judgement without conservatives doing the same. Gay marriage fails on the ballott almost every time. I don’t know why some conservatives are so willing to just cede the issue.

  • Viet71

    The real power players and the real money guys are indistinguishable from the Dem power players and money guys. The real split is at the base of each party, which the power players and money gus regard with scorn.

    Romney’s going to get the nomination. If the R-base doesn’t back him, it’s throwing away the Supreme Court. Just that simple.

  • maybenexttime

    Obama’s re-election is far from guaranteed. The price of gas alone could sink his prospects for another term, even if Iran plays nice and the economy continues its slow recovery. Yes, the GOP is hurting itself with a protracted nomination fight, but not enough to overshadow the problems Obama will be battling over the next 7 months.

    Romney will still probably end up with the nomination. Santorum is just going to make it incredibly difficult for him to wrap up the win before Tampa. Once Romney gets the nomination, it will be a whole different ballgame for Obama…who has been able to sit back and watch comfortably from the stands. With all the problems he’ll be facing for re-election, don’t act like the GOP has suddenly decided they’ll let him coast to another term.

  • maybenexttime

    You forgot a third definition:

    Egomaniac — Someone who thinks its all about them…all the time.

    Newt is an egomaniac. Romney created this monster back in Iowa with the carpet bombing negative ad campaign. Gingrich lost because of that, and he will never forgive Romney for what happened. I honestly believe Gingrich knows he can’t win, but he still believes he can humiliate Romney by remaining as thorn in his side.

    Newt’s continued presence in this race forces Romney to run to the right. This is killing Romney with Independent voters, and Gingrich is well aware of the damage both he and Santorum have caused the former Massachusetts governor.

    It’s all about ego and payback at this point. Forget about being a statesman, or even a politician at this point.

  • la2000

    Erick, I get what you are saying, but frankly I think it’s just a rationalization for not dealing with reality. It’s your grief talking.

    Votes have been cast. Many issues have been (repeatedly) debated. A significant portion of delegates have been allocated. If, as you state above, you believe that Romney is destined to be the eventual nominee, then it’s time for you and everyone else who is rooting for the republicans to button it up and get in line. Because there are two choices here: 1) despite knowing that Romney will be the standard bearer for the republicans, you choose to wish him continued political damage while the party unnecessarily equivocates on a full throated, unified endorsement or 2) you suck up your disappointment that Romney wasn’t everything you hoped for and start rebuilding the party brand in the image of the future nominee.

    But articles which suggest that we should continue to dither over which candidate is good enough, when even the author believes that the die has been cast, are entirely unhelpful.

    While there are some who suggest that a brokered convention will lead to conservative redemption, I believe the opposite is true. If, after a race that has at various points involved no less than 6 different front runners, we arrive at a convention only to demand a mulligan so that we might pick yet another contender (no, really, we promise, you’ll really like this one. This one for sure is a keeper…), is an invitation for disaster. You will watch the entire credibility of the party sail straight out the window. It will make great television, the way watching Britney Spears have a meltdown made great television. Which is fun unless you are Britney Spears in that scenario. The party which built it’s reputation on decisiveness will suddenly look like a pack of indecisive, befuddled morons. No one will vote for that party. It will make the democrats look positively organized by comparison.

    Santorum and Gingrich are not going to exit without a hard push. They got a whiff of victory, they’ve convinced themselves that this is going to happen, and that sheer determination will secure a win. They have Ron Paul disease. And articles like yours aren’t helping matters.

    So if you believe that, at this point, Romney will be our nominee, then it is time to shut off the oxygen on these other two. That isn’t up to them. It is up to us. We, the republican voters, will decide whether we exit this primary season in a coherent and positive way or whether we drag this out into an ugly, very public family squabble.

    I am not, by the way, a big Romney fan. I am, however, trying to be realistic about what needs to happen if 2012 is going to be competitive.

    Everyone wishes Ronald Reagan had shown up. He didn’t. It’s time to deal with the hand we dealt ourselves and make the best of it.

  • vtdelacy

    There were at least 90 conservative leaders who turned out to CPAC from across America to give their full support to the one conservative candidate we have remaining in this race, Rick Santorum. The following week, both Rush Limbaugh and Dr. James Dobson added their voices to the rising tide of those wanting to endorse a Santorum nomination and Presidency. That is the proven social conservative that our party needs to get behind and endorse. If we end up with a “moderate” like Romney of Romneycare fame, it will be giving Obama another 4 years b y which to complete the dismantling of America on a silver plattter, may God forbid that! Rick can and will beat Obam,a, we simply need to get behind the one candidate remaining who offers the greatest hope of that objective. That man is Rick Santorum for president in 2012!

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Some are just more dead than others. If Newt prevents Santorum from getting the nomination that only improves his legacy.

  • http://online.logcabin.org/about/ suzieQ

    Having spent the last five years of my life in college I have grown to truly love statistics. I’m not being sarcastic here, for those who think that’s funny. Breaking down each state by number of votes cast and turnout in the primaries and caucuses thus far, then comparing those numbers to 2008, is very alarming. For one, turnout is low. Very low. But aside from that, the turnout is also a very skewed demographic from that of the overall state. Take Alabama for instance. It has a large Hispanic population, a large African-American population, a large youth population. But if you look at the demographics of the GOP primary last night, it was primarily elderly caucasians that turned out to vote. And even then, a smaller group than turned out in 2008. For the future of the party, that is scary.

  • http://online.logcabin.org/about/ suzieQ

    Romney has been running ads here in Utah in favor of Orrin Hatch. During the ads, he mentions that re-electing Hatch would help to dismantle the government takeover of health care. Hearing that come from Romney always sounds so disingenuous, it makes me feel like he thinks the Utah voters are too stupid to know his past.

  • lepelerin

    I think, if you want someone other then Romney as our nominee. Santorum can not get enough delegates in the remaining states to win and with Gingrich still in there picking up delegates, he’s pulling delegates away from Mitt, so Mitt can not get enough delegates.

    If you want Romney to win, Newt should drop out. If you want someone other then Mitt to have a chance at winning in Tampa, Newt should stay in.

  • furiouschads

    Wooden
    Inevitable
    Electable (I don’t like him but normal people will vote for him.)
    Privileged
    Well funded
    Moderate (in his party?s view)
    From Mass.
    Francophone
    French-lover
    Flipflopper
    Weird when agitated
    Looks strange in jeans
    Really prefers souffle to cheese grits

  • swi2522

    i could not agree more with you and its time us conservatives begin to defend our principles against the left propaganda machine
    a friend of mine is black with a business that is struggling but he will still vote for obama and he has way to defend his decision other than saying the repubs have prevented obama from being successful

    i have to stop at that point because i want to call him an IDIOT

  • texastaxpayer

    Consider the races Romney has won and the races he has lost. Florida a swing state, Michigan and Hawaii are hardly bastion’s of conservatism. New Hampshire? Please….. Ohio was basically a tie as was Michigan honestly. Who here believes Washington state or Massachusetts is going to turn red in November? He did win Mormon heavy Arizona, Idaho and Nevada though one has to wonder how much religious affiliation has to do with that. Notice the Rombots never mention that aspect of religion in politics. But more importantly look at were he has lost. South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Kansas and North Dakota all reliably red states. It seems that Everytime we have a race in an actual honest to goodness red state Romney losses. Unless of course he can drive voter turn out through the floor with his smear campaigns and attack ads. Am I the only one who doesn’t want to field a candidate who’s whole campaign seems to boil down to “Yeah I suck but the other guy is worse”? Are we really going to pin our hopes for 2012 on the idea that the democrats will be less effective than Mitt Romney at turning out the vote? Have we considered the ramifications down ticket with this guy as the “Headline”? I can’t say that I truly like Rick Santorum that much more but at least he didn’t invent “Obamacare”, he isn’t a greedy wall street 1%er personified and certainly doesn’t have the poor economic record Mitt Romney carries from Massachusetts. I think we should all look at Alabama and Mississippi and take to heart the fact that Newt’s southern strategy is dead. Don’t waste your posts with the “it was a tie BS” Newt Needed wins not ties to continue. Even though he is my fav of the three he isn’t delivering and needs to suspend and support Rick. We who do not want Romney need to face facts and back Rick with our votes, advocacy and perhaps most importantly our wallets. It’s time to get serious and defeat tweedle dee so we can move on to the real job of defeating tweedle dumba$$ in November.

  • texastaxpayer

    1) Romney has a record picking judges and its nearly three to on AGAINST conservatives. So NO I am not convinced Romney is the “Supreme Court Savior” your touting here. Facts are facts.

    2) Though probably most important the senate has “Consent and Confirm” powers for all supreme court picks. So unless we do something stupid like say nominate oh…. Mitt Romney and drag down our prospects for taking back the senate. The idea that Obama will get to appoint two more Kagans is nill.

    Nice try but no sale….. The supreme court is not a reason to support a Massachusetts Liberal….

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Seriously, we can play this game all day. All we have left are B-list and C-list candidates. None of them are likely to beat Obama. What we will hear endlessly is how a conservative candidate can’t win in a national election. What’s really bad about that is the fact that Santorum isn’t a conservative candidate.

  • clowngirl

    For one thing, there’s a triangular element at work that isn’t being acknowledged:
    Romney can’t go TOO negative on Santorum because, if he does, he’s going to flip a lot of votes back to Newt.

    After Santorum’s poor performance in the only debate where he has been remotely in the hotseat, it would’ve been CLEARLY in Romney’s best interest to try and reschedule another debate before Super Tuesday if it weren’t for the fact that could also provide a boon to Gingrich.

    Incidentally, I don’t agree with Erick’s new analysis that Romney won Florida because he “largely destroyed” Gingrich in the debates – I agree with the analysis he posted at the time: Romney’s win came about because he ran 65 times as many ads as Newt.

    And I would add that a coordinated and dishonest media attack, and the cushion of early voting Romney built up in Florida before Newt’s resurgence also played a big role.

    This is the line of logic I don’t see: Newt is irrelevant, he’s not even a spoiler, Newt desperately needs to get out.

    If he’s so irrelevant and Santorum’s doing so well anyway, why is it so urgent for him to quit?

    Erick’s asking the question: Does Romney need more debates? Of course he does – but, to state the obvious, more debates could – and almost certainly *would* benefit from more debates.

    I’d say a Mississippi debate could’ve easily given Newt the extra point and a half he would’ve needed to win.

    If your goal is a brokered covention – it’s very foolish to say Newt should get out and I think Erick’s remarks should be considered in light of the fact he almost wrote a post saying BOTH Newt and Santorum should drop out.

    Frankly I don’t see how Erick can criticize anyone for flip flopping. He’s gone from passionately urging Rick Perry to drop out to publicly talking about how he voted Rick Perry in GA ( where Newt winning a majority would’ve taken delegates from Romney)

    He’s said he’s for a brokered convention and now was this close to saying everyone should just clear the field for Romney. If Romney got 3% more of the vote in Mississippi (or 2% more while Santorum got 1% less) Erick has said many times he doesn’t think Romney can win a general election. I agree with him there– and am appalled to think he would’ve suggested we should clear the field for Romney under almost any circumstances- much less on something as thin as him unexpectedly winning one Southern state.

    A brokered convention is not something for the faint of heart. It is something of a last resort — for that reason it should not be suggested lightly — and also shouldn’t be thrown over as a goal because it would just be easier to hand the nomination to Romney.

    The reasons for a brokered convention are compelling and shouldn’t be forgotten.
    It’s about not surrendering to the establishment and media elements who are trying to shove a shockingly unacceptable candidate down our throat. It’s about taking the party back.

    As an aside: there are a lot of systemic problems that should be looked at, for example: the vast majority of pre-super Tuesday states ( who have SO much influence in determining the front runner) were states who voted for Obama last time. And many of them had open primaries or caucuses.

    Santorum didn’t fare very well at all in the one debate where he saw any kind of scrutiny. If Newt were to drop out the scrutiny would become much more intense and there’s little reason to think he would held up.

    Respect to Senator Santorum, but it should not be forgotten that he’s gotten very, very lucky and benefitted from a remarkable combination of circumstances.

    We haven’t seen him face anything close to general election pressure and we need to.

    Neither Gingrich nor Santorum are likely to amass a majority of delegates pre-convention. Romney actually isn’t all that likely to either – unless Newt drops out-

    What’s wrong with both Santorum and Gingrich staying in, forcing a brokered convention – and going in with a promise to run on the same ticket and (largely) unite the party?

  • APA Guy

    ..and the country was never the same after Obama destroyed it.

  • http://online.logcabin.org/about/ suzieQ

    during the general election than he is having now regarding the enthusiasm problem. Once the primaries are over, and he has the nomination, he will begin to move back to center and run on his leftist record as governor. He will try to show how “moderate” he has been in the past to pick up the independent voters. This will only alienate his base even more and reduce enthusiasm and GOP turnout even further.

  • Scope

    for breakfast, was so dumb it was incredible. It reminded me of when Hillary Clinton went before a Selma AL church crowd and started speaking with a black accent. Yes, it is patronizing and demeaning. He also kept saying that with the southern states he was playing in away games, as though the south was on another planet. He was mocked for that earlier, but repeated it again yesterday.

    Another point gleaned yet again from the exit polls is that Romney is winning with those 65 and older, the higher income brackets, and those with postgraduate education. Those same stats showed up in other states exit polls. He also gains the voters in the urban areas which I think are more heavily Democrat areas. If you looked at the map filling in with the Ohio primary, he lost probably 90% of the state geographically, but pulled the win from a few highly populated areas. I don’t see how he can win the general competing mostly in Obama areas.

    Romney’s money advantage is not paying off. If he doesn’t go really negative on the others, he doesn’t do well. When he does go negative on the others, and outspends them in every state, he doesn’t do well either. Unfortunately, some of the high donors, like Romney’s Wall St. donors, do in fact contribute to both R’s and D’s. If Romney can’t seal the deal, and he is struggling to prove that he can, his high dollar donors will start crossing back over to Obama. Romney has pretty much proven that he isn’t even a candidate without the money advantage.

  • edintexas

    “…who has been able to sit back and watch comfortably from the stands.”

    Seriously? Axelrod, running Dear Leader’s campaign again, has already orchestrated attacks against Romney. They expect(ed) Romney to be the candidate, and couldn’t wait to start the attacks.

    I think you are correct that Dear Leader will have problems, particularly if gas prices continue to rise (should we expect a release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, say around late August?). And Healthcare will still be a big issue, even Romney may take another unenthusiastic try at opposing it.

  • Viet71

    I’d trust him to pick better Supreme Court Justices than Obama. Once in office, he’d feel the heat from voters like you.

    Truth is, I think all three candidates are losers as candidates.

  • jout99

    There! I said it! Romney thinks he can throw his money around and buy himself into history. I’m not fooled.
    Newt is so upset with Romney that he is staying in to deny him the delegates. Way to go Newt.
    I like both Newt and Santorum. Tough Choice!
    The way I see it. Newt for Prez, Santorum for VP. That way Santorum can follow up in 4 / 8 years as Prez to keep the donkeys out!

  • texastaxpayer

    I think Rick has a better shot simply because he doesn’t take obamacare, cap and trade, supply side economics off the table and he isn’t carrying a 47th out of 50 economic rating around as a reminder of his single term “attempting” to lead a government. Is he a big spending neocon certainly but still better than a big spending, big government “Massachusetts Moderate”.

  • Scope

    and that has been one of the problems for Romney all along. He was the “inevitable,” even before the first vote was cast. He has been known to be the establishment pick, as well as the media’s. So many of his surrogates have arrogantly claimed that no matter what you think of him now, you will get in line, and get behind him in the general so we can beat Obama. That may be true, but far too many still remember the smell of having to do the same thing with the uninspiring McCain. How many times can these elites in the party tell us what we will or won’t do. Get in line is repulsive.

  • texastaxpayer

    Your attempt is better than most admittedly but still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth….

  • rmike

    so that we can unite behind one candidate (most likely Romney) to fight Obama (Remember that is the goal), I actually believe that the conservative movement will be better served by grassroot individuals expressing themselves and their views, rather than the Republican establishment dictates everything. Actually,that’s how we got into this mess in the first place! The “insiders” of the Republican Party has made up their mind on selecting one candidate without actually checking whether the voters in the conservative base actually likes him.

    Even though this particular presidential election is a nauseous mess, in the long run, the fundamental ideas should come from the base. And I believe Erick is doing just that, and so are many people who post here in RS despite of their different takes on the candidates and whom they support. There is no need to stifle the opinions.

    That said, I still think the only way to salvage anything from this disastrous primary is to unite behind one candidate asap. I think that Santorum has a shot (IF Gringrich is to drop off the race, which is a big IF). Romney will win the nomination when the dust is settled, (hopefully sooner than later). I can’t wait for the real thing in November.

  • renl57

    Where Dems outnumber Repubs 4 to 1 in the MA legislature?

    Of course Romney picked non-conservative judges. The Dems would enjoy voting down every conservative judge Romney nominated to the bench.

    Here’s the problem. Romney is a pragmatist: He makes the most of what he’s got. Given that as MA governor he faced an 85% liberal legislature (one of the most liberal legislatures in the U.S.), he nominated judges that were at least competent and that the MA legislature would confirm.

    What you seem to prefer would be for Romney to nominate conservative judge after judge, just so the MA legislature would vote them down with relish and Romney could score political points.

    But MA is not TX. The more Romney did that, the more the MA voters (who are mostly Dem) would demand that the MA legislature restrain and constrict Romney even more.

    MA is not a state where conservatives win anything by provoking fights.

    I know.
    I live in MA.

  • texastaxpayer

    The moderate approach has been tried to failure many times. Looks like we are all set to try it again though. Surely this time will be different right? *rolling my eyes*

  • http://online.logcabin.org/about/ suzieQ

    And that even if he can’t buy the presidency, he can at least purchase himself the nomination.

  • renl57

    The operative word in “brokered convention” is “brokered.”

    All that brokering–the deal-making and back-slapping and promises of favors and pork in exchange for delegate votes–would be taking place on live TV and on the Internet.

    Dem operatives will sneak video cameras or smartphone cameras into all the places where the GOP brokering is taking place, and put that stuff all over the Internet.

    That kind of sausage-making would alienate the voters even more.

    Brokered conventions died–or should have died–when it became possible to televise the proceedings live.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    He’s not any more of a fiscal conservative. I don’t see where principle fits in here at all, except for SIVV’s that seem to love Big Government social conservatives.

  • renl57

    No reliably red state will vote for Obama.

    Romney can count on the Red States to vote against Obama no matter what, just like Obama doesn’t need to worry about campaigning in MA or VT or CA either.

    A reliably red state or a reliably blue state can be taken for granted.

    It’s the swing states that matter.
    And Romney has done well in FL. Ohio is the big question mark. If Romney could win Ohio as well as FL, he would win the Presidency.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I put his over/under at 10 states.

  • APA Guy

    Apologies for the ambiguity!

  • renl57

    Check the exit polls from 2008.

    The base did turn out in sufficient numbers.

    McCain lost because of a massive defection of Independent voters to Obama. I believe Obama won Independents by something like 8 points or more.

    In 2010, those Independents swung back to the GOP column–and the GOP won big.

    The idea that a party loses an election because the base just didn’t turn out, is a popular urban myth that has never been confirmed by any exit poll from any past election that I’m aware of.

    It’s a soothing myth for a party’s base, because it allows them to believe that the outcome of the election is all about them. It never is. It’s all about the voters who are NOT part of the bedrock faithful of a party–and how you win them over.

  • APA Guy

    In my heart, I believe that Romney will be pro-business when all is said and done…especially with a GOP congress sending him bills and budgets.

    Will we take it on the chin with SCOTUS appointments? Quite possibly.

    Will we hold our collective breath when Obamacare repeal goes to his desk? Definitely.

    But at this moment, I’ll take someone who can get this economy back to the business of creating private-sector jobs…and I trust Romney to do that better than Santorum at this point and time.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    *no^text*

  • goodgovernance

    …and her attempt at a black accent. If a Republican had tried that they would have been branded a racist for sure. If Mitt ends up becoming the nominee, we better warn him not to try that one again, because I think he’d be foolish enough to go for it.

    You’re absolutely right that Romney hasn’t proven he’s even a competent candidate without the money advantage. Beyond not being able to connect with voters, he’s stiff and wooden not just on stage, but is unbendable in terms of changing his campaign strategy to something that really works.

    It’s high time Romney applied some creative destruction to his own campaign team, but I don’t think anybody in the upper echelons has been let go this cycle. It might be that he’s very loyal to the people who work for him, but if they truly haven’t been incompetent in their actions, then he’s done a terrible job as their leader.

  • eddiethegeek

    Romney polled 30% to Anti-Romney, who won 70% of the vote. Romney has not come close to 50% in any primary, has he?

    If Gingrich folds (as he should, he is done-stick a fork in him), then we have essentially a one-on-one race, and I think Santorum will defeat Romney pretty handily down the stretch.

    This piece hits the nail on the head with respect to Romney – he inspires ZERO excitement in the base. That, my friends, would lead to certain electoral defeat in November.

  • texastaxpayer

    Rombots are all the same. Anything they perceive as being beneficial about Mitt’s record is “his accomplishment”. Everything else is those d@mn pesky democrats.

    Look Romney was the Governor period end of story. He made the picks, he swore them in. They are his. The fact of the matter is he didn’t even bother to fight for conservatives. Fighting and Loosing is one thing and at least I could respect that but Romney didn’t even do that much. A little preview of his presidency no doubt.

    BTW The fact that you “live in MA” destroys any credibility you might have otherwise had. Shew liberal scurry over to the huffington post where you belong.

  • texastaxpayer

    I am sadly in total agreement my friend…

  • texastaxpayer

    Have to ponder that…. We maybe able to make a bet..

  • APA Guy

    I know we conservatives don’t like to hear this, but he has Independent appeal that the other two do not possess. Mitt’s obvious glaring weakness is his inability to win the support of the base.

    But in a general election against Barack Obama, a socialist Democrat, how much motivation will it take to pull the lever for him? Maybe enthusiasm will wane, but as much as some here (including me) can’t stand Romney, we LOATHE Obama. That will trump all in the end.

  • westcoastpatriette

    like being on a plane in the air and watching the “pros” lose the ability to function. Where are the grown-ups who can deal with this mess?

    About the only left for America to do is pray for mercy because without it, we deserve whatever is coming. God help us.

  • irishgirl

    n/t

  • rmike

    When she said this was the worst run campaign she had ever seen in 20 years. From an GOP insider point of view (which Barb Bush definitely is), this primary really should be over by now. The plan is to select a candidate who is most suitable to challenge Obama in the general. That is fine by itself (Beating Obama is Objective #1 for me). But what the Republican base fail to do is to check with the conservative base. And from what I see, most conservatives are either lukewarm to Romney or simply doesn’t like him at all. That is why he can not close the deal.

    Still, I want this primary over with so we can focus our energy for the general election. A Romney administration is still much better than an Obama administration.

  • rmike

    The trouble you can make for typing too fast!

  • westcoastpatriette

    Should say “About the only thing left…”

  • annie54

    talking about Mitt in jeans. They said that some men can wear jeans but Mitt isn’t one of those men and that it’s time for him to stop. It was really hilarious. We woulldn’t hear that kind of talk on FOX.

    I enjoy watching CNN on the election coverage because they aren’t biased – among the Republicans. FOX still believes that Mitt is the ONE we’ve been waiting for.

  • texastaxpayer

    Romney shares so much with Obama record wise healthcare, cap and trade, tax hikes not to mention the “social issues”. Couple that with his failed economic record and I think Romney has a real problem differentiating himself and a credibility gap as far as turning the economy around.as well.

    Independent voters aren’t the most informed group on the planet and the media will be a united chorus pointing out Romney’s hypocrisy and failures Everytime he tries to lay a glove on Obama. I think the result is that left leaning independents vote and right leaning independents stay home.

    You also have to factor Gary Johnson into the equation as well. He is credible, has a great record and business experience. He will be able to attack Romney from the right on economics.

    It’s not a pretty picture with a disenfranchised base.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    #no-text#

  • westcoastpatriette

    Even they can’t hide their bias. Bret Baier was practically begging Newt to get out of the race.

  • vaaztx

    ?a similar statement about gays in Iran?

    You know what country I don’t want to live in? Iran.

    Sin is between a person and their God. As long as your or his or her sins don’t affect me (ie theft & murder), then government should not be judging it. A small, limited government does not enforce the beliefs of one religion over another.

    Remember, “God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him.” (John 3:17) Are you saying you’re better than Jesus?

    Each person will be judged by God when they die. If God disapproves of someone’s sins then he, and he alone, will cast that person into hell.

  • texastaxpayer

    I don’t believe a single word Obama err…. I mean Romney says. In fact I think he should release his birth certificate. Not to prove his citizenship rather to prove he isn’t an android Microsoft and Intel put together in the basement at redmond. Further I would like the opportunity to confirm his name is Willard Romney after all all we have is his word on it and we all know what that’s worth

  • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

    Home, home in my world
    where the donks and the elephants play
    where often is heard a discouraging word
    and the sky is most cloudy all day

  • Scope

    there really is another picture that may just well be worse. Imagine Newt Gingrich in tight jeans. LOL

  • annie54

    Very well stated.

    It bothers me that Perry is so in the tank with Newt. He’s better than that. If he persists, I will have to drop my allegiance to him.

  • johnt

    plus several more oodles of millions, plus Romney getting establishment Republicans to struggle for him and bad mouth Newt & Rick. Then Romney prays and hopes, & maybe???
    Face it, the guy doesn’t sell. Obama & the people who dress & feed him are hoping for Romney, for that reason.

  • texastaxpayer

    I know many many many people who vote republican when there is someone they “like” running. Otherwise they stay home. Wonder how strong a trend that is in the country as a whole?

  • kipling

    Romney is hell bent on winning the nomination at all costs and that drive will devastate the party. He is bending the rules to secure wins in Michigan, Hawaii, and even Florida. Yes, he won those states but a simple win was not enough. He had to bend the rules to win more. He is funneling huge sums of money into negative ads to depict his candidates as “desperate.” The man’s ego has no bounds and he will destroy the party to get the nomination he craves.

    Then, in the midst of the carnage he created, Obama will easily pick him off in the general election and the establishment will blame the whole fiasco on conservatives.

  • texastaxpayer

    Many Texans myself included despise Mitt Romney not least of which for his lies and smear campaign against Perry and Texas. Gary Johnson has gotten very popular in my neck of the woods. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised at all if Romney has to compete in Texas this fall. Which in itself is a huge loss for the GOP.

  • annie54

    n/t

  • streiff

    doesn’t agree with you.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I’m excited about lots of opportunities in local and regional races. I got dumped into CO-02 with the People’s Republic of Boulder™ with our latest redistricting. We actually have a chance to elect a Republican here now. Wouldn’t that be something!

    As for the Presidential race, it’s going to be Romney. I’m ok with that. I was ok with that 4 years ago, as Romney was where I settled after Fred! got out. I don’t think he beats Obama, but he won’t kill us downticket like Santorum would.

  • reggie1

    …that you notice the WH pulling strings during these primaries. They saw that Mitt could have closed the deal yesterday, as Erick also saw. But they want the infighting to continue raising our negatives. So they steal one of Mitt’s distinguishing planks by filing suit against China for unfair trade practices. Watch Helperin on MSNBC each morning flip from reporting the WH is afraid of Mitt, to them having reams of oppo they will unveil when he is nominated. This is the WH stretching things out, by once again playing to our weaknesses.

  • streiff

    1. I need an unequivocal statement from you about what your comment means. Are you insinuating that being against sacramental sodomy results in a theocracy?

    2. Your theology stinks. Really, really stinks. I sounds like an atheist making a theological argument. It sounds like my dog expounding on particle physics.

  • joeydavis

    Is the way Massachusetts has been governed the way we want the United States governed? Gay marriage, government mandated health care, overzealous environmental regulation…

    Mitt’s record as governor is proof positive we don’t need his executive skills in the White House.

    Further, what exactly is Bain Capital? It’s more or less a private equity investment bank. They do kinda what Washington did with General Motors. They buy distressed properties, cut off the deadweight and sell the living body for profit. It doesn’t take real management skills to do that. It just takes money. When Bain Capital was spun off it had tons of that.

    Managing the olympics? That was pretty simple. Go to Washington and beg for funding. It’s the freaking Olympics. The whole world is watching, No one in Washington is going to deny any requests and take a black eye. Even Greece pulled off a successful olympics.

    How about how Mitt is managing his campaign? It’s an outright disaster. The man is outspending his opponents 10-1 and either losing or marginally winning.

    His key to every task he’s ever performed is throw a bunch of money at it and buy results. That’s what Obama has been trying to do for the last 3 years. It doesn’t work in government.

    I like that Santorum’s campaign is effectively managed. He’s spending fractions of what Romney is spending. He’s spending it in locations where he can have success. And most importantly, he is succeeding! That’s the sign of good concervative leadership.

  • annie54

    and if they have their way, another one will be added to the mix.

  • streiff

    that he didn’t even try? Wow. Stunning admission from a supporter but his lack of guts has been obvious to the rest of us for some time.

  • texastaxpayer

    Sums it up rather nicely for about 70% of the base. Imagine starting your presidency with a 30% approval rating with your own party. Bodes well eh..

  • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

    I do not attack you personally. I remember after 2010 elections that you did point me to some victories that were had in CO.

    I am ok with either Santorum, Romney, or Gingrich, and I am objective enough to see that Romney is positioned ahead of the other two. I do hope you are able to replace Polis in CO-2.

  • westcoastpatriette

    Exactly like Meg Whitman. She spent a $140 million — a mere pittance of her fortune — and was easily destroyed by the Moonbeam.

  • streiff

    Don’t they? How do they go to work without psychotropic drugs? Or do they?

  • Tbone

    to keep myself from bemoaning the fact that Rick Perry dropped out.

  • annie54

    Rick Perry wears jeans ummm, ummm, ummm.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I’m opposed to Santorum because of the disaster he would create downticket. He’s a C-list candidate at best. He’s the national version of Dan Maes. Sure, I’ll vote for him if he gets the nod, but especially in Colorado it’ll hurt deep. We wouldn’t take CO-2. We’d lose CO-3 and CO-6. Coffman has been one of the best representatives since he got into office and the redistricting specifically targeted him.

    And calling me an Eeyore is a personal attack. We go back a long way, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one.

  • okpensfan

    Supreme court considerations alone will not turn out an unenthusiastic base. Did we learn nothing from McCain?

  • joeydavis

    I think Santorum actually IS exciting the base. The man is being carpet bombed 24-7 by the Romney campaign. The voters are being told night and day that he can’t beat Obama. His campaign has very little money to fight back with. Yet he is consistently WINNING.

    The only way that is possible is base enthusiasm. Right now I think the base is invoking a strategy we use in softball when the other team has an “insurmountable” lead. It’s called hit and hope. You get up take your swings, get on base and hope the next batter in line does the same. As long as you keep hitting, there’s still hope.

    I think the base is happy with Santorum but with the way we’re being treated it’s really hard to seem excited. I mean day after day we go out and fight for a supposed “lost cause”. It’s kind of depressing, but we will push on, race after race, delegate after delegate, we’ll do all that we can, get to Tampa and hope our effort is rewarded.

  • jeffreywturner

    Conservatives just don’t trust him. Period.His “road to Des Moines” conversions are simply not believable. Conservatives have no doubt that Romney is a capable and sufficiently intelligent man and could “handle the job” of being President. They (we) just don’t trust him.

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

    Do not suggest ANYONE depart from the race until you come-clean regarding track-record [Rick Perry]; meanwhile, anyone who suggests The Newt’s ongoing-presence allows for BHO to prevail is ignoring recent [negative] polling regarding his achievements.

  • naraht

    55555

  • texastaxpayer

    That’s the question indeed. Can’t imagine a sober person would put Willard in jeans and feed him that grits line. Had to be drugs involved in these decisions….

  • reggie1

    Perhaps this was already on Drudge when I wrote the post above:

    “Obama camp: If election were today, Mitt would win…”

    There’s the WH, putting its thumb on the scale to keep us dancing a little longer. Keep those negatives up, as our candidates attack each other.

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

    Oh, do tell.

  • okpensfan

    It makes no sense to do what’s “best for the party” for 2012 when we can’t address the bigger picture for the future. I will vote for the candidate of my choice, which is not Romney.

    I’m tired of Romneys…. McConnells…. Boehners…. selling us out in the long term for insignificant short term gains. No, I don’t want more Obama. But I want to win in 2016 and 2020 and 2024. How do you do that if you sell the future for a win today? If we put in a lightweight who can’t / won’t fix the current mess, then we will own the mess and will be tossed right back out the door in 2016 and 2020. If we don’t take the Senate, Reid will push Romney around like a shop broom. What does that gain us?

  • Cowboy

    this fall you Texans have a much bigger problem than Mitt Romney. If you allow Obama a second term because of Romney losing Texas a collective head exam is in order.

  • JSobieski

    Most of the debate in recent months has been on who is best suited to “take on” Obama instead of discussing policy/solutions to economic problems.

    The debt is rarely mentioned, and SPECIFIC solutions are almost never mentioned.

    When is the last time a candidate was asked to identify three things they would cut?

    When is the last time entitlement reform was mentioned?

    We let our campaign turn into a season of reality TV. There is no “winner” in this scenario—the entire country really loses.

    It wasn’t that long ago that the public was engaged in a discussion about baseline budgeting, different ways to implement a balanced budget amendment, etc.

    What are we discussing now?

    This is the least productive presidential primary season that I can recall—-and I do think that Romney bares much of the blame . . . along with much of the center-right punditry class.

    Rome is burning, but our public debate doesn’t even seem to notice.

  • littletboca

    I don’t think Newt is out by a long shot – usually agree with your analysis.

  • acat

    remember “mom jeans”? The one of Obama on a bicycle with low or flat tires?

    Drugs may be involved, but it appears to be a bipartisan problem….

    Mew

  • joeydavis

    I almost agree with you. Newt has done about all the damage he can do to Santorum. He should have dropped out earlier.

    He cost Santorum Michigan (only 2 delegates). He cost Santorum Ohio (maybe 10 delegates). Most importantly he cost Santorum majority wins in Mississippi and Alabama where 50% would have given Santorum ALL the delegates.

    The only real harm Newt can do now is in Wisconsin and maybe Texas. His presence in Wisconsin may cost Santorum the “winner take all” race which is critically important to stopping Romney.

    So Newt can stay as long as he wants, his damage I’m afraid has already been done.

  • docaja

    as smug and superior as you wish. When you wake up in one year Obama will still be president and you can continue your history-changing tirades on this charming little website.

  • naraht

    In the situations where the nominee is known for certain pretty early such a sitting President or Bob Dole in 1996, the Convention is largely a choreographed coronation. All of the speakers are picked months in advance and the actual “votiing” of the delegates is more or less for show… I fully expect the 2012 Democratic Convention to be of this type (yes Randall Terry got a delegate from Oklahoma, I don’t think that will do anything)

    I think the chances of that sort of coronation for Romney reduce by the day, and my *guess* is even if both Santorum and Gingrich drop out *today* that Ron Paul will get enough delegates to at least be acknowledged by the convention and even force an honest to goodness vote.

  • texastaxpayer

    Perhaps you should consider how bad it is that we even have to have this conversation.

  • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

    You did tell him that you admire him for always being opposed to federal government controlling health care with mandates and federal government controlling energy consumption with carbon cap and tax. I don’t presume to change your mind, but you are objective and see at least something about Santorum that is admirable.

  • saulpaulson

    If Newt had not been in yesterdays elections I think we can assume that 60% of his voters would have gone to Santorum and thus allowed Santorum to start closing on Mitt Romney.

    Also it would have allowed Santorum to win by at least 20% which would have created a bigger perception of the Romney’s doom

    Newt Gingrich and his supporters are helping Mitt Romney.

  • Juggernaut

    and wouldn’t get excited about Mitt. Wine for the women of course.

  • antisesquipedalion

    anybody know what if any concrete solutions he proposes to any of our major problems

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

    Once again, we’re living up to the worst possible expectations.

  • Juggernaut

    just look at Romney’s gaffes, all major mistakes and Perry drops over small stuff yet his record in office is superior. Sickening and proof of media corruption.

  • antisesquipedalion

    nice guy. ?but president

  • saulpaulson

    I think for non-conservatives who do not loath Obama, it will be very hard to tell Obama and Romeny apart. Like it or not but their records are very similar.

    I read something a while ago about Romney’s record as one of the toughest governors on regulating urban development and pollution. Hard to say that sells him to independents as being different from the current president.

  • antisesquipedalion

    watched my last Fox program last week. feels great !!

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

    presidential primary season, it’s the “most destructive”.

    The candidates with both leadership experience and strong records of conservative governance either didn’t run or got bitzed out early. We’re left with a progressive rich guy, a big-government pro-lifer who’s never had a job and Newt who arguably has some record of conservative governance but is unacceptable to most of the theologians.

    And you’re right, Rome is burning. Gary Johnson looks better all the time.

  • antisesquipedalion

    REALLY

  • saulpaulson

    This has been and always will be about selling books and making money for Newt Gingrich. Remember when he was leading in all the polls in December and his response was not to try and consolidate his standing, but to have as many book signing evetns as possible. Even his wife had a few in there for her children’s books.

    That is why his supporters need to ditch him and consider support ingSantorum, otherwise they voting for Romney.

  • macbookben

    …for me if I have to vote for Mitt Romney in the general. I grew up in Alabama and I don’t get offended by such comments from friends, acquaintances, The Daily Show, northerners (my wife’s roots are in NJ), etc. It comes with the territory. What bothers me about Romney’s ham handed attempt to curry favor with the primary voters in Alabama (and probably southerners in general) is he really thinks he is making a connection to them and doesn’t realize he sounds like a real jerk. How far do you think Newt would get in Massachusetts if he tried to endear himself to Republicans at a rally by opening up with ” sorry I’m late, I had to “pok the cah in hah-vud yod?” Or what if Santorum addresses a crowd in Dallas with “howdy y’all, I don’t see any steers and queers, ’cause they’re all at the Romney Rally.”

    So far, Romney has let loose some real boners (The trees are the right height here in Michigan; my wife has 2 caddies and I drive a Ford pickup, etc). And I’ll have to give this screw up award to Romney’s staff when he asked Randy Owens of the country group Alabama to launch into playing Lynyrd (we’re from FLA) Skyrnyrd’s “Sweet Home Alabama.” Good one, Mitt.

    I have said before that I will vote for the Republican nominee, period. I would like to think that I won’t have to support a classic douchebag in this endeavor. It is my hope that with Santorum’s victories last night, and his continued campaign success, that I won’t have to.

  • rabun1016

    The only point I agree on is the management of the campaign. Stu Stevens, whom Romney hired, is awful. Ads are pathetic. Romney himself is a smart, disciplined guy, who is no natural politician and has few instincts in that regard. He will make a great President, but he is a poor candidate.

    Regarding your smears, Bain made money by running businesses and selling them if profitable. If it were easy to do, every entity in this world, from Coke on down, would be doing the same with an investment arm. It takes hours of analysis and good judgment to get it right.

    Mass Healthcare is a vestige of federalism, not anything else.

    I was not a Romney guy from 2008, but I am a business pragmatist with some mouths to feed, and I think he offers our best shot. Santorum would be Goldwater in 64. Where Romney is lacking, I think it would be a lot easier to persuade him than Obama.

  • joeydavis

    1. Negative campaigns depress turnout, not inspire voters. Obama hatred will not create voter turnout. If the Republican candidate can not inspire the base, he will lose, regardless of what we think of Obama. Low turnout elections benefit incumbents, high turnout elections benefit challegers. That is Political Campaigning 101.

    1a. The romney campaign knows this. They have been campaigning as the Republican incumbent from Day 1 with their negative carpet bomb strategy to control the message about their opponents. It’s a general election strategy that will fail miserably.

    2. The Independent voter is a myth. In polling we ask voters to “self describe” themselves. Someone essentially nonpolitical may describe themselves as Independent, but if given a 15-25 question survey, you’d find that 90+% ideologically favor one party or the other. The other <10% more than likely aren't going to vote. You vote because you have preference.

    2a.Therefore winning Independent voters is no different than winning partisans, it's about voter turnout. It's just that you have to first identify which independents agree with you and which don't.

    3. Successful candidates need crossover appeal. To have a decisive win, a candidate needs a demogrphic group within the other party where he can steal votes.

    3a. Santorum has this with social values Democrats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, N. Carolina and Virginia. Romney does not.

  • texastaxpayer

    Everytime they (the party hacks) march out one of these rhinos we all get the same routine.

    Propaganda: Moderates and independents determine elections. A conservative CAN’T WIN. Face reality and vote for the “most conservative candidate that can win”.

    Reinforcement: “Conservative” (read republican) pundits, leaders and media confirm the rhino is the only viable option in the election and the conservative(s) are summarily dismissed as “too extreme”.

    Fear Mongering: “If you don’t fall inline and support our candidate the democrat will win”. This is by far the most effective form of coercision. Seeing alot of it now with Romney. “If you don’t support Romney Obama will win”.

    I am sick of it personally and frankly not playing along this time.

  • JSobieski

    No matter who is our nominee, all Johnson needs to do to get 5% of the vote is campaign on a specific plaftorm of reform.

    He does that, and he gets to 5%.

    He gets to 5%, and we lose.

    We lose, and Obamacare transforms the political landscape, and the best we can hope for is becoming the next Canada.

    How in hell did we end up here?

  • rabun1016

    Daily, we have the negative diatribes, some worse than others, from Glenn Beck, Erick Erickson, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, and Newt Gingrich slamming our likely candidate, Mitt Romney. Great job, guys. Bill Maher could not have done it better.

  • angryguy77

    How many of is have been pressured by salesmen who used the tactic of “make a decision now, or you will not have the same opportunity tomorrow” before? This belief that we need to get behind Mitt is the same thing.

    You should never buy a product when pressured like that, nor should you vote for a candidate based on that tactic.

    It would be one thing if Mitt was a conservative with a few warts, but he’s not, he’s a liberal with a few conservative warts. He will not govern as a conservative, his stint as governor proved that.

    Why are we so eager to throw away conservatism for the sake of winning? None of us would agree to throwing out the Bill of Rights to save the country. If we did so, what was saved wouldn’t be worth the sacrifice. The same applies to our ideology and cause.

    If we are going to save this country, we need to do so by electing CONSERVATIVES, not pretenders who should be running on the other ticket.

    Mitt reminds me a lot of Clinton in the sense that he lacks core principles. Power and the office was the goal for him, and it’s the goal for Mitt. The betterment of the country is not the driving force behind his campaign.

    Save me the “Our country can’t survive another 4 years of Obama” line. If we are that close to the brink, can anyone with a tell me with a straight face that a man with a hollow core can save this great nation? We’re screwed either way.

    Selling one’s soul to the devil for a short-term gain has never turned out to be winning situation for the seller.

  • Ausonius

    He came away with a majority of delegates last night, is now near 500, more than Gingrich and Santorum combined.

    Romney does indeed inspire ZERO excitement, even from people who voted for him.

    Democrats are famous for appealing to emotions, rather than using the sensible, the logical, the left-brain appeals used by Republicans.

    We need to use both to win: where is Romney’s right-brain, emotional appeal? He evokes a head-shaking disgust and the words “Such a phony” from my non-political wife.

    To be fair, I do not see much emotional appeal from any of them…except for the emotional and very irrational appeal of Ron Paul! :)

  • saulpaulson

    People keep dogging Santorum for the few places where he stepped away from conservative principles,but each and everyone of those was because he was supporting Pres. George W Bush. Are we really so insensed that a Republican Senator would dare to support a Republican President?

    Santorum has been a leading voice for conservative principles and will be a good leader as a nominee.

    Compare that to Romney who if elected the nominee will do everything possible to prove he is not one of those “mean” conservatives. He will re-assure everyone that he will not touch the social safety net like those “bad” Republicans will.

    If you believe in conservativism, I hope you will give Rick Santorum your support!

  • texastaxpayer

    Though I just assumed someone working in the Obama campaign would be a user. Kind of a prerequisite…..

  • joeydavis

    Why do you have any allegience to Rick Perry in the first place? Can you not make decisions on your own?

    It was fine to be loyal to a candidate, but once he’s dead, he’s dead. His ghost shouldnt have any influence over you at all. Remember all these guys are first and foremost politicians. They make decisions, particularly endorsement decisions for points.

    Perry dropped out when he did because he didn’t have a path. At the time it appeared as though Gingrich did. Perry’s political math said take gingrich. If he had stayed a bit longer or withheld his endorsement for another month, he probably would have chosen Santorum.

    Sarah Palin made the same mistake. Had she not jumped in the South Carolina race for Gingrich, Santorum could have carried Alaska. But she couldn’t very well have her husband endorse a candidate, support that candidate and then suddenly endorse another candidate. It would be disingenuous.

  • RonsBoy

    I’m a southern and former Gringrich supporter who is now in the Romney Camp.

    I like Ron Paul better than Santorum. Santorum may be the social conservative darling but he is not mine.

    Santorum and Gringrich are both weaker than Romney. They are each tag teaming Romney hoping to take this to a brokered convention where the Republican Establishment will pick our nominee.

    One a brokered convention nominee (even if it is Romney) is not better than Romney.

    Two no outsider would run hoping to be nominated after the first balloting of the convention.

    It time for consrvatives to start focus on winning in November and closing ranks around the Romney. Romney is an acceptable conervative and electable.

  • Common_Cents

    Afraid of Gingrich.

    All 3 other campaigns talked to each other to agree to skip the GA CNN debate. Now Romney may need a debate? Yeah right.

  • texastaxpayer

    Just who do you think all the paulbots are going to vote for???

  • Common_Cents

    I almost thought Baier was going to get hostile when gingrich called him out.

    Baier reminds me of one of the Goofus and Gallant characters. Is that guy for real or an animation?

  • JSobieski

    nt

  • brojohn2

    The world is condemned already, if you are a Christian then you know that God wants you to try to bring people to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. BTW God doesn’t send people to hell, they send themselves by their refusal to accept Christ. Here is the actual context of the passage you incorrectly quote above.
    “16 ?For God so loved ithe world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not obelieved in the name of the only Son of God.”
    There are also many valid reasons why Rick Santorum can run better than Mitt Romney and this is just one of them. It is time for Christians to stand in the gap, we have for too long sat on the sidelines and watched.

  • joeydavis

    That’s always the case in primary elections and well most general elections. 2008 being the exception to the rule. Don’t let it concern you.

    In general voter intensity and party identification (usually more conservative) grow with age. In part because as we get older we have more stuff and the more stuff we have the more critical the role of government is in our lives.

    An old joke kind of sums up the whole deal…

    If you’re under 30 and vote Republican, you don’t have a heart. If you’re over 30 and vote Democratic, you don’t have a brain.

  • steeltube

    The only thing I saw over the last few weeks is that allowing Southern Republicans to nominate our candidates would be political suicide. Thankfully we are thru with the “grits and NASCAR” portion of the process and can return to a more expansive playing field.

  • Common_Cents

    High gas prices might be the only thing to save us from Obama. Ironic, eh?

    Let’s not pressure Obama to lower gas prices, or pressure him to fire Chu. Steven Chu might be a double agent for Republicans!

    I’d vote for the country to suffer high gas prices and another economic dip in order to avoid permanent damage in an obama 2nd term.

  • sndclark

    I have been a Republican since I was a kid, since long before I could even vote. I am not some Johnny-come-lately convert from the democrats who finally grew up when they realized “hey, wait a minute, now that I have a job, I don’t want someone stealing all MY money.” I actually have conservative principles in every area of life, not just on fiscal matters. Which, I’m sorry, just means you’re greedy.

    What really amazes me is the sheer ignorance and, dare I say it, stupidity of not just the general population in this country but more specifically among those who call themselves Republicans. Let’s not even get into the depths of idiocy that make up the ranks of the democrats. How few people in this country even know where the word election comes from. The term itself is a Biblical word. The very term election came from the Christian Biblical concept of God’s elect. It is a Latin word from the Vulgate Bible. When the first elections in this country were held it was decided that they would choose the men who were the most likely to be of “the elect,” the men who were of the highest moral character, the most virtuous among them. Because, as Christ said, by their fruits you will know them. All those who keep screaming that Christians (social conservatives) need to sit down and shut up really don’t know squat about the history of this country.

    The Republican party is really good at one thing . . . Self Destruction. We have seen it time and time again. How we are incapable of learning from our mistakes as a party is beyond me. Einstein said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. He could have been talking about the Republican Party. Repeatedly our party keeps running moderate liberal Rhino candidates who continue to get their butts handed to them. Gerald Ford, Bush 1, Bob Dole, John McCain, and that’s not to mention all the house, senate and governors races we have lost. And here we are talking about doing it again.

    Let’s get one thing straight people. Mitt Romney CAN NOT beat Barack Obama. Romney has no support among the conservative base. Just like McCain (who thanked independents in his nomination speech in 2008) the only victories Romney is getting is from leftists. Second, Romney has NEVER won a contest in which he was outspent by his opponent. Obama has already raised a war chest that is unparalleled in history. Romney has spent so much trying to buy the nomination he won’t even be able to compete. Third, Romney is a blatant liar. He bends the truth to suit his own desires (as he did in the Arizona debates). There is no real substantial difference between him and Obama. The Republican party has to have a candidate who is significantly different to beat him.

    As far as Gingrich is concerned, every last shred of respect I had for the man was deleted last night. When he stood on camera before the nation and flat out said that even though he knows he cannot win, he is just going to make darn sure that no one else does, he showed that he is a man of absolutely no character. Rick Perry said in one of the first debates, that if a man will cheat on two wives he will cheat on his business partner so how could we trust him to be President. People were willing to forgive Newt his indiscretions and give him the benefit of the doubt. But now he is showing his true colors. It is all about his ego. If it were not for Gingrich still being in the race, Santorum would be wiping the floor with Romney. If Newt really cared about the nation and not just himself then he could drop out and get behind Santorum. Maybe he could become Santorum’s debating coach, which seems to be Newt’s greatest strength and Santorum’s weakness.

    Historically parties that have to go to a brokered convention almost always go on to lose the election (Adlai Stevenson, Thomas Dewey). The general populace gets fed up of the infighting and tend to go with the other side. Obama has the power of vast amounts of money and the power of the incumbency as well as a complete willingness to cheat. By being willing to force a brokered convention for his own ego Newt Gingrich is effectively giving the Presidency back to Barack Obama.

    I have to go and prepare for the apocalypse that is coming when Obama wins his second term with no fear of having to run for reelection.

  • texastaxpayer

    The question is how much of the left leaning independent vote can he get?

  • Jack_Savage

    My tirades aren’t designed to change history, Einstein. They describe reality.

    And if in a year, the national character of the American people has been eroded sufficiently to re-elect this effete little man, Obama will still be the most worthless President in the history of this country, or in its future, and no amount of whining or water carrying by you will ever change that fact. Ever.

    And here is another thing. Should Obama be re-elected, and you wake up in a few years with a pain in your side, and you run to the emergency room and beg someone to take care of you, and they turn you away because the line is too long and there aren’t enough doctors and you should just take a pill and deal with the pain, remember this conversation.

  • joeydavis

    My girlfriend swears Romney is a robot. Maybe we do need to see his birth certificate/date of production.

  • clintonformccain

    The problem for the base is that no legitimate conservative candidate ever entered the race (except Rick Perry, who self-destructed). As a result, the conservative base has lurched from one truly horrible candidate to another, all the while riling themselves up into ever increasing dissatisfaction because none of the white knights have been wearing shining armor.

    It’s never been Mitt Romney’s fault that the conservative challengers in this race have all been irreparably flawed. Heck, most of them can’t even manage to get on the ballots.

    At this point, I think most mainstream Republicans, perhaps most Republicans period, have just tuned out. Not participating in the discussion. Not bothering to vote. The only thing that is going to change that dynamic is having a nominee and turning the fire on Barry Obama.

  • acat

    The answer is “enough to give Obama a second term”.

    Mew

  • chuckludd

    That’s who I watch on primary nights. They have the best coverage of the 3.

  • annie54

    Santorum is the only candidate who identifies with what most Americans are thinking. We want freedom and liberty for us and our grandchildren, as we have known in the past. He will attack Obamacare. Romney won’t.

    Romney is ObamaLite. If he becomes POTUS, he will enjoy the job, but do little.

    Puh-leeze give Santorum a chance by listening to him. He speaks from the heart and not a teleprompter.

  • jamesm

    Conservatives will unite behind Santorum. Gingrich will back Santorum. Santorum fresh off a victory in Texas, Santorum will win California. That’s right ..I said it. We will begin mobilizing over here. Watch how the defeat of Mitt Romney will play out. Finally conservatives are not giving in to the establishment.

  • joeydavis

    And since you’re so confident of his landslide defeat, I also want 2:1 that Santorum has more electoral votes than McCain in 2008 and 4:1 that Santorum wins outright!!!

    10 Romneys?

    10 states???

    That’s the dumbest comment I’ve seen well since I watched Mitt Romney utter the words “desperate end of his campaign” last night.

  • ceili_dancer

    I really love condescension, especially from some one who is oh so much smarter than everyone else. I can almost see you typing this with your eyes closed and the slight turning of the head smug people do when they know better than the humanoids(snark alert) that inhabit the south.

  • clowngirl

    Could be just what Newt needs to regain momentum.

    And, Gingrich aside, we need to see Santorum tested by more debates where he’s in the hot seat.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    Nobody is disputing that. Obama is not popular. This election probably will be tantamount to a referendum on him, and as we have seen, his poll number can drop on something as common as a rise in gas prices. I just find it pretty amazing that that is the case, because not one of the current candidates is politically deserving of being elected President based on their ability to make people want to vote for them.

  • texastaxpayer

    I don’t know that that’s true. Your assuming Obama gets more than the 30% or so hardcore supporters. Normally I would say your probably right however Johnson represents essentially a middle ground as he will run moderate socially and conservative fiscally. He will do what Romney wants to do only with credibility. I think he takes a lot of the middle left vote who aren’t happy with Obama but aren’t republicans either. Which is coincidently most of them. In a Romney scenario I think he takes the center right as well as disenfranchised voters. In a Romney/Obama/Johnson election I think Johnson has the best shot of the non-obamas because of credible crossover appeal.

  • RonsBoy

    Joey,

    Santorum is spending every dollar he can get ahold of. It is actually a negative that his fund raising is SO small compared to Romney.

    It is also a negative that Santorum HAS to RELY on Gringrich and Paul to challenge Romney in STATES he is UNCAPABLE of running a NATIONAL CAMPAIGN. Santorum is actually running for President of the United States.

    Does Santorum ever plan on competing in Virginia (Where he was not on the ballot) or Florida (where he was on the ballot but didn’t win ONE county)

    As a former Gringrich support, I want to win in NOVEMBER, so I’m closing ranks around the front runner Romney.

  • filobeddoe

    I will never vote for Romney. And he’s right about one thing, there’s nothing he can do to change my vote.

    With his money and long term campaigning, Romney buffalo’d all the better candidates out before the nomination process ever began. He’s trying to buy the primary (which may work). Like hell if Im going to reward that.

    When the Republicans nominate a Republican, then I will vote for that Republican.

  • acat

    Advocating Johnson here may become hazardous to the health of your account.

    More importantly, I don’t see how Johnson gets past Perot’s numbers to a victory, but I do see how he gets to Nader’s numbers and costs the GOP the White House…. especially if we nominate a lousy candidate.

    So .. yeah. Cat is pessimistic today. There’s no “win” here… the hope is that Obama loses, and we get a Nixon.

    Mew

  • streiff

    second tier candidates no matter how much money he throws at them. And you are saying he’s electable.

  • westcoastpatriette

    disgust with Newt. I do not think his only motive for staying in is to make sure no one else wins — just to feed his ego. I think he rightly sees the across-the-board dissatisfaction with this race and, like myself, Newt also sees Santorum as not only weak but potentially unable to beat Obama also. There is simply huge disagreement within the party about the remaining three and so I see Newt’s decision to stay in as a tribute to fight on because something good could still come out of this. Newt is absolutely the smartest and ablest one left and I would rather he win than the other two. So, we are a party divided and in disagreement ourselves with how best to proceed.

  • filobeddoe

    trashing Newt in Iowa. Yes, it worked. But Romney broke a lot of glass with primary voters. It really took the shine off of Willard. It lowered his image by being a negative campaigner. He did it in a low way… He actually sent Republicans out to badmouth Newt to the press publicly. It disgusted Newt supporters and many others. Especially me.

    But his campaign did not have to wage that kind of warfare. Newt would probably have blown himself up if the campaign showed any type of long term thinking. There’s also little doubt in my mind that they leaked the Cain stories. Anytime anyone surpasses Romney, they meet with an accident.

  • joeydavis

    Exit polls aren’t real good at classifying “independent” voters. Exit polls ask voters to self identify. They generally show Republican and Democratic voters at between 35 and 40% each with the remaining 25-30% as Independents.

    In reality most voters have a partisan tilt to their opinion. If they were surveyed past a self identification you would find that leaning.

    What you actually find with Independent voters is, in fact, partisan enthusiasm. The side with the most enthusiasm will turn out more “leans” voters than the side with less enthusiasm. Therefore it will appear that Independents went in one direction or the other. What actually happened was the group self describing as “independent” changed.

    For instance there was no doubt that Democrats were more excited by Barack Obama than Republicans for John McCain in 2008 or that Republicans were more enthused than Democrats in 2010. If you’ll look back in electoral history you will ALWAYS see the Independent vote swing to the motivated party.

    The number of true Independents in the actual population is less than 15% and most of them don’t vote ( you vote for a cause, if you have no cause, you have no care, if you don’t care, why vote?). The real Independents on election day would be in the 5-7% range and as a subset would be unscorable in exit polling.

  • clowngirl

    Newt had just beaten Santorum by 23% (as compared to Santorum beating him by around 1 point in Mississippi) and lead Santorum by nearly 20 going into Florida ( a winner take all state critical to stopping Romney) if Santorum had endorsed Newt, then defended and campaigned for him – he likely would’ve won Florida, come out with huge momentum, won some states in February and then CRUSHED Romney on Super Tuesday.

    So I have little patience with this kinda talk from Santorum supporters.

    And you can’t just add their totals together and figure 100% of Newt supporters aren’t just going to migrate to Santorum.

    In Mississippi, only a quarter of Newt voters said they were comfortable with Santorum as nominee (31% of Santorum supporters said they were comfortable with Newt)

    Unless Santorum and Gingrich were to come to an agreement where Newt was dropping out but guaranteed to be Santorum’s running mate, I question whether it’d even be 50%.

    With regard to Ohio – we don’t know that Santorum would’ve won if Newt has dropped out. Rasmussen found that in a hypothetical head to head without Newt Romney actually did a couple points BETTER.

  • geotan

    Erick, the problem is not that Romney is not ” closing the deal”. For he has by everyone’s admission gone over to the right vigorously. Check Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Charles Krauthammer and National Review just to name a few. Romney has offered to reform the tax code, focus on job creation, deregulation, cutting spending, appointing conservative judges like Alito etc etc. It’s simply comes down to a trust factor. The Very conservatives think Romney is a moderate plant who will cave to the Washington pressure. This is laughable when it is proven that Santorum and Gingrich had largely done this during their tenure in Washington over many decades. However, Romney has a lot at stake with his reputation and electability for a second term were he to win the election this year. I can’t see how Romney could not govern conservatively under the circumstance. The very conservative need to trust the establishment this time even though they are risking their vote. Otherwise, they will continue to make Romney, the inevitable candidate, look weak and bleed money from his campaign and make things a lot easier for Obama.

  • geotan

    If you live in a purple state what you just said is foolish. If you live in a red state it matters too but not as much. Don’t forget to send in your congratulations to the Obama inauguration!

  • texastaxpayer

    While I get your point I wasn’t advocating Johnson. I was expressing an opinion. I haven’t made the case anyone should vote for Johnson besides my own personal opinion that Johnson offers an alternative to Mitt Romney who is neither republican nor conservative in my opinion. Or to quote Willard “I was an independent during Reagan Bush”.

    As far as the Nader Perot numbers analysis I will leave you with your own council today as you don’t seem to be in the mood for my “pot stirring”. Perhaps another time I we can discuss this further.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    by bloodlines he is as much Kenyan as he is American

    You could have stopped there, I get the picture.

  • geotan

    Sorry but Romney was never expected to be close in these states as they clearly have a mistrust of his conservatism and his religion. This is a fact. Erick is biased.

  • jon11

    id hoped mitt would eke out MS but after TN i didn’t really expect it.

    what i did find shocking, and potentially devastating for the fall, was that only 22% of MS voters said santorum has the best chance to beat Obama (almost 50% said mitt has the best chance) and then…and then after making that admission…

    they went out and voted for santorum.

    as Forrest Gump would say: “Stupid is as stupid does.”

  • Ann_W

    I didn’t think so. Cain’s camp thought it was Perry at the time. Just stop it.

  • joeydavis

    Red States are Red, Blue States are blue….

    We’re playing for pinks, baby blues and purples.

    Find the Demographic advantage in the Purple and baby blues that voted for Obama. That’s where you’ll find your candidate.

    That demographic is working class, socially conservative Democrats. They are in eastern NC, southwestern VA, eastern OH, western PA and throughout MN, WI and IA. Cut Obama’s victory margin in these states with Democrats from 80-20 to 70-30 and you win. That is a legitimate path to victory

    Romney has no demographic sufficient in number to push his campaign. His path requires FL OH CO NH and ME as well as NC and VA. CO is trending hard D and nothing in the Northeast will come easy. He also may be challenged to hold on to MO.

  • acat

    His record in Massachusetts isn’t noticeably conservative… so we get asked to ignore it because it’s a “blue state”.

    His record at Bain isn’t noticeably conservative .. more Wall Street insider … so we get asked to ignore the obvious #OWS issue…

    His record at the Salt Lake Games isn’t noticeably conservative – he needed a Federal bail-out …

    So.

    What you’re left with is a weak appeal-to-authority, backed by a comedienne, an establishment insider, and an establishment rag.

    I am not persuaded.

    Mew

  • Jack_Savage

    Is it the truth, or not? I have no doubt that he was born in Hawaii, but if you think that he appreciates, or values, or even understands American culture, you are sadly mistaken.

    I’m waiting for you to give a cogent defense of this miserable failure, or even a reason why you are here.

    Waiting.

  • JSobieski

    There is no reason to suspect (or evidence to support) that Johnson is currently at 5%.

  • kipling

    Romney may have the war chest and the establishment but he is a small man. If Santorum is so small then why has Romney not been able to close the deal.

    Romney outspent both Santorum and Gingrich by 5 to 1. Yet, he came in third. Santorum has no money and no national organization and he won.

  • Joshua Persons

    no text

  • kcdude

    but I find it laughable when some say he is the only candidate who can win in November while he has not won in any state without excessive dumping on his opponents.

  • ceili_dancer

    Coulter, Krauthammer and Nat. Rev are all in the Romney camp, so them saying he’s gone over to the right vigorously is not as truthful as it sounds. Limbaugh, to my recollection, has not said anything of the sort. If he has indeed gone vigorously over to the right, he would have disavowed the mandate and Romney care, promise more than just giving exceptions to all 50 states and vigorously work to repeal Obamacare, and do more than tinker at the edges when it come to the budget and taxation. Your conclusion of him looking weak and bleeding money is because he is/doing both. The amount of negative ads by him and third parties is a drag on himself and the party in general. He reminds me of a heel in professional wrestling. Acting all smug and innocent until the ref is distracted then out comes the foreign object and low blows.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Most of the hard-core Libertarian folks following him around would jump to Johnson.

  • JSobieski

    Romney’s adoption of tax reform (something he never spends political capital actually trying to advocate) is as shallow and deeply felt as Dole’s comment above.

    There are plenty of reasons to doubt Romney’s dedication to tax reform and other conservative aspects of his platform.

    Its pretty clear that he didn’t want to adopt those policies. He did so only after he realized he wouldn’t walk away with the nomination.

    Its not a question of trust so much as it is a question of laughability.

  • wingnut43

    Gays, Abortion, and Contraception are Dem base hot-button issues. They are not as important as restoring US prosperity, maintaining US global dominance, and preserving liberty and freedom in the USA.

    I actually think Santorum is better for the economy than Romney. If you go by what Romney says, he is likely to cut federal spending so much that we will get a severe fiscal contraction and reenter the 2008-2009 Depression. At least Santorum recognizes that returning to a gold standard is insane.

  • Joshua Persons

    nt

  • RonsBoy

    Record as Governor:

    Romney balanced the budget every year of his administration with out increasing taxes or increasing state dept.

    Romney turned a $3 billion budget deficit into a $500 million surplus by reducing government spending and added 80,000 new jobs by the end of his term.

    In 2004, 2005, and 2006 Governor Romney proposed cutting the state income tax from 5.3% to 5.0% (Democrats refuse to pass)

    In 2006, Governor Romney testified before the United States Senate to support the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would limit marriage to one man and one woman

    Romney filed legislation to reinstate capital punishment, but was defeated in the Massachusetts House of Representatives on a 99-53 vote

    I guess if you don’t support “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND”, “THE BRIDGE TO NO WHERE” you can’t be a conservative.

    YOU ARE NOT CONVINCED because YOU CHOSE TO BE.

  • ceili_dancer

    It’s earned by campaigning and working your tail off on the trail. While I’m not really a Santorum supporter, you have to give him credit with his strategy of staying in Iowa for most of the period and winning the caucus there and parlaying that into a few more victories along the way. His cash numbers are low, but he has been able to go toe-to-toe with Romney’s tidal wave of spending, sometimes at a 5-1 disadvantage and stay competitive. Probably more of the success is anti-Romney than more pro-Santorum.

  • annie54

    to the fraud in the White House.

    After all of Breitbart’s tapes of Obama are released, Obama will be deemed unfit to reside in OUR house.

  • JSobieski

    It is unclear how many Ron Paul supporters are primarily Ron Paul supporters over all else, how many would vote R, and how many would vote L.

    Assuming that Ron Paul supporters will just jump on the Johnson bandwagon is an assumption without evidence.

  • mikelindell2

    Neither one of them is conservative and neither is electable. It’s time for them both to do the honorable thing and withdraw from the race.

    Did anyone notice that Fox News stopped playing Newt’s speech last night right in the middle of it? Thanks to Fox, it looks like there is now a two person race made up of 0 conservatives. I think Santorum is worse than Romney, at least everyone knows that Romney is a fraudl Santorum seems to coast by with people thinking of him as a conservative when he is so far from it. Just because he is not Romney doesn’t mean he is any better than him. The longer Rick remains a prominent candidate, the more damage is done to the party. Democrats’ dream to have a top candidate who says college is for snobs and contraception is not OK.

  • JSobieski

    Ever consider that dramatic spending cuts would invite that $2T of private capital sitting on the sidelines to be put into play?

    The Keynesian-based support of Santorum is not helping Santorum.

  • vastrightwingconspiracy

    …the Senator to get any of those delegates?

    He couldn’t get one person to vote for him?

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    I obviously have to be careful what I say here.

    That being said, you show by your own words that you are a racist, so why do I need to dissect your rant point by point? You’ve demonstrated your bias and therefore your post undermines itself.

  • lynnotting

    does not want a president that clearly believes in nothing….They have values, principles and gut feelings….whether they are conservative, moderate or liberal….and Romney cannot convince himself much less anyone else that he will fight for what he believes, much less what they believe. Even if you want to think people will vote for someone just because they believe he can fix the economy, his record at Bain will destroy any chance of that happening…. His only support in this primary has been the establishment, his wall street friends and his mormon base.

  • RonsBoy

    From his issue page:

    “10, Eliminate the corporate income tax for manufacturers ? from 35% to 0% – which will spur middle income job creation in the United States and will create a job multiplier effect for workers”

    http://www.ricksantorum.com/made-america

    Obama only wants to lower it. He has offered no clue on how you define manufacturing. Is all of GE exempt–not that they pay taxes any way??

  • vastrightwingconspiracy

    …religion should have come before conservatism in your analysis.

    Erick is biased, yes, but he is right. Romney’s camp really raised expectations on Mon/Tues with the comments about “desperate end” and other statements.

    They blew a chance to tout such a close result, and instead are seemingly backpeddling from those expectations.

  • angryguy77

    Guess what? If Mittens had a conservative record, us pesky conservatives wouldn’t have a problem with him.

    1-To equate Newt’s and Santorum’s past crimes against conservatism to what Mitt has done is what’s laughable. Not even close. It shows just how far. you Rombots are reaching

    2-There is a problem when a candidate who has to try as hard as Mitt has done to convince people he’s a conservative.

    3-You are betting that Mitt will govern as a conservative out of personal ambition, rather than from his core. How can you not see what’s wrong with that picture?

    Btw, stop being disingenuous and making it sound as if Rush is on board with Mitt. Anyone who has listens to Rush doesn’t have to hear him say he doesn’t like what Mitt stands for. Mitt is exactly the kind of republican Rush tells us we need to rid the party of.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    That’s the logical conclusion of his campaign, but I agree, it assumes that which must be proven.

  • texastaxpayer

    Though based on what I am seeing here (North Texas) I would say he is there easily. Certainly when the press decides to use him to destroy Romney this fall he will rise much higher.

  • annie54

    donated during the past 10 hours. I would tell you to go to his website except that it’s down now from the heavy traffic. Expectations are that the other 1/2 million will come in before the 24 hour period following his 2-state victory last night.

    Rick isn’t a spend-thrift like Mittsy. He can make a million go a long way.

  • JSobieski

    The libertarians have never received anything close to 5% of the nationwide vote before.

    Burden of proof is on your side of the proposition, not mine.

    I think Johnson poses a real problem, but I am not the person claiming that Johnson already has 5% of the vote when 99% of the population has no idea who he is.

  • mikelindell2

    They are on the ballot in all 50 states and we need to nominate a far-left “progressive” to their ticket to chip away at Obama’s support. Kucinich, or someone like him, would take away a fraction of Obama’s votes and maybe, just maybe, allow one of these two fake conservatives to beat him. I say Kucinich because he just lost his race in Ohio and supposedly the Obama team was actively backing Kaptur over Kucinich-he might be bitter enough to want to run against him. If we’re serious about beating Obama, this is where it starts. Anyone interested in beating Obama has to make sure a radical lefty is put on the Americans Elect ticket.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    Santorum is a hard worker. He has a doggedness that I admire. As you point out, a lot of his success has to do with the failure of Romney and others, but still, his perseverance gave him the opportunity.

    But once he gained support and saw that he had a legitimate shot to win, he showed why he is undeserving of the office. He got trounced by the mediocre Romney in the last debate, and he has made numerous gaffes and errors in judgment, unnecessarily pounding the table on his fringe minority views on contraception, for instance. I personally am not offended by his views or the fact that he holds fringe minority views– I have my radical views on certain issues too– but when you are a candidate for president and you are unwilling to put those views aside and concentrate on issues where something can be accomplished, you are recklessly tossing away your chances, which shows either poor judgment or a lack of desire to actually be president.

  • joeydavis

    Santorum’s fundraising in February was inline with Romney’s. Romney’s burn rate is about 3 times Santorum and Santorum’s fundraising is picking up. Santorum is relying less and less on his SuperPac. He has money in hand and if anything they’re being too consevative. They’re still kicking themselves for not buying in the Cleveland market last week.

    Romeny’s fundraising is flatlining and the rumors I’m hearing is Romney ay be self funding his campaign by month’s end and he’s relying more and more on his SuperPac.

    The reason Romney is now only outspending 3 and 4 to 1 instead of 10 and 12 to 1 or 60 to 1 is because he’s out of cash.

    Florida was vary expensive state and winner take all. If you weren’t going to win (and clearly Santorum wasn’t) it would be FOOLISH to waste a dime there.

    Virginia’s ballot access is a nightmare. Only two candidates, both of whom have been running for the better part of a decade qualified.

    Presidential campaigns really aren’t national. You spend time and resources in places where you think you can win. In the fall 95% of the money on both sides will be spent in 25% of the country.

  • califgal

    1) Define “the base.”

    2). Once you define it, do you argue that “it” has to speak with one voice at all times or else it isn’t “the base” as the article “the” seems to suggest?

    3). Can a “base” if it exists, ever speak with more than one voice; that is, can people existing in this “base” have opinions that differ from one another, substantial differences, or do their differences suggest they do not form part of a “base” at all?

    4.) Does the far right of the GOP represent “the base” with no other voices seen as such by you?

    5.) Was there no “base” to the 2007-2008 Democrat Party since the votes of that party were, in late spring of the primary campaign season, still quite split in their choice of a candidate?

    6.) Did the winner of that Dem. election season turn out to be a poor candidate?

    7.) Since neither Obama nor Clinton were able to procure the necessary delegates until late in their season, should the Democrats have gone in search of another candidate or argued for a brokered convention?

    8.) Should voters who don’t blog, voters who don’t post on blogs, voters who don’t show up at campaign events with signs and banners,, voters who aren’t “activists” in any way not vote, and leave the picking and chosing of candidate of their party of choice to the activists, like days of yore?

  • Jack_Savage

    Poorly played at that, my friend. I will admit that if I were trying to defend Obama, I would go to it early and often as well. Kind of like how they vote in blue states.

    The point about Kenyan bloodlines, which you missed entirely because of your reliance on your DNC talking points master program, was that he was never exposed to or taught to appreciate American culture. Most young men learn it from their fathers, and his father, a Kenyan (unless you are actually trying to dispute that), took him in another direction. Glad to know that the far left’s definition of “racist” has hit a new low.

    Now while you go to various liberal websites and whine about racists at RedState, I am actually going to go back to work to pay for your food stamps / unemployment compensation / whatever government program you are bellying up to at the moment.

  • clowngirl

    According to Mississippi exit polls, only 25% of Gingrich voters were satisfied with Santorum as nominee. How do you jump from that to 60%?

    We also don’t know what effect a Gingrich exit would have on Romney. He may start calling for more debates which would involve him and Ron Paul attacking Santorum all night. He may also go scorched earth negative if there was no chance of that backfiring and helping Gingrich.

  • annie54

    but, excuse me, Rick Perry is not dead. Rick Perry has a future in the Republican Party in many possible capacities. One, is to replace Salazar as Secretary of the Interior. He has a strong dislike for Obama’s EPA standards, as well as the energy-rich lands that have been “captured” by this administration.

    Rick Perry has just begun. I just don’t want him to become weighted down by Gingrich. Newt’s weight (literally) could disable anybody if he were on top.

  • texastaxpayer

    English not your first language?

    They have never run a successful two term governor with a great economic record and business background before either. I also seem to remeber that he was pollimg even with Huntsman in the primary before the GOP decided to shut him out. So i seriously doubt its a stretch to suggest he would get 5% nationaly in a poll where the options where Romney obama or Johnson.

    But you are more than welcome to continue to suggest I am a liar or stupid or whatever else you may have ment with that burden of proof crack.

  • naraht

    See
    http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-22/politics/30428055_1_mitt-romney-wolf-blitzer-bad-joke

  • JSobieski

    Texas is not representative of the rest of the country when it comes to libertarians.

    Although the past isn’t a blueprint for the future, tit is folly to simply presume that support for Johnson is presently at 5%.

    The mast majority of voters have no idea who Johnson is.

    I don’t doubt however that Johnson’s support in parts of Texas is currently at 5%. We are talking nationwide general election voters, not Republican voters, not Texas voters. etc.

  • JSobieski

    When I find a Michigan voter who even knows who Johnson is, I will call the AP.

  • annie54

    so that all your loved ones have to do is pull the plug to get rid of the mess.

    Be assured that Rick Perry is not done yet, but that he WAS done in the race for the nominee. He had to learn a few things in the real world.

    Give Santorum a chance. He has more depth than anyone realizes. He just hasn’t had a chance to reveal it all.

  • RonsBoy

    Even after last night Romney got more delegates than either.

    I’m just looking at the Map. NY, NJ, California, winners take all.

    It seems to me Romney cliches or we have a broker convention.

    I’m looking to win in November and broker seems like a loser to me.

    You may be right. Maybe by June Santorum will be able to campaign in Florida, Nevada, and Virginia.

    As for me I’ve seen enough. I think we are just hurting ourselves by not closing ranks and I’m not interested in a moral victory of getting the most socially conservative candidate which loses in November.

  • texastaxpayer

    Your saying in the first nationwide poll that includes Johnson he will debut at less than 5%? That is the logical extension to you argument.

  • trickamsterdam

    I don’t know about that, EE [i.e., Newt].

    After the break I explain why Newt staying in may be key in taking Romney down and also an important thing Newt gets out of staying in that no one’s talking about (I mean something he gets besides revenge on Romney…although that’s a good enough motive for me).

    ***

    Super Tuesday.

    After Romney pulled-out OH I basically gave up and conceded him the nomination. Part of my frustration was w/Newt voters who refused to do strategic voting against Romney.

    Especially since it was so frustratingly clear it would have been in Newt’s best interest too…i.e., he had a better chance in a two-man race w/Santo than in a three-man race w/ Romney and Santo.

    But now I wonder if Newt always knew that and it’s just his supporters who didn’t. Remember how he just handed over MI to Santo? And I don’t remember him doing much in OH at the end either.

    But he couldn’t quit concede OH all the way because he had campaigned and spent good money there initially. It wouldn’t have looked right.

    But now Newt last night didn’t really talk about winning out-right for himself he talked about denying the necessary delegates to Romney!

    In other words Newt’s on the brokered convention bandwagon and now I wonder if he was all along.

    Not stupid he realized after FL he couldn’t win out-right…but he couldn’t admit he was after a brokered convention until now.

    The same way he couldn’t just say “vote for Santorum in MI” even though everything he did pointed to him wanting his people to do that. Shame some didn’t get the message but then you can airmail precise instructions to some people and they’ll still act like you’re using “moonspeak” (no pun intended on Newt’s potential colony of Newtonia).

    Which brings me to why I think Newt’s staying in.

    From what I understand if you win a plurality in three States you can get on the ballot at the convention. Newt’s got two and he needs one more. And he only needs to win by one vote for it to be a plurality.

    The good part is his strategy only works if Romney is denied the delegates. So that’s what he’s going to be working for. Luvs it. We’ve got the smartest man of the four left working for what I (and a lot of other people) have wanted all along:

    A contested/open/brokered convention.

    I trust Newt to pull it off if anyone can. I want Newt to stay in.

    BTW Newt staying in also makes it harder for Romney and Santo to cut some kind of deal (anything w/ Romney in the top slot isn’t OK w/ me but it might be to Santo).

    However that brings me to:

    Romney the Coward. He doesn’t even appear last night I hear (I’ve been tuned out of politics since Super Tues and didn’t watch any of it)?

    This is the guy that whined when Newt wouldn’t concede to him after FL. This is the guy who’s “Presidential”? Two close third-place finishes and he hides like his own dog at a rest stop because it doesn’t want to go back on the cage on the top of the car?

    This guy is not a President. He’s a life-sized haircut. And that’s all.

    He also said he wouldn’t consider Santorum as a VP because he’s not “sufficiently conservative”. LOL. I wonder if he understands that’s a tacit admission that he’s not a conservative. Since if Romney were a conservative the VP wouldn’t have to be e.g., Reagan/Bush (you know them….that ticket from the 80s that Romney wasn’t a part of because he was “an Independent in the 80s” lol).

    What a walking pratfall he is.

    Anyway keep burning those bridges w/ Santo dude! Make any deal impossible and increase the chances of the brokered convention. Luvs that too.

    ***

    Still am not going to be posting much because I just can’t believe those Super Delegates aren’t going to swoop in and somehow steal it for Romney at the end. And I can’t seem to post w/out writing WAR & PEACE (e.g. this post). So it just takes too much time (my fault).

    But I did send Santo a contribution right before I signed on here. Last night was a good night. I have a little keyhole of hope again. Hey didn’t some guy talk about hope a lot a few years ago or something? He was right. It’s not bad! :)

  • naraht

    Worst case scenario, (including insulting Romney’s Mormonism ten times worse than Huckabee did so that every Latter Day Saint Republican stays home) Santorum takes
    South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Wyoming.

  • texastaxpayer

    So by definition didn’t you just make a fool of your self?

  • RonsBoy

    And I would take him over Santorum or Gringrich.

    Holding Romney to decades old position is just silly.

  • acat

    Romney has been pro-gay-marriage. Romney has been pro-abortion. Romney didn’t raise taxes, but he did raise fees… and that’s still “balancing the budget on the backs of the taxpayer”, eh?

    I am not convinced because every fact you show has a counter-fact that disproves it…. and that’s true for practically everything in the Romney campaign!

    Mew

  • rednation

    “In five years of campaigning it is stunning to me that the Romney camp still has no clue how to play the expectations game. It is increasingly clear it is not a well run campaign, Mitt Romney is not a good campaigner, but he will still, more likely than not, be the GOP nominee.”

    Mind blowing that the whol establishment picks Mitt, despite being so clueless that he kissed an African American baby in 2008 and said “nice bling bling” over jewelry the infant wore.

    We have a person who connects with voters, who is more conservative in totality, and we cherry picks his votes and argue over electability in a contrast cycle and practically give the nomination to a man who is totally unlikable and phony, on the assumption that he’s more electable.

    Nice.

  • garfieldjl

    At most it is 3 years ago.

    Romney still hasn’t said that was a mistake, that is why I don’t believe he will repeal Obamacare.

  • goodgovernance

    Obama wasn’t raised by his father, Jack. He hardly knew the guy so it’s not like he was instilled with “Kenyan colonial values.” You might as well argue that anyone with immigrant parents was instilled with German, Irish, or Polish European socialist values, not American ones.

    Obama was raised by a Leftist but American mother. He did live an early part of his life overseas. At the end of the day I don’t see anything that makes him something other than a liberal socialist elitist. And the fact is most of America sees him as more benign than that, otherwise they wouldn’t have voted for him.

    Going around telling people Obama is really a foreigner is going to lose us the general, no matter who the nominee is. It’s just wrong, and what’s more, it’s unnecessary. He doesn’t have to be a foreigner for us to be against him, he just has to be big government Leftist. Which he is.

  • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

    for Mitt
    New Jersey = 50
    Utah = 40
    DC = 19
    Delaware = 17
    New York = 95
    Maryland = 37
    Connecticut = 28
    Oregon = 28
    Puerto Rico = 23
    Rhode Island = 19
    Illinois = 69
    California = 86
    Wisconsin = 21
    498 + 491= 989

    for Rick
    Montana = 26
    Wisconsin = 21
    California =86
    Indiana = 46
    Texas = 155
    South Dakota = 28
    North Carolina = 55
    New Mexico = 23
    Kentucky = 45
    Arkansas – 36
    Louisiana = 46
    Pennsylvania = 72
    West Virginia = 31
    Nebraska = 35
    Illinois = 34
    756 + 233 = 989

    I used this site http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/R
    to figure delegate counts, and I split California, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

  • winning2012

    You can’t have it both ways.
    Romney WON more delegates last night than either rival and expanded his lead. Right now, Mitt is leading his closest rival by about 2 to 1 in delegates.

    If Romney sucks, than the alternatives must REALLY suck because they’re losing to him.

    You do realize this contest is going on simply because Santorum is angling for a VP spot? There’s no mathematical way he can capture a majority of delegates now. He’s basically hoping he can somehow steal it in a smoke-filled room, and he’s admitted it. How noble of him.

    The candidate that comes in with the most delegates is going to be the nominee, unless you want to see a Party split in half.

  • Scope

    and shortly before that if Gingrich couldn’t win AL and Miss, he really had no reason to stay in the race. He proved he doesn’t even have the southern states under his belt. Someone from his own campaign even said that without at least one win in yesterday’s primaries, it would be time to fold his tent. I’ve been reading of turmoil within the Gingrich campaign. It was wise for Gingrich himself to say he was staying in no matter what, as saying I’m getting out if I don’t win was counterproductive. Voters and donors would have started fleeing even before yesterday’s votes.

    Today I saw a clip of Gingrich saying that what they wanted was to come in second, which was ludicrous. That was similar to the Romney camp saying that last night’s losses were no big deal because they still got delegates.

    Do a spin around the web, and/or turn on your TV, and you will see that today has seen increasing numbers of people saying that it is time for Gingrich to exit. Those calls will only become louder and more frequent, and will be coming from all quarters, as Gingrich becomes more and more delusional, as he keeps trying to find some justification to remain in the race, when he is already considered a dead man walking, so to speak. Then again, I’m not aware of Gingrich ever losing a hat size. I suspect Adelson will cut the purse strings here very soon, if he hasn’t already. Any day now we will be hearing that they didn’t have any newspapers in the Holiday Inn Express he stayed in last night.

  • rednation

    He supported the BBA before any other candidate did, and even publicly rebuked a high ranking senior Republican operative for failure to support it back in the 1st part of the 90′s and argued for his resignation.

    Earmarks are 2% of the budget.

    And they just ways of allocating money, and the public is misinformed about those. You measure on big ticket items. It’s true some earmarks are cheated into larger bills that do not belong, and it’s also true that the process sometimes makes one consider as a Senator voting for the greater good to get a bill passed that is essential. In any case, they make good soundbites, but are badly framed to the public.

    A guy like Romney who supported bailouts, TARP, and Romneycare and even a nationally applied mandate is disqualified from being our nominee.

    We can do a lot worse than Santorum…

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    The point about Kenyan bloodlines, which you missed entirely because of your reliance on your DNC talking points master program, was that he was never exposed to or taught to appreciate American culture. Most young men learn it from their fathers, and his father, a Kenyan (unless you are actually trying to dispute that), took him in another direction.

    Obama was mostly raised by people from Kansas. His father was mostly absent from his life after the age of three. He never saw his father after the age of ten. His grandparents, indisputably American, were a far greater factor in his upbringing than his father. But the facts do not matter to you, since what you are really concerned about is “bloodlines”. Your backpedaling here doesn’t hold water with me.

    And I have no intention of running off to a liberal site and trashing RedState. I have been treated respectfully here so far by the majority of folks I have encountered.

    And I’m a taxpayer and have been my whole adult life, friend. Don’t flatter yourself with delusions that you are supporting me. You aren’t.

  • garfieldjl

    However there is a charecter Newt has a similarity with.

    If you read the Naruto manga, you would know that charecter has a tendency to not give up.

    How many times have people told him to drop out already and he just keeps coming back.

    If nothing else Newt just will not give up, only way he’s leaving this is if Santorum can convince Newt that he will take up Newt’s policy ideas and can convince him that he (Santorum) can beat Obama.

    Otherwise I think he will stay in this all the way to the convention.

  • garfieldjl

    My mentality is that Newt is the candidate, as long as he stays in I’m backing him.

    If he ends up deciding Santorum can take up the mantle I will vote for Santorum. Until then I’m supporting Newt, and I don’t particularly care what the polls say.

    That said, a Gingrich/Santorum or Santorum/Gingrich ticket would easily clobber Obama in November.

  • angryguy77

    That takes the cake.

  • tomkinney

    I’m a fiscal conservative but I’m not religious and totally agree with you.

    Like Rick Santelli says, “I’m a live and let live liberal but a fiscal conservative.

    Or like Breitbart said, “I’m a liberal in bed but a conservative in my head.”

  • lapert

    You are treating them as winner take all when nearly all of those are proportional allocation and will be split – except ironically, you did split Wisconsin which is winner take all and California which is winner take all though at the district and state levels.

  • garfieldjl

    He’s never ran anything like Gingrich or Romney have had to.

    I trust Santorum will do his best to keep his word on stuff.

    I don’t trust Romney at all.

    Santorum just can’t seem to come up with big ideas, big solutions.

    I would argue that if people had known that Santorum and Gingrich would take 1st and 2nd in Mississippi and Alabama, that the race between them would have been a lot closer and Gingrich may have ended up coming out on top, not Santorum.

    That said, I find it hysterical that even with the Conservative vote split, Romney not only didn’t come out on top, he got beat by both Conservative candidates.

  • noveldog9

    You are lying! The fire you need to worry about is the one God has set for those whom he has denied entrance into Heaven. Hopefully most of these readers will see through your obvious lies and not be swallowed up in them.

  • naraht

    then every state that Obama took in 2008 is out of reach.

  • garfieldjl

    We all know that Reagan switched parties because he realized the Democrats were starting to go off the deep end.

    He didn’t switch parties for political expediency like Romney.

  • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

    Oklahoma ended up

    Santorum 14
    Gingrich 13
    Romney 13

  • garfieldjl

    He was required to balance Massachusetts’ budget, I think they even have a balanced budget amendment.

    Calling that an accomplishment when he had no choice in the matter is rather laughable.

    Gingrich Balanced the Federal Budget, and he wasn’t required by law to do it. He could have let spending go out of control, but he made the decision to make sure we stayed on a balanced budget.

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

    The Great and Powerful Santo commands you!

  • joereagan

    I don’t know why so many people fail to take Gingrich at his word, and instead impart some other derogatory motive to everything he does. He was interviewed last night, and made it clear what his thinking is. It comes down to this question: Is Romney more likely to be stopped by Gingrich staying in, or dropping out? His conclusion is that Romney is in a more difficult position having two opponents instead of one. If it came down to Romney vs. Santorum, Romney’s machine could unload all of its attack ads against Santorum, knock him out and move on. Two conservative alternatives split the fire, and make it harder for Romney to get away with it. The amount of delegates gained between the two of them (Gingrich and Santorum) is likely to be larger than what either could get alone. In my opinion, he’s right. And he needs to stay in to stop Romney and give conservatives a shot at the convention.

    The alternative is to roll over a let the establishment think it can do this to us again and get away with it.

  • 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? 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.

  • lapert

    Oklahoma became winner take all if one candidate got over 50% of the vote otherwise it was proportionally allocated. Wisconsin and California are winner take all at the district and state level. The only state to go so far with a similar method was South Carolina.

  • texastaxpayer

    Q11 If the candidates for President this year were Democrat Barack Obama, Republican Mitt Romney, and Libertarian Gary Johnson, who would you vote for?
    Barack Obama………………………………………… 47%
    Mitt Romney……………………………………………. 40%
    Gary Johnson …………………………………………. 7%
    Undecided………………………………………………. 6%
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/02/santorum-down-five-romney-seven-vs-obama-nationally.html#more

  • garfieldjl

    These could be slam dunk issues, we saw how Gingrich derailed the media’s contraceptive song and dance routine. He turned it into a referendum on how radical Obama is.

    Santorum needs to learn how to do that and fast.

  • lapert

    Well, considering that Romney is leading the most recent primary poll of Texas I think it is quite a stretch to suggest him winning said nomination puts it in play in November. Seems more like one person projecting than, you know, reasoned analysis.

  • joeydavis

    Newt wasn’t close enough in Florida for Santorum to make a difference. Figure Santorum and Gingrich supporters both break roughly 60-40 in favor of the other against Romney. I think that may be a bit low, but it’s afair number.

    Gingrich would still lose Florida by 150,000 votes. However Santorum would win Ohio by 25,000, Tennessee with 53%, Alabama with 53% and Mississippi with 52%

    The Rasmussen Ohio poll is a clear outlier. PPP showed Santorum 63-37 over Romney with Gingrich voters in both Alabama and Mississippi. The Missouri primary without Gingrich showed Santorum with 54% which is very much in line with where Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi would have fallen on a 60-40 split.

  • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

    Virginia and Oklahoma are the same with the 50% threshold.

  • JSobieski

    Not so difficult.

  • aesthete

    “Romney has offered to reform the tax code, focus on job creation, deregulation, cutting spending”

    You know who else offered all that stuff in vague, non-committal form? Hint: his name rhymes with “Barack Obama”. You’re absolutely right, it’s a trust thing. There is no reason to trust Romney, *especially* since he’s already contradicted himself several times, and ruled out the drivers of our debt as areas for reform.

  • garfieldjl

    Newt giving up.

    Seriously how many times has his campaign been declared dead by the media that smeared him?

    Newt could have gave up at any time earlier. He refused to give up and got right back in the fight.

    If Santorum wants to win this, he has to prove that he can handle the pressure. Romney is very much like Obama (including campaign tactics), Romney is going to be ignoring Gingrich and focus entirely on Santorum.

    If Santorum can handle it, then Santorum wins. If he can’t, Gingrich is still in this so “Mr. Inevitability” Romney doesn’t win by default.

  • JSobieski

    So nope. . . I didn’t.

    You seem to be trying hard enough for both of us.

  • lapert

    New York and CT will also be that way – and Romney has a decent shot at 50% in both of them.

    One of the difficult things for Santorum is that the states he has the advantage in are nearly all proportional and the states that are pure winner take all Romney has the advantage in (DC, DE, Puerto Rico, NJ and Utah). WI, MD, CA and Indiana have a district/state winner take all model which probably is to Romney’s advantage in MD, Rick’s in Indiana and is more evenly split in CA and WI.

  • garfieldjl

    Romney knows that Santorum supporters would jump to Newt and then he’d end up having to fight Gingrich all over again.

    Santorum should have stayed out of Alabama and Mississippi, glad he and Gingrich both beat Romney, but it would have been more effective for Santorum if Romney had his attention divided.

    That was an awful risk that Santorum took, and nearly handed Romney the nomination.

  • joeydavis

    I may have been a bit harsh and speaking in the short term. By dead, I meant in this election cycle.

  • aesthete

    The only lesson he ever taught Obama, American or otherwise, is that selfish dipsh*ts who leave their families cause a lot of pain.

  • naraht

    He got 72.2% in the Massachusetts Primary, 59.52% in the Virginia Primary, 61.6% in the Idaho Caucus and 50.02% in the Nevada Caucus

  • garfieldjl

    Santorum or Newt can win this still, if they decide that they are the ticket, and now we have to decide whom is on top.

  • Jack_Savage

    Typing slowly. You wrote:

    “Obama was mostly raised by people from Kansas. His father was mostly absent from his life after the age of three. He never saw his father after the age of ten.”

    Exactly. His father was mostly absent from his life. My point is, again, and again, is that he was hampered (to put it mildly) from an appreciation of American culture by an absent father, who was not an American, and a four year stint in Indonesia from ages 6-10, during his formative years.

    If you would like to argue that it doesn’t matter, or that Obama has a wonderful love and appreciation for American culture, or that his mother and grandparents imbued him with a sense of patriotism and pride, or that his leftist mentors taught him that America was exceptional, fine. I’d really, really like to hear that argument.

    Reductio ad klanum is a poor substitute for facts, friend.

    PS – I am very happy you are an Obama supporter who is self-supporting. That’s one off my list.

  • Jack_Savage

    I am not arguing that Obama is a foreigner. I am arguing that he has very little appreciation for American culture or exceptionalism.

    Don’t fall into skymutt’s trap.

  • garfieldjl

    But this goes beyond a lack of enthusiasm. Many of us don’t trust Romney based on his record, his dishonest smear campaign, the shannigans in Iowa, Virginia, and Maine (and who knows where else), etc.

    I will have a tough time voting for Romney AGAINST Obama. This isn’t about lack of enthusiasm this is about the fact Romney has yet to prove he’s any better than Obama.

    Santorum suffers from a lack of enthusiasm and a tendency to get trapped in fights on distraction issues.

    The only candidate still in that I have a genuine enthusiasm for is Newt Gingrich. I want to vote FOR someone, not vote just to vote AGAINST Romney or AGAINST Obama.

  • kleerstreem

    None of the current crop of contenders are conservative…..!

    @Erick…..Mitt not closing the deal….if Mitt’s not closing the deal what are these other Jassbutts doing??…..Mitt won more delegates last night than any of the others…..There is no friggin deal to close. All that matters is who has 1144 delegates on July 1. That’s a friggin fact. Any of these contenders had of won 100% of everything since Jan 1, none
    would still not have enough delegates to be the GOP nominee…that is a fact. And don’t forget, our former leader Michael Steele was responsible for giving us this proportional awarding of delegates…much different than in 2008.

    TODAY’S SHOCK WOULD HAVE BEEN IF MITT HAD WON EITHER M OR A…….THE REAL SHOCK, LAST NIGHT WAS NEWT CAN’T CLOSE THE DEAL IN HIS OWN BACKYARD!!

    Please stick with the facts and stop acting like Santorum is now the GOP choice…..Santorum, Newt, Paul, Mitt are all far from becoming the GOP choice to run against Obama!

    If Santorum or Newt are Conservatives, then Ronald Reagan, was a Communists. (We know better than that, don’t we???)

    None of these contenders have ‘stellar’ records …..let’s knock off the lies and stick with the facts.

    Who am I??…just a Republic of Texas Constitutional Conservative that will still vote for Governor Perry on May 29!

    http://r1b2.posterous.com/my-analysis-of-remaining-gop-primarieswill-we

  • antisesquipedalion

    as the Beatles sang

  • RonsBoy

    Which is more than the Republican Senate with a Republican President did.

    Who was the Republican whip during that time???

    Oh, yeah it was Santorum… voting for and leading the fight for No Child Left behind and the bridge to nowhere.

  • antisesquipedalion

    trust Romney

    make another selection

  • RonsBoy

    It is cherry picking both ways if won’t even register that there are conservative credentials.exist in his record.

    You asked for something in the record and I gave it to you. How you wish to deny them is your business.

  • RonsBoy

    Joshua,

    If spelling is going to be bother you, I’m going to bother you. :D

  • filobeddoe

    so my vote doesnt really matter whether in a blue state or red state. But I will be responsible for electing Obama?

    Who made the foolish statement?

  • garfieldjl

    A judge agreed with Perry on that point, but said Perry didn’t have grounds to sue because he waited too long, which is a cop out, because you can’t sue until you are actually affected by something.

  • aesthete

    Most third party movements tend to underperform — but those numbers are about on par with Nader’s numbers, IIRC.

    I don’t think Gary Johnson gets 5% — but if he does? I think the Republican Party stands a good chance of dissolving or reconstituting itself as something else.

  • garfieldjl

    Seriously, think about it, if it came out Romney was who was behind the smear job on Cain, he would be forced out of the race within a week tops.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    First, you said “by bloodlines he is as much Kenyan as he is American”. Then you said that by bloodlines you were referring to his upbringing– you meant by that that his Kenyan father “took him in another direction”, away from an appreciation of American culture. Now, you say that it was his father’s absence that “hampered” his appreciation for American culture.

    So, remind me– what did you mean when you said that Obama “by bloodlines as much Kenyan as he is American”? Type as slowly as you want.

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

    from a “brokered” convention or in the weeks immediately preceding it, assuming no one gets the required 1144.

  • RonsBoy

    I would counter. He is not running on Romneycare was the blueprint for obamacare and He’s going to keep it.

    He is running on repealing Obamacare and the simple fact of the matter is turning over Obamacare relies more on a Republican Congress.

    Which Presidential candidate has the coat tails to do that??

    The guy who Republican moderates and independents are keeping a float or the guy who is running against counting Repubican moderates and independents?

  • RonsBoy

    I’ll allow Romney the same consideration.

  • cbartlett

    What if Romney was the one that dropped out and let the other two actually get their message out to the base without the massive Romney-backed negative ads and the GOP establishment “inevitable” mantra? Would the electorate be able to clearly see what Newt and Rick stand for and what their plans for the future are and make a REAL decision instead of having one forced down our throats by elitists and MSM?

    If Romney gets the delegate votes he needs, even if it’s not until the convention, how much of his delegate support will end up being from states that will ultimately vote for Obama anyway? It sure does seem like a lot of the Republicans who will be voting in states that will actually contribute electoral votes to a Republican president in November, have demonstrated that Mitt is NOT their first choice. So what if all of the California delegates go to Mitt in the Tampa convention? California will never vote for a Republican in the general election. Maybe there’s a case to be made for the smoke-filled-back room after all…..

  • texastaxpayer

    ;)

  • RonsBoy

    Santorum wants to exclude manufacturing corporations from paying income taxes. Obama only wants to lower taxes on manufacturers.

    How is that conservative???

    GE & GM (not that they are paying taxes now) get a pass. I guess when you plan on fighting for the UAW votes you have to go into the deep end.

    How are we going to simplify the tax code by having the IRS defining what manufacturing is.

    If I create a report and print and bind it. Did I manufacture??

    That’s Santorum!!!

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    .
    .

  • acat

    I’d suggest starting with the Larsen Bros. comedy hour, and if you come up with something new, let us know.

    Part One
    Part Two
    Part Three

    Mew

  • angryguy77

    he ran for pres. He didn’t morph from a liberal to a conservative while he was campaigning.

  • cbartlett

    nt

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    We could just put a threshhold on it and say that a “fringe minority view” is a view held by less than 10% of voters on a subject that most voters would have some sort of opinion. A recent Pew poll showed that only 8% of Americans shared Santorums view that contraception in morally wrong, for instance.

  • lapert

    Unless the margin is really close there is virtually zero chance that anyone other than the delegate leader wins the nomination – most of the talk otherwise is either wishful thinking, political naivete or journalists manufacturing storylines to be gobbled up by those who want to believe in wishful thinking or are politically naive..

  • acat

    Nixon will cut a deal with Rockefeller and enter the convention with the nomination in hand.

    The only question is whether the role of Rockefeller will be played by Santorum, Gingrich, or Ron Paul.

    Mew

  • filobeddoe

    It must have been Rick Perry, the guy who said he’d pick Cain to be his VP.

    Romney has a bit of a track record on negative campaigning.

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

    think its possible absent a scandal involving the frontrunner…and I don’t think the dog on top of the car qualifies.

  • cbartlett

    The Fear Mongering is by far the most annoying one in your list.

    What if something very, very big – in the same league as Cain’s fiasco – came out about Romney next week? It probably wouldn’t be women on the side like Cain, but imagine a gaff so bad that Mitt chokes on the foot in the mouth and the media crucifies him and forces him out. What then? Let Santorum and Gingrich duke it out? Could we really find out who they are without all of that GOP establishment and Fox News bias interferring? Could we find out what is really important to voters? Something to think about….

    (PS – I’m also a Texas taxpayer and I’m beginning to think that we will, once again, have absolutely no say in this contest.)

  • acat

    but that doesn’t change the fact that Romney and any of the other three will have enough delegates to make the convention into the usual rubber-stamp .. if they cut a deal.

    The question becomes who moves first, not whether someone will do so.

    Mew

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

    still have the power to coalesce around the more conservative Santorum if they GOTV.

  • Tbone

    A mile wide an a foot deep?

    Please. The only person that Ricky is more conservative than is Mitt.

  • garfieldjl

    He is too easy for Obama to go after.

  • garfieldjl

    However Gingrich excites different factions of the same base.

    Can we just throw them on the same ticket have a coin toss as to who is on top and be done with this.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    even though Senator Santorum is entitled to his personal views on contraception. Part of the issue is access to birth control which is available anywhere in the country and can be had for about $9 a month or free at your local PP clinic.

    The main issue is religious freedom. According to the same article you linked from usatoday:

    “If government comes in and forces a religious entity to invoke a policy against their religious affiliation, I think that’s a slippery slope,” said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. “I think that for a lot of women, they know what’s going on, and it is government trying to overrun the church and they don’t like that. They like having those religious liberties.”

    A CNN poll released Thursday backs up Blackburn: Half of all Americans aware of the ruling said they oppose it, while 44% support it. However, nearly 40% of those polled said they had not heard about the dispute, which means both parties have room in which to define the debate for a large swath of the public.

    The ruling puts Obama and the Democratic Party at risk of alienating Catholic voters, who made up 27% of the electorate in 2008. A majority, 55%, of Catholics believe that religious-affiliated organizations should be given an exception to the rule, according to the Pew poll. Obama won the Catholic vote in 2008 by 9 points over Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., but he lost or tied for the Catholic vote in swing states with high Catholic populations, including Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.

    Religious liberty is protected by the First Amendment, and the Senator’s views on this are correct. Below is a link to a discussion of his remarks made at the forum here in Alabama on Monday night regarding this issue. It’s hardly fringe.

    here

    However, I agree that our candidates should focus on the economy for the moment. Hopefully, they’ll soon realize that the left has made contraception an issue in order to avoid talking about the economy themselves.

  • brojohn2

    are you trying to say that Romney doesn’t have an ego? The man has been unable to get a solid 50% of the vote in any place other than Virginia where he ran against Ron Paul. He has been campaigning for the last 5 years + and still cannot convince anyone that he is a conservative. PLEASE! Ego is Romney’s name.

  • garfieldjl

    That’s why people chose Santorum and Newt over Romney.

    Beating Obama is pointless if we replace Obama with someone just like Obama.

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

    tea

  • gabs

    1. Nobody is making Catholics use birth control.

    2. People are less sympathetic about this because it’s in the context of the Church owning a business.

    3. Catholics themselves voluntarily ignore the Church’s ruling on birth control in fairly large numbers.

    That doesn’t mean the Church should pay for birth control. But that’s why the issue isn’t taking off in the general population.

  • joeydavis

    Once we do close ranks (behind Santorum) he’ll have sufficient resources from the folks funding Romney and from the party.

    Santorum is a natural fit for the coalition it takes to win in Virginia. Florida is going to be a dogfight regardless. I’m sure the Florida party machine is geared up and ready.

    But to be absolutely honest my Santorum path to victory doesn’t need Florida or Nevada (although I think he would win in Florida). My Santorum path runs through the rust belt and blue collar Democrats. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, North Carolina and Virginia. It’s all white, all rural and heavy on social values and manufacturing.

    I don’t even have Santorum playing in Florida or the mountain west.

    I think Romney’s road is more difficult.I don’t see Romney connecting in North Carolina, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania. He’ll have a dogfight on his hands in Ohio.

    To win he’s going to have to have Florida (doable) Ohio (maybe) Colorado Virginia, then he’s going to have to have some success in New England New Hampshire and Maine.

    It’s certainly possible but I think I’d take Santorum’s chances in Minnesota and Wisconsin over Romney’s in Maine and New Hampshire.

  • Jack_Savage

    It is a simple fact that Obama’s father was Kenyan, unless you dispute that. Therefore, he is half Kenyan and half American. Using principles of math, that makes him just as much one as another.

    This was apparently the genesis of Obama’s (now racist) book, “Dreams From My Father”, which is racist because he mentions that his father is Kenyan, that he was influenced by his father, both during his breif time with him and by his absence, and even goes so far as to call him “pitch black”. Yikes. Of course, I might have misread all this time and did not catch that the title was actually “Dreams From My Grandfather” or “Dreams From My Mom” or “Dreams From All Those Folks In Kansas”.

    By saying “bloodlines”, I was also making a distinction between myself and “birthers”, who are banned from this site (you’ll need to know that since you are now a moderator). He is half Kenyan by blood, not all Kenyan by birth.

    Now a question for you – give me some idea of the influences on Obama that solidified his patriotism, appreciation and love for American culture, and belief in American exceptionalism.

    Waiting.

    PS – Get used to being called out on your little schtick of very respectfully telling everyone why there is no GOP candidate that is “Presidential material”. It may have flown under the radar so far, but it’s not flying with me.

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

    I don’t want to sound like I am a Romney freak, I support him only half heartedly. But this is bogus. He is a scrappy fighter, and if he wins the nomination then he will go after Obama tooth and nail.

    That, combined with high gas prices, a bad economy, and a lot of disappointment in the messiah will lead to several victories.

    Romney might not excite anyone, but he is head an shoulders above the ” O” , and it will become obvious.

  • Jack_Savage

    n/t

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

    Romney, like MOST people might have become more conservative as he got older?

  • redstateneck

    The adults who put time and money in to winning against Obama are speaking. The wanabe so-called conservatives do speak with their money and don’t wake-up to go to their local Republican Mass Meetings. Those that are committed in the off-season to the Republican Party choose Mitt. The others are just interested after the decision has been made. Sill ideologues that will never govern.

  • joeydavis

    He’s very good at standing by his position and defending them.

    I thought his interview with Schieffer on “Meet the Press” was terrific. Santorum’s not new to the playing field with his positions. He’s been in the game in Democratic havens for 20 years. He’ll be just fine.

  • Jack_Savage

    He will respectfully and deferentially tell you that Santorum’s views are “fringe”, backpedal a little, then try to get away with it clean.

    He is an Obama shill, and deserves to comment on GOP candidates like I deserve to comment on neurophysiology.

  • redstateneck

    Reagan was a Democrat. He spent like a Democrat.. so why so critical of Romney. At least he’s always been a (R).

  • mort

    George Mason, author of the “Bill of Rights” warned, “As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, so they must be punished in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, Providence punishes national sins by national calamities.”
    Therefore as the nation continues to ignore God’s word, we bring destruction on ourselves. Of course this is not limited to gay rights, but also abortion, materialism, greed, not keeping the sabbath holy, murder and adultery to name just a few that all of us are guilty of.
    A sin may be between the sinner and his God, but it affects the whole nation.

  • joeydavis

    But what if we ummm

    just put Santorum on top of the ticket and in exchange for his delegates Gingrich can choose the VP.

    If he wants the job, he can have it, but I really don’t see Gingrich as a VP.

    That way he gets to be a kingmaker TWICE.

    Don’t get me wrong I really do like Gingrich a lot. I just think Santorum is a better choice.

  • cbartlett

    I thought the same thing when I heard Newt speak last night. I think he started out in this to actually become President because he thought he had something to offer. I think now he’s staying in to try to keep Romney out – he recognizes the danger of allowing the GOP establishment yet another progressive in the White House.

    Newt knows that Romney would not give him the time of day if he wins in November and that perhaps Rick would at least recognize and possibly adopt some of the fiscal principles Newt knows this country needs. It’s a shame – I think Newt is the only one that has the maturity to recognize and care more about correcting the destruction that has been taking place in the last decade+ than he does about what people think about him. Unfortunately, you do have to care what people think about you to actually get elected to do the job that needs to be done.

    I think trickamstr’ said it above —- unless he implodes, Romney will most likely be nominated regardless of very close delegate counts because the GOP Super Delegates will 100% back the GOP establishment “inevitable” candidate that they have been pushing on us all along. Whatever made us think we actually had any say-so in this anyway?!?

  • mort

    which are winner take all?
    In Pennsylvania all the delegates we elect next month are free to cast a ballot at the convention for whomever they wish, unless Steele changed that recently.

  • garfieldjl

    Rather than turn tables and move on to a seperate issue that Obama is even weaker on.

  • acat

    Cheshire grin

  • RonsBoy

    You don’t think Nevada and Florida are not on the Santorum model.

    In Ohio Santorum lost the suburubs to Romney, those are the very voters you are counting on and they didn ‘t choose Santorum.

    You really think Romney’s money comes on board after a brokered convention??

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    making Romney doesn’t get the nod, I don’t think this is lost on him (not much is). So it becomes a question of Romney & Paul vs. Newt & Santorum, doesn’t it? I really can’t imagine any other combination.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Do a blog post yourself. Put the top 10 clips you can find of Santorum being !SATANTORUM! Let’s see if it rates any higher than Nancy Pelosi claiming that she “knew something about Newt.”

  • garfieldjl

    You raise a valid point concerning Santorum though.

    However, Newt Gingrich did get a balanced budget. We can also say that congress managed to screw everything up after Newt left.

    Newt would have stood up to Bush, he would have kept us on a balanced budget.

    Newt probably would have gone after Freddie and Fannae.

    McCain would probably have won 2008 if the idiots in the party hadn’t forced him out.

    Speaking of which, didn’t Sen. Graham admit recently that forcing Newt out was a terrible mistake.

  • joeydavis

    Santorum is playing to win. Gingrich is playing for a draw.

    Santorum may not be able to win it, but he’s going for it.

    I don’t believe in playing for the tie. If that’s gingrich’s plan so be it, but I think when you start playing not to lose you should just get off the field.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    There cannot be absolute religious freedom from any law that they do not agree with in a nation of laws. The Catholic Church believes, like I do, that the death penalty is wrong. But just because Catholics believe that, they are not exempt from the death penalty, nor can they require that the death penalty not be applied when they are a victim of a capital crime, nor can they require that their taxes not be paid to fund the application of the death penalty. So, as far as the death penalty is concerned, Catholics pay taxes to fund a practice diametrically opposed to a core tenet of their religion. To implement such an exemption in every possible conflict would be cumbersome to the point of being unworkable and would result in injustice.

    I am not fundamentally opposed to special accomodations which give religious groups exemptions from certain laws that conflict with their beliefs when it is practicable, but those accommodations are things that are granted on a case by case basis thought the judgment of the legislature, not some absolute right guaranteed in the First Amendment. The First Amentment only states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” There’s nothing in there about not having to pay taxes for things you do not like.

    But anyway, that is contraception, and I think the issue is a distraction too. I was probably more troubled by Santorum’s statement that the federal and state government should get out of education. It’s not just the statement itself, it’s the way he kind of just threw it out there, off the cuff, in the Arizona debate. Now, we have heard many conservative candidates say that education should be left to the states, and I would not call that a “fringe” position, but to say that the states also should not be involved in education is another recent “fringe” position that Santorum has taken since his rise in the polls. It’s an important position on a major issue, and I think he said it on the spur of the moment without reallyt thinking about it, If true, this in my view shows poor judgment. As far as I know, he has not developed that thought further since then much less formed it into a plan of action, furthering my belief that this was just an unserious thing that he tossed out there just because it sounded more conservative than what his opponents were saying.

  • acat

    More reading, less gum-flapping.

    Mew

  • garfieldjl

    I think he is planning on making sure Romney can’t win. Then make the case to Santorum why he should be on top of the ticket.

    Gingrich is still in this to win, and also ensure that it will either be him or Santorum that is the nominee by making sure Romney can’t win.

    Gingrich is doing that by getting on Team Obama’s nerves without even being the nominee yet. By getting Team Obama to constantly react to him, it shows that Newt actually scares Obama.

    So he’s playing to win, but win by convincing the delegates that he can get Obama off message (which he’s already done).

  • garfieldjl

    how Pelosi’s attack hurt Newt. Looked more like it backfired in a rather spectacular fashion.

  • garfieldjl

    If the right candidate emerges, we could actually win the election in November, there’s a first time for everything.

  • garfieldjl

    That they are fed up with Romney’s attacks, they agree they both should be on ticket and then either they both stay in to tag team Romney, or one leaves the race and starts campaigning against Romney.

    Gingrich makes it so Obama can’t pull the experience card on Santorum whom would be VP.

    Gingrich blunts the contraceptive song and dance routine cause he can easily turn it against Obama, and then the fact Santorum is VP not the one setting policy.

    My issue with Santorum boils down to experience, Newt for all his quirks has remarkable accomplishments, I think a Santorum/Gingrich or Gingrich/Santorum tag team would almost be Obama’s worst Nightmare (his worst would probably be Gingrich/Palin).

    I also think Gingrich is a lot better at getting Team Obama to run around in circles so much they collapse from exhaustion than Santorum would be. Gingrich also never seems to give up, he is always thinking of his next move, he believes he can win.

  • steve962

    If you think Pennsylvania will ever vote for Santorum again, you may be in for a very big surprise.

    I’d rate his odds of winning the PA primary at only about 1 in 4 at best (assuming Gingrich drops out by then — if Gingrich is still in, I expect him to steal most of Santorum’s votes here…) – it all depends on whether the suburban Republicans find the choices to be compelling enough to actually get out and vote in the primary or not. If they do in even light numbers, Santorum won’t even come close.

    His odds of winning PA in the general, however, approach zero, IMHO. Nothing will motivate PA democrats to get out and vote in this state more than the prospect of Santorum as president.

  • acat

    He doesn’t have the delegates.

    Paul+Santorum or Paul+Gingrich still equals #Fail… no way any of ‘em get enough delegates to name themselves as the ticket.

    Romney+Paul is, my guess, the hope in the Romney camp. If the two of ‘em combined get enough delegates, Ron Paul may be willing to trade all his delegates for a big splash at the convention, and maybe a good spot for himself or Rand in Romney’s administration… not necessarily veep, but .. something that can support a future run. Heh. Maybe Fed Chairman. (Bernanke’s done in 2014)

    Romney+Santorum makes enough political sense that, if Ron Paul can’t bring enough delegates, it could happen. Romney/Santorum become “the fusion ticket”, Romney’s business and executive acumen, Santorum’s social conservative and Senate how-to. Santorum gets out of the political wilderness he’s been in for .. all of 2 years .. and is a much larger sop to the Values Voters, who Willard needs to win, than I think they otherwise will get from Willard. Besides, the veep is a pitcher of warm spit; once Santorum’s sworn in, Romney can send him to the undisclosed location for 4 years, and nobody will care.

    Romney+Gingrich I just don’t see. It makes some political sense but … less than Santorum+Gingrich, if only because Gingrich isn’t young enough to wait until 2020. I can see Gingrich trading delegates for a large role (cuz he won’t fit in a small) as “Reform Czar” or something, lending some gravitas to Romney .. but as with the veep post above, once Romney’s in, Gingrich can be sent packing.

    So .. yeah. I’m not seeing much good here.

    Mew

  • garfieldjl

    Romney switched parties so he could run against Ted Kennedy.

    Reagan switched parties because he thought the Democrats were going off the deep end.

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

    .

  • garfieldjl

    Blame the rich and “their Republican shills”, he is the worst candidate we can run.

    Bain Capital is the reason

  • vaaztx

    “You don?t think gov?t should condemn what God called an abomination”

    It is not our government’s job to support the tenets of one (or more) sect(s) of one religion amongst the multitude of religions. For even if the government supports something I do like, then we make it more likely that they support something that I don’t should my religion (Roman Catholic) ever be in the minority.

  • Scope

    for remaining in the race is to keep Romney from getting the number of needed delegates. Haven’t all of the candidates, who were all considered the anti-Romney’s, from the beginning been trying to get the delegates and keep them from going to Romney? Gingrich is simply trying to find justification for staying in the race, when he knows he has zero chance of winning. Even the most apolitical should be able to see through that rationality.

    Why ever should Santorum, who has been working just as hard as Gingrich to win primaries, and has been much more successful, be willing to just give his hard fought wins to Gingrich who hasn’t been as successful? How do you think the Santorum voters would feel about him being willing to give their votes to a candidate they didn’t vote for, and in many cases would never have voted for?

    I am unaware of any agitation shown by the Obama administration toward Gingrich. The Obama team is focusing on Romney, and not even paying attention to Gingrich. Where has the Obama team constantly reacted to Newt Gingrich in particular? I may have missed that.

    Just saw an interview of Santorum from Puerto Rico where he is campaigning for the Sat. primary, where Newt just keeps conceding states, and not even trying. He said that he was doing OK against Romney in Hawaii for a while, I believe, but Romney pulled out the win because there is a large enclave of Mormons in Hawaii.

    I would be fine with a Santorum/Gingrich ticket, but there is no earthly reason for Santorum to take his hard work and successes, and just turn them into a warm bucket of spit so to speak. If Gingrich had done all the same hard work of campaigning everywhere, and didn’t just concede states because he had little chance to win there, I wouldn’t be thinking that he has been a little lazy.

    Once April 1st comes along, many of the states then become winner take all. If Gingrich remains in the race after that, he knows darn well he will keep splitting the vote, and will just hand Romney all those delegates by default. How does he plan to keep those delegates from going to Romney?

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    Now you are finally back to the what I believe to be truth– when you said “by bloodlines [Obama] is as much Kenyan as he is American” you were expressing “it is a simple fact that Obama?s father was Kenyan, unless you dispute that. Therefore, he is half Kenyan and half American.” This makes sense.

    But looking at the context in which you made the “bloodlines” remark, it was obviously a disparaging remark, meant to be one item in a list of why Obama is unfit to be President.

    Let’s look at the sentence, just to be sure. You said:

    That your candidate is the idiot of idiots, that he was the most ill-vetted, inexperienced, radical leftist ever to even attempt to run for President, by bloodlines he is as much Kenyan as he is American and has as much love for American culture as Hugo Chavez, he is an incredible failure from top to bottom and end to end, and is such a dolt he can?t even get a baseball over home plate.

    Every clause in that sentence obviously expresses some negative trait you perceive in Obama that contributes to why he is unfit for office, so when you say that “by bloodlines he is much Kenyan as he is American”, you are saying that that too contributes to the reasons why you believe he is unfit for office. Put it all together, and you are saying that Obama is unfit for office in part because the “simple fact that Obama?s father was Kenyan” makes him “half Kenyan by blood”.

    That is racist.

    As far as my “schtick” and whether I can fly under the radar– I may not last, we will see, but I bet that there are more than a few RedStaters that want someone like you gone as well.

  • garfieldjl

    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/29/obama-loses-his-first-debate

    Newt managed to goad Obama into reacting to a speech Newt gave, then Newt dismantled Obama’s argument when Obama reacted.

  • joereagan

    Make it is difficult as possible for Romney, and as painful as possible for the “establishment”. Whether we can actually deny Romney the nomination is debatable. It’s definitely still possible. But even if we can’t, we need to hamstring the coronation as much as possible. They need to know that they can’t shove a liberal down our throats and get away with it.

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

    I do not think the government has a right to say people that are gay are any different than people that are not gay. That is up to god. There were people who once believed that God wanted black people to be slaves, they were wrong then, and the idea that government has the right to legislate morality now is wrong. I think the idea that we are small government conservatives until it does not serve our purpose is just not valid. Therefore, yes, I am not social conservative. The contraception debate was decided 30 years ago. Government should not tell religious institution to pay for it, nor should it tell if they could use it or not. Government should never have the power to push its own morals on us. Now I do think there is a difference between morals and laws. Murder is a law, and the government should make it so. Nevertheless, murder and gay marriage are two very different things.

  • garfieldjl

    He and his supporters arrogance!

    You blindly push for the man that fits right into Obama’s campaign strategy, and have the gall to call us stupid, a bunch of little kids, etc.

    Well I guess the kids are more intelligent than the adults because they aren’t stupid enough to fall for the Romney is electable crud.

    Obama’s wants to take on Romney, whom fits into his “blame the rich strategy,” I’m sorry so many people just can’t get the fact that you’re pushing us into a trap.

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

    I see no reason Government has the right to say whom one can marry. Heck, if someone wants to marry their Dodge Truck, go ahead.

  • texastaxpayer

    But the BASE IS SPEAKING and 70% of us don’t want Romney. Romney is the godfather of obamacare, cap and trade and a tax and spend liberal at heart. In an election that promises to be about economics the “adults” are promoting a candidate that scored 47th out of 50 for economic growth during a growth period for the country. The “adults” are suggesting a man that ended his single term leading a government with policies that destroyed his states economy, blew a whole the size of Texas in his budget and ultimately left office with a 34% approval rating is the “electable” candidate. Frankly I don’t think the “adults” have a freaking clue….

  • garfieldjl

    As well as his other “slips” lead me to believe that it is more likely that he is just not being honest.

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

    Telling us your lefty professors’ version of libertarianism isn’t really interesting or helpful in adult debate.

  • jamesm

    will go for Santorum in many congressional districts. Santorum will get a lot of delegates out of here

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

    However, with Santorum on the ticket I can see him getting close.

    Obama will pull his hard core reds. Santorum will pull socons.

    Both will piss off the vast middle, Obama because of his performance, Santorum because they don’t want him messing with their lives as Pope (and between BO and the MSM, he will be perceived that way by October). That leaves a pretty big number of people looking for an alternative.

    Johnson was boring as watching paint dry in the debates, perhaps because there was a whole stage full of participants, but he’s got a really solid record of conservative governance in a Blue state and has the potential to be an attractive candidate in a three way race, especially if both of the other candidates can rightly be perceived as “fringe”. He’s also got more executive experience than Obama and Santorum combined.

    It could be a really interesting race.

  • garfieldjl

    I’m serious folks, the media has been shilling for Romney.

    Newt’s bringing up Bain Capital and the media not covering it should have been a red flag for everyone here.

    Obama wants to verse Romney, he’s practically drooling over the idea of Romney being the nominee.

    He’s then going to spring a bunch of sob stories about how Bain Capital caused someone’s mommy or daddy to lose their job.

    People are so desperate to beat Obama, they are buying into the lies they are being told.

    Romney is about the only one running that could easily be beaten by Obama.

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

    Get a life.

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

    how can you not be biased. I am bias against Obama, and Romney. I do not like the idea of a government run anything, except military and a few other things.

  • acat

    I’m reading into what you’ve written a little, but .. if Johnson can’t make Perot numbers then .. he can’t win.

    If Johnson can’t win, then all he can do – and all he needs to achieve are Nader numbers – is to screw the pooch for the GOP.

    So .. yes, a race for the history books, but with a second Obama term as a chaser.

    Mew

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

    He could potentially pull independents from Obama who would NEVER vote for Santorum.

  • Scope

    like a comment today saying that Gingrich is still playing to win the nomination, and that he really can accomplish that.

  • garfieldjl

    If I thought Romney was being honest with us, I would support Romney.

    Problem is there are plenty of indications that Romney has no intention of doing what he said he’ll do once he gets elected.

    However, my analysis of Obama being able to easily beat Romney is based on facts.

    I looked at the baggage I know about Romney, baggage that Newt has, baggage that Santorum has. I stacked it up against Obama’s baggage.

    Romney’s baggage is easy for Obama to attack, but Romney’s own baggage gets in the way of him attacking Obama.

    Romneycare is a good example

    Santorum and Obama can go after each other’s baggage all day, if Santorum can keep the focus on Obama’s baggage, Santorum wins.

    Gingrich has the most baggage, but a lot of it is old, further a lot of it can call attention to Obama’s baggage.

    Gingrich can pretty much attack Obama’s baggage all day and not worry about any backfires.

    So from a tactical standpoint, in order of most likely to beat Obama.

    Gingrich is more likely to beat Obama than Santorum whom is more likely to beat Obama than Romney.

    I’m being charitable to Romney in this, cause Ron Paul would be more electable than he is if we don’t get into Ron’s foreign policy idiocy.

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

    11th commandment.

    Wild speculative attacks on Romney don’t help us beat Obama.

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

    ..

  • rabun1016

    That is smart. Sit out if Romney is the guy. That will teach this country.

  • garfieldjl

    1. I consider Romney to be a Democrat trying to pose as a Republican.

    2. These issues will be brought up in the general, I’m trying to point out why Romney shouldn’t be our nominee, so we don’t make the mistake of handing Obama 4 more years, because we ended up walking right into Obama’s trap and made our nominee the one person Obama could easily beat.

  • Scope

    John King asked the former Bushie Homeland Security Secy. why he threw his support behind Romney, and he said because Romney has had a leadership job in the private sector, and that he was a leader to turn the Olympics around. King asked him what chance Romney had of winning PA, and Ridge said a little better than 50/50. LOL The kiss of death, so to speak, from the guy that was replaced after the Katrina disaster brought shame on the Bush admin., rightfully or wrongly. He got trone under da bus by Bush, but once a Bushie, always a Bushie. That endorsement probably has about the same worth as Jeff Foxworthy’s. How do you know if you are a Redneck? When you believe what you are told to believe, that Romney is the only inevitable one who can beat Obama. Maybe someone will make some big bucks designing neck collars and leashes that are inscripted with Romney the Inevitable.

  • texastaxpayer

    Of course there isn’t a pattern of media projection you know since he has been the “presumptive nominee” since before the first vote was cast and all. What I am telling you as someone on the ground in north Texas is my friends, my family, my co-workers and the people I talk to in the morning at Starbucks hate the guy. There are more Gary Johnson signs in my town than Romney signs. Spin that however itmakes you feel better. But I can tell you this much. This Texan will not support him and I am far from lonely.

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

    He’s a leading candidate for our nomination, whether you consider it true or not.

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

    GHWB wasn’t toxic to the middle and Santorum will be. Clinton was a relative unknown and was the best politician of his generation. Obama is well known and his performance is pretty toxic and he’s a lousy politician, Clinton was “one of the folks”, Obama is masquerading as the Master.

    Perot was crazy as Ron Paul and had no political experience, Johnson is a pretty reasonable – if boring – guy who has a better resume than either Obama or Santorum.

    I see the dynamics as totally different from 92 when the R base was really pissed at Bush and Clinton was running as a conservative.

  • texastaxpayer

    A new poll of the Texas Republican presidential primary from Wilson Perkins Allen shows Rick Santorum leading Romney 35 percent to 27 percent, with Newt Gingrich in third place at 20 percent. 27% sounds about right.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/poll-shows-santorum-leads-in-texas/2012/03/14/gIQAVOpYCS_blog.html

  • rabun1016

    Erickson’s sole talking point on WSB. Really clever. Santorum has the right answers but the wrong experience, all in govt. He worked as an atty even fewer years than Obama did before he ran for Congress. I like his positions. Very similar to mine. Just don’t like that his entire career has been in govt. Didn’t think he had a chance in 2006 in Pa and don’t think he has a chance in 2012 on the big stage.

  • aesthete

    Johnson has the ability to pull away independents disaffected with Obama, fiscal conservatives/libertarians, and some of the anti-war folks frustrated with Obama. (I’m actually not sure about that Johnson’s appeal for that last group, since Johnson isn’t really much of a peacenik and seems to be pretty pro-Israel, but anything can happen.) What would make it particularly interesting would be if a) Santorum won a plurality, but b) Johnson did well enough to both put the libertarian party on the map, and make the Libertarian Party qualify for all of the government recognitions and goodies that apply in federal elections once a political party gets past the 5% threshold. Nader’s goal in 2000 was, after all, to get the Green Party past the 5% threshold, and such a showing on the part of the LP would destabilize the GOP, and make it more likely for voters to move away from it. If Santorum lost outright, I don’t see how such an event wouldn’t fatally wound the GOP; if he won a contested plurality, it would make things… interesting, as far as the two-party system goes.

    I think this is an academic discussion unless Johnson either gets invited to debates, or finds a way to put himself on the radar, though.

  • trickamsterdam

    Yeah I do like that stuff despite my joke about “moonspeak”. I’ll have google that one when I have time later tonight.

    I think it’s more about Newt just being flat-out smarter than the others though more than never giving up. Yeah Paul’s a doctor but he’s so rigid. Romney is a double-major at Harvard but not an original thinker to say the least. And that’ll be his undoing either now or in the General.

    Santo is a useful tool and is electable because he’s immune to the class-warfare attacks and has a real chance in OH and PA. He’ll still be a measurable underdog to Obama of course.

    But Santo doesn’t understand very much. Doesn’t mean he’s not better than Obama and Romney it just means that he doesn’t understand very much.

    But Newt…that’s why I tried to explain to his people that if they destroyed Romney first and got it between him and Santo and they were both on equal financial grounds like they would have been? He would have run rings around Santo.

    Newt understood that. Too bad his people didn’t.

    Then again if Newt wasn’t so lazy and self-absorbed he might have done better fund-raising in the beginning and been able to defend himself from that initial attack in Iowa…if so this Race might already be over….and you might be looking at a Newt/Perry ticket.

    Well at least there surprisingly is still time to avoid a Romney/Anybody ticket. Let us all than our various gods for that.

  • Jack_Savage

    He is unfit for office because he has no appreciation, love or respect for American traditions, culture, or exceptionalism. If you weren’t so obsessed with race, you would see that. You conveniently leave out the last part of the sentence which makes that point.

    You are lying, and continue to lie.

    It also is telling to know that you are so unwilling to defend him on his record, or even engage in that debate, that the “racist” card, which should be your last resort, is your first one.

    As far as me going anywhere, pal, I was here when your President was a pathetic little state senator in Illinois, late for every hearing and defending infanticide. How about letting me know exactly why you are here?

    And I am STILL waiting for a scrap of a whiff of a reason why any sane person would support Barack Obama.

    Waiting.

  • Jack_Savage

    I guess all that combined is enough to make you vote for Obama, right?

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

    In a rotten economy, a weirdo, pro-dope, pacifist third party candidacy could pull off disaffected DEM leaners.

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

  • Scope

    He got more than 50% of the vote in heavily Mormon states. The only reason he got the percentage he did in VA was because he was one of only two candidates. Did you notice that less than 5% of the VA Republicans came out to vote in this year’s primary? I’m almost starting to believe that this is a race between the Mormons and the rest of the electorate, every where they have an enclave of Mormons. What are they trying to prove that a Mormon can win the presidency? and that the positions of the candidate don’t matter worth a dang?

  • Scope

    Gingrich is like the battery powered energizer bunny that just keeps repeating that the media and everyone else has been against him, and you want to take a baseball club to that energizer bunny to make him stop already. You’ve already proven to be one of those batteries.

  • garfieldjl

    I think this will be number 4 now. That’s why I compare him to Naruto. Forget conventional wisdom this race has had so many front runners that anything can happen.

    Newt already has a plan on how to win the nomination even with yesterday’s results which proved Romney couldn’t win even when he divided the vote, he lost to both Santorum and Gingrich.

    There are a few primaries that Santorum isn’t on the ballot, that Newt and Romney are on.

    At the very least, Santorum would prefer Newt taking those delegates instead of Mittens.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    He either has something, or he doesn’t.

  • Scope

    an unthinking Newtbot. We do have a few of those around here, for various reasons, that don’t care about anything other than their leg tingles for Newtie. Obama also incited those leg tingles, and how has that worked out?

    You need Newt to tell you to back Santorum?

    This folks is why the Republicans have no, zero, zip chance of winning the nomination.

    If Newt told you to back Obama, would you jump off that cliff?

    This is depressing.

  • garfieldjl

    I think Gingrich is driving Romney up a wall because he can’t seem to get rid of Gingrich so he can focus on driving Santorum out of the race.

    If Gingrich leaves, Romney will want debates again so he and Paul can gang up on Santorum.

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

    But Johnson is far from a weirdo. He “could” be a pretty attractive candidate.

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

    poll 5%+ with Santorum as the Republican nominee. And, you’ve pretty well nailed it with respect to putting the Libertarian Party on the national map. That would raise all kinds of hell down the road.

    And your final paragraph is right on the money.

  • Scope

    So where was the last place you guys saw a spaceship filled with Newties that have already inhabited the moon colonies?

  • Scope

    anywhere anytime. You people are worse than the cultist Ronbots. and just as delusional.

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

    I’m pretty sure he’s a ghost.

  • The_Gadfly

    for Republicans is that excluding sitting Presidents it has worked so rarely in the general election. Heck, even a couple of “inevitable” sitting Presidents have lost in my lifetime.

  • The_Gadfly

    Another of those memes came out tonight on Fox News. Romney did an interview in which he basically discounted all criticisms he’s taking by saying that those of us who don’t like him now HAVE to vote for him November just as long as he wins the nomination. It may be true, but show a little bit of class and don’t rub our noses in it. Too much nose rubbing and you just may find out you were wrong. Just becasue that means everybody loses doesn’t mean it won’t happen. Worse, it may not affect the top line, but have detrimental effects downstream where you’ll actually need it to have the congressional support you need.

  • Jack_Savage

    It was the first time I had ever called anyone an idiot here. It was true, and felt good.

    If he had just left this sentence out of his post on this thread:

    “None of your candidates are presidential material, Erick.”

    I wouldn’t have bothered. For an Obama supporter to say that, on this site, was a little too much for me this morning. Of course he pulled the race card, but even sooner than I projected.

    I hope your business is picking up out there. Mine (commercial construction) has somewhat, but it is still very, very low margin and hit or miss, with plenty of opportunity for scoundrel – like activity during the bid process. Everyone seems to be waiting for a change…

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    He is unfit for office because he has no appreciation, love or respect for American traditions, culture, or exceptionalism.

    And of course you have previously said that he has no appreciation for American culture because of his half Kenyan bloodlines. If I accept these two statements as true, the only logical implication is that Obama is unfit for office because he is half Kenyan by birth.

    There’s really no reason for me to defend Obama to you, for the same reasons I’ve already mentioned.

  • The_Gadfly

    that the delegates in a brokered convention will be working for the good of the party/country. In a brokered convention the most significant players will be the establishment players who are use to dealing with horse trading and long knives. The only times that grass roots conservatism has carried the day have been when we’ve been able to beat the establishment in open primaries: Reagan’s second run at the Presidency (he lost the first one to Ford and one Republican pol is famous for noting that when Reagan gave his nominating speech for Ford, he had the sinking feeling they had just nominated the wrong person), the Contract with America 10 years later, and the 2010 Tea Party counter-revolution. When we play insider baseball we lose, and it doesn’t get any more insider baseball than a brokered convention.

  • earlgrey

    Our choices for R nomination our very bad in my opinoin. Would Johnson have been better (knowing now it is too late)? Just curious.

  • naraht

    I didn’t say that those states represented significant victories. :)

    Frankly, some time ago, I thought that Romney would win the primaries/caucuses in all of the states where *either*Obama beat McCain in the General Election of 2008 *OR* are in the top 8 of percentage of Latter Day Saints in the population. (UT, ID,WY, NV, AZ, HI, MT, AK) or both.

    I think the States that are most likely to break that would be Santorum winning either Pennsylvania, North Carolina or Montana.

  • yongin

    Romney is vastly outspending the field, yet he is limping to the finish line. I want the race to last as long as possible becuase it will force Romney to actually make the case for his candidacy to conservatives instead hiding behind Super PACs that trash the competition. Saying “vote for me now or Obama winsns is not exactly exciting. Also my vote in a presidential race will actually matter for once. I live in IL. In the past, when the Presidential race come to IL, the race is over. I glad that vote will matter. Really, why should the political universe be cnetered on Iowa, New Hampshire, and South cArolin?

  • lineholder

    Did you hear his interview with Megyn Kelly today? He specifically says that in 2008 he was the Conservative in the race and that he can get Conservative support. Then he said that for people who are very Conservative, they may not be on board with him now but they will be in when he gets the nomination. (And he was laughing when he said this)

    Where has this man been the past three years? He’s not the most conservative candidate in this race. He may have been in 2008, when he was running against McCain, but he isn’t now. What’s more, there’s been a shift toward the right during the past three years. A significant number of people have shifted towards becoming MORE conservative, not less.

    I don’t particularly like the man anyway because he’s so incredibly disingenuous about his support for socialized medicine. I’d love to say that he just doesn’t get it, he doesn’t realize how much of a shift there has been, and he doesn’t realize that if he EARNS the support of Conservatives, he’s got a chance to blow this next election slap out of the water. Turn out would be high…much higher than it has been.

    But the simple fact is that he’s too much of a politician to care. He wants to reach either 270 or 1144. That’s it.

    When that’s the kind of attitude he’s got…no, he isn’t closing the deal.

  • The_Gadfly

    In a word: No.

  • Ann_W

    You guys are ridiculous.

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

    He built his political career out of the living room of convicted terrorists and was groomed by the Chicago political mob. He’s never held a real job, was “editor” of the Harvard Law Review but never saw fit to publish so much as one article, couldn’t even land a tenure-track teaching job at a university. When he was a state legislator, his career is notable only for the “Present” votes on any controversial issue.

    With respect to his disdain for the history and tradition of the United States I doubt it has anything to do with his absentee father, more like his radical left mother and grandmother and his associations in college.

    You are absolutely pathetic. Not as pathetic as Obama, but pathetic none the less.

  • Jack_Savage

    But you aren’t, so I will relieve you of the burden of trying. I have some fence posts down the street I could explain it to, with a much higher chance of them comprehending. I think they are also Obama voters too, which makes sense.

    You don’t defend Obama, because you can’t. You can’t abide any criticism of your messiah without pulling the race card, which is so predictable as to be a joke around here. You won’t even answer why you are here, because you aren’t here in good faith.

    I get all that, and maybe if I were in your shaky political position I would consider similar tactics. Actually, no. I would re-evaluate my skewed worldview. Anyhoo, it must be difficult to constantly project your obsession with race onto others, and for all these reasons I feel truly sorry for you.

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

    along with the bulk of my net. I’ve been working for somebody else for the last couple of years mostly to just get stabilized at home. I’m working on a new venture that I’m expecting to start in the next couple of months, we’ll see.

    It looks like I was wrong about the ghost effect, the stupid sob is still here. I just had the opportunity to note that he’s an idiot just below.

  • Bill S

    This is a site for promoting Republican and conservative ideals. Barack Obama does not represent those. If you are here to shill for something else, then I suggest you leave now.

    In fact, that’s not a suggestion.

  • garfieldjl

    Problem is Santorum has a tendency to wade right into it instead of turning tables on the media.

  • Jack_Savage

    My poker buddies and I, all of whom were gainfully employed or business owners, have also been forced to be quite creative to keep the cash flow going in the proper direction. The mortgage broker is flipping entry – level houses, the developer is building mid-level single families, the commercial leasing agent is surviving on medical facility leases and 60% of his former income, the project manager at the general contractor is now working in the field, and so on. I am the only one who has kept his job and benefits, albeit with a stiff reduction in income.

    We just can’t stand even one more year of this, much less four. And idiot below can’t understand why everyone is a little tense. Jeez.

  • The_Gadfly

    doesn’t mean he hasn’t got a point. I know Art got a lot of flack for his inside long-knife analyses when he posted here, but they were point to be thoughtfully considered.

    Leftists don’t train to fight reactionaries, they train to fight other leftists, particularly the ones who aren’t sufficiently far to the left. Which pretty much descirbes Romney’s stint in Mass to a tee. Yeah, yeah. I’ve heard the remarks that Mass is a Dem stronghold so he had to compromise. Which misses the point that someone as plastic and rich as Mittens can pretty much pick the state where he wants to run for governor to burnish his credentials and then do so. Mitt selected Mass when he could have had Vermont, New Hampshire, Utah, or Michigan. Heck, he probably could have even run in PA.

  • acat

    when – or, I suppose, if – the Romney campaign insiders will realize their strategy of not needing to reach out to Values Voters by clinching the nomination early has failed.

    Mew

  • garfieldjl

    Dude, I didn’t fall for Romney’s song and dance back in 2008. I knew he was a left winger.

    You are set on beating Obama, that you are buying the media’s electability song and dance without realizing how you’re being played as a fool.

    I happily voted for McCain because I did my research and knew Obama was a far left radical. I don’t blame McCain or Palin, I blame the advisors McCain had, and the media giving Obama a pass on everything.

    Romney is being treated with kid gloves by the Obama-loving media, that should be a red flag for you right there.

    Obama wants to run against Romney, Romney plays right into his campaign strategy.

    Santorum would make it so Obama would have to switch the strategy but it’s along a similar smear campaign to divide the country. However Santorum would actually be a threat to Obama’s re-election chances.

    Gingrich would totally upend all his entire campaign strategy as would Palin.

    It doesn’t take rocket science to predict how Obama’s campaign will operate, what their planned attacks are, etc.

    Romney fits right into Obama’s class warfare song and dance routine.

    He probably already has videos of a bunch of children crying because Bain Capital took away their parent’s job and left them starving in the street (slight exageration but you get the point).

    Romney’s record is very similar to Obama (public record), so that also blunts Romney’s ability to fight back.

    Now if you are saying that Romney has a chance to win cause he fights just as dirty as Obama, okay fine. Problem is that Romney won’t have the money to outspend Obama, and the media will be shilling for Obama not Romney.

  • acat

    Or . .so Scope has maintained.

    Mew

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    … on their terms?

    You won?t even answer why you are here

    I’ve already answered that question here, just not to you. I’m happy to engage people on their terms when they are civil.

    I can defend Obama… but it is senseless to defend Obama over the fact that he was born to a Kenyan father, since Obama didn’t have much of a say in the matter. Besides, you haven’t really developed any specific, substantive claims against him on his merits, so there is really no need to defend him from anything here. Tell you what though– get me a guarantee from an admin here that I can write a diary on it, and not get banned for doing so, and I will write a whole diary making the case for Obama, and you can come try and pick it apart to your heart’s content.

  • garfieldjl

    He has 0 executive experience, I also don’t think Santorum can beat Obama.

    Newt can beat Obama, because his Obama’s baggage would get in the way of attacking Newt.

    I don’t see Rick coming up with solutions.

    This can’t be about lesser of two evils, we need who is best able to fix things and sorry Santorum isn’t it. Unlike Romney, I trust Santorum is telling us the truth and being honest with us, which is why I will not support Romney.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    That’s part of the reason why I am not doing it. I’m here for a little debate, not to make the case for Obama. I think Jack is trying to goad me into doing it. He wants me to be a notch on his belt.

  • oldmom2

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/mitt-romney-was-a-democrat

  • garfieldjl

    He came here to argue his points, as long as he doesn’t start flaming people or trolling I don’t have a problem with him.

    Heck we could even convince him that his initial positions are wrong.

    Reason I’m defending him is because I was treated like this by liberals on other sites, and I would be a hypocrit if I stood by and let people treat someone the way you are currently and not call you out on it.

  • Jack_Savage

    Thanks for the belly laugh.
    Maybe you could explain this one, though:

    “None of your candidates are presidential material, Erick.”

    And you expect civility and respect?

  • Jack_Savage

    You are here to help Gingrich supporters with their case against Romney and Santorum. You are here to work with Romney supporters on why Gingrich and Santorum aren’t “presidential material”. And last but not least, you need to help Santorum supporters understand why they couldn’t possibly vote for Romney or Gingrich should they win the nomination.

    This is something we are discussing among ourselves. We don’t need your input. At all.

  • Jack_Savage

    Really? Why?

  • clintonformccain

    NT

  • garfieldjl

    It was wrong when Liberals treated me like that, and it’s equally wrong for Conservatives to treat a liberal like that as long as he isn’t flaming, trolling, etc.

    We’re better than that.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    I admit that I’ve gotten myself drawn into a bit of a flame war here, and people have probably been banned for less, here and on liberal sites. I really would prefer not to be banned. And I’m like you… I like it when the “other side” comes over, and am always sorry to see those who want to want to ban all dissenting voices descend.

    And, I have a few conservative views that probably don’t even need much modification! Some Kossacks seem to think I am a right winger. They are wrong of course, but I am not a checklist liberal by any stretch.

  • Bill S

    If leftists want to debate, they can join Toastmasters. Debates just give them a venue to voice their opinions, and that wastes our bandwidth.

  • Jack_Savage

    If all you did was criticize Democrat candidates, it wasn’t wrong to treat you that way. You were in the wrong place, doing the wrong thing.

    If you think this is some little fun debate, or a really interesting cocktail napkin discussion, then I can’t do much to help you. Barack Obama is the enemy of this country, and anyone who supports him should be approached with that in mind.

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

    no text needed.

  • lineholder

    I’m not sure what you were expecting, skymutt. Not only is RS a Conservative website, but it also a Conservative site that is fairly well known for strongly supporting religious freedoms. Coming to this particular site and attempting to present the argument that you have, especially in the light of recent decisions made by DHHS…it does leave you wide open to speculation, and justifiably so.

    It’s obvious to anyone who has been following this discussion that there is likely to be very little range of agreement between the viewpoint you have expressed and the viewpoint that most people here at RS tend to support.

    Perhaps we have other points on which we do agree though, which was the purpose of my question above.

  • lineholder

    It depends on how Conservatives respond, I guess, but I think that after Romney wins the nom (IF he wins the nom) and he begins his move towards the left to seal the deal with Independents (which he will do and we can count on it) that it will begin to dawn on them that them they’ve really messed this up, strategically speaking.

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

    Note, that wasn’t a question.

    This idiot waltzes in here and starts playing the race card in a discussion about whether Obama is competent, qualified to be President and the FACT that he wants nothing to do with American tradition or the idea of American exceptionalism.

    He’s an idiot troll and if you’re thinking about defending his worthless butt, you should reconsider your efforts here – which to date haven’t shown much thought.

  • acat

    They tried to stay behind their Cloak of Inevitability and clinch early. Conservatives didn’t buy it.

    They tried to take out the rivals through dirty tricks, and got some to drop … including Johnson, Pawlenty, and Perry… (Bachman, Cain, and Huntsman blew themselves up) but conservatives didn’t buy it.

    They spent a bunchaton of money to build some faux-momentum, releasing attack ads and flooding the airwaves … and conservatives didn’t buy it.

    At some point, Team Romney have to figure out that maybe they need to do some outreach .. the question is when that light goes on.

    Mew

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    Erick — this is his diary– has been saying pretty much the same thing. He said this last week–

    I voted for Rick Perry.

    I wasn?t going to vote at all. But then all sorts of people, including Donna Brazile and Sean Hannity, started in on me about my ?civic obligation.? Frankly, I wish less people voted. But nonetheless, I voted. I was the only person in my precinct in the middle of a city that usually sees steady turn out.

    No one in Georgia seems to want to vote except the die hard supporters of the various candidates.

    I did not want to vote for Romney. But I did not want to vote for Santorum or Gingrich or Paul. Choosing between them has been like choosing the tallest midget. I have been left uninspired for various reasons by each.

    So I went with Rick Perry. Consider it a protest vote. But at least, unlike many, I went with who I liked as opposed to voting for someone to be against someone else or some other strategic pattern of voting.

    What a mess this primary season is. At least soon we?ll be able to focus on Barack Obama instead of the hand we?ve dealt ourselves this primary season.

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/03/06/i-voted-for-rick-perry/

    Only I left out anything that could be considered gratuitously provocative, like comparing choosing between the remaining candidates to choosing the tallest midget.

    Now, naturally, very few here really want to hear a Democrat say that– few wanted to hear Erick say it. So I didn’t expect people to throw bouquets of flowers my way, if that’s what you’re asking. And that is fine… I accept that I am treading in opposing territory here, and will inevitably receive a few insults from time to time, and that if I want to remain here, I can’t just return every insult in kind.

  • carolina

    I think the base gets enthousiastic when they think their vote for a conservative ‘counts’. Newt & Sant both drew a good turnout, as the Romney campaign learned the hard way.

  • lineholder

    He’ll have to take a shot at Independents between winning the nom and the general election. Attempting outreach to Conservatives at that point would definitely mean risking sealing the deal with Independents.

    Do you remember a comment that Boehner made about Conservatives one time…’what are they going to do…vote for Obama?” A certain amount of that came across in Romney’s comments during the interview today. You can watch it yourself and see if you agree. Check out the 3:40 mark.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/14/romney-very-conservative-voters-might-not-be-with-me-now-but-they-will-be-in-november/

  • acat

    They won’t vote for Obama .. but enough might just vote for Johnson.

    Mew

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    I’ve had a couple nice conversations here… not necessarily talking about debates, where I’m trying to win every point, but conversational discussions where I’m finding points of agreement as well as points of difference. Had a nice discussion like that in an energy diary the other day.

    I’m just trying to find a workable level of participation here that is not stifling to me and yet will avoid banning. I think there are some folks who would like for someone like me around– I certainly liked DailyKos better when the site used to have a few right wingers around.

  • Flagstaff

    I registered Democrat in 1976 for the same reason as Romney–to vote against Ted Kennedy.

  • clowngirl

    Several factors you’re not considering:

    #1. Newt was actually ahead in Florida polls immediately after SC. Santorum remaining in the race fed into the “the non-Romney’s will just keep splitting the vote” which could only serve to deplete Newt’s momentum.

    Had Santorum dropped out and endorsed/defended/campaigned for Newt it could’ve been a whole different ballgame.

    2. You’re acting as though the only way Santorum impacted the race was by taking votes himself. I doubt that that was the case. Santorum spent most of his time in the debates attacking Gingrich. He didn’t improve his numbers much. That suggests:

    1. He was almost entirely ineffective or

    2. He wasn’t that effective at convincing a significant number of voters to switch to supporting him but did play a part in convincing voters who a few days before had been leaning Gingrich to go back to Romney.

    That’s just a couple examples.

    I don’t know if Newt would’ve won Florida if Santorum dropped out and you don’t know if Santorum would’ve won Ohio or Michigan.

    I reject your 60/40 split as arbitrary speculation on your part that directly contradicts the only data I’ve seen with regard to a hypothetical head to head matchup in Ohio.

  • lineholder

    our the hole-diggers commonly considered to be “the leadership” of the Republican Party is next to impossible.

    I honestly believe that they are messing this up so badly that we could see a much lower voter turnout than we need to win. It would hurt at the Presidential level, but wouldn’t it do just as much damage on down-ticket races?

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    I personally think that public employee unions ought to be abolished.

    I advocated additional oil drilling, including in ANWR. I support gas exploration in Marcellus shale, etc.

    I’m pro-business, pro-entrepreneur, pro-trade, against protectionism in most cases. In many cases, I am skeptical of regulations.

    I advocate for deficit reduction, approve of entitlement reforms such as raising the retirement age to cut costs.

    I am concerned about the degenerating effects of “the dole” and believe that it is the responsibility of able bodied and minded people to find their own way in the world in normal circumstances.

    On the social hot button issues, I admit to being pretty liberal, but my interests tend more toward the economic issues. I’ve recently discussed Santorum’s social views here and criticized his approach, but really only in terms of how I perceive his emphasis on them to be damaging to him politically. I think I can easily avoid advocating my own liberal social views, if that is your concern.

  • acat

    and some House seats .. and some statehouse and Governors’ races.

    This is why we need a not-Romney .. the guy couldn’t lead a squad of hungry Marines to a Hooters … he’d bore ‘em to sleep!

    Mew

  • clowngirl

    2 thoughts:

    1. I would think that a lot of the people who agree to serve as delegates are grassroots activists who don’t like Romney.

    And

    2. Even granting – for the sake of argument – that a brokered or contested convention doesn’t go our way– it still seems better than just playing nicely with the establishment and encouraging other candidates to drop out.

  • clowngirl

    :)

  • lineholder

    Yeah, I can tell you right now that you’ll have some interesting discussions if that your political position. Be prepared to defend in great detail how you can support socially moderate/liberal positions (especially when those social positions come at the expense of taxpayers) and still profess to being a fiscal conservative.

    I’m a social conservative/fiscal conservative, but my social conservative focus is somewhat different than a lot of social conservatives have. I look more at broad spectrum social issues (poverty, education, health care, etc.) rather than narrower or single social issues.

    I’m not a mod, but believe me when I say that if you go too far in a liberal direction in expressing your viewpoint, the mods WILL let you know.

    Good luck. I’m not sure at this point whether or not to say “welcome”. (No offense, but I am a Conservative, and we question just about everything these days, LOL)

  • Flagstaff

    I got the year wrong, probably. But it happened in the year Teddy was seriously considering running for President.

  • aesthete

    My post above doesn’t contradict any of that (which I 100% agree with), and has the added benefit of being on-topic.

  • lineholder

    But let’s speculate for a few seconds in saying that we get Romney. We need something on our end that will keep Conservative proactively engaged in the elections. I’m not saying that I think Conservatives would bail…only that enthusiasm could be lagging.

    Maybe I’m way outside the box on this one, but that’s why I wrote that personal letter diary to Newt.

    If you have other ideas, put ‘em out there, ‘cat.

  • Ann2012

    Such as coming up with ideas that would cause you to change from Democrat to Republican if the Republican party would to XY&Z.

    You provide what XY&Z would be. Your only restriction in this exercise would be that the party would stay socially conservative and you would not be allowed to raise taxes to accomplish your goals. You don?t have to do that now if you don?t want to, but just suggesting that maybe framing your messages along those lines in the future would allow those that run the site to value your contributions more, instead of keeping their finger on the eject button? and having you not know at what moment they may press it? : )

    I have a theory that the Republicans could get a 65% consistent majority if they developed the creative and entrepreneurial expertise of those in business and applied those skills to solutions that a political party would then promote. That type of thinking and innovation doesn?t seem to be with those who work in politics, or government for that matter. Too many lawyers in politics might be the problem and not enough inventors and engineers.

    I wrote a post regarding some of what I mentioned here:

    http://www.redstate.com/rjsantorum/2012/03/12/promoting-economic-freedom-and-growth-not-more-government/#comment-1003

  • demsaresatanic

    is a new low for you. Marriage is not a trivial issue.

  • clowngirl

    There seem to be a lot of RSers making default arguments: you’re candidate is no good; therefore you should support mine.

    The fact that Romney isn’t able to close the deal in spite of his lead and his absurd advantages (money, press, Romney friendly states voting early, etc.) is a sign that many voters are unconvinced or find him downright unacceptable)

    I don’t support Romney for 3 basic reasons:

    1. I don’t think he would make a good President.

    Specifically, I don’t think he will repeal Obamacare.

    And while I can’t imagine he would be quite as bad as Obama…

    2. I don’t think he has any plausible chance of beating Obama.

    3. I dislike him.

    You can bash Newt and Santorum as much as you want – it’ not going to make me remotely inclined to support someone who – in my view – has all three of those problems.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    I also think he’s shown a vindictive side. Folks talk about Newt’s ego, but how about Romney’s? He apparently doesn’t care about, as you say, earning the support of conservatives. That’s a huge mistake which may or may not cost him the election, but good luck being an effective leader if your own people don’t have your back. We don’t trust Boehner. We don’t trust McConnell. And we wouldn’t trust a President Romney.

  • JSobieski

    To be honest, it makes be question whether or not you are conducting yourself in good faith.

    If government isn’t involved in paying for things, many of the social issues fall away anyway.

  • lineholder

    I was thinking about earlier this evening. Yeah, the man’s got his share of ego…and vanity…and pride…and plenty of ambitions, to the point of being ruthless in pursuing them.

    Do you think the gentleman you mentioned genuinely care about whether or not we trust them? I seriously doubt that they do.

    Their first priority is on playing politics and gaining political power, not providing leadership. They’ve proven that much, I think.

    I want us to win this next election, you know? I want to see Conservatives stay engaged in this battle and follow this through, with or without their lead.

  • aesthete

    Because, you know, Obama’s Presidency has been fantastic for anti-war folks and wartime liberties.

    He did get us out of Afghanistan, close Guantanamo, and didn’t start any wars in North Africa or start beating the war drums with Iran, after all. He’s definitely not taking the legal position that he can assassinate a US citizen anywhere, anytime without prior court approval.

    Oh wait…

  • JSobieski

    All of the attacks are really just based on the right-left divide.

    There is so much fraud in the public debate it is no wonder that campaigns suffer from a lack of straight forward candidates.

    I don’t know how to implement a long term solution on this point, but the quality of public debate just gets worse and worse.

  • JSobieski

    Alternative slogans . . .

    Romney 2012: Why solve problems today when they can be put off until 2016?

    Romney 2012: Otherwise, the robocalls will never stop!

    Romney 2012: Because like Bob Dole, I too can be Reagan if you want me to be.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    no text… and not kiddin’

    “As of 2010, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints website reports membership in 1990 was 7,500, increasing to about 12,000 in 1994, which is about one in four American Samoans”

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    Do you think he’s pro life, too?

  • naraht

    Romney 2012: The best candidate money can buy.

    Romney 2012: Winning the Republican Nomination, one liberal state at a time!

    Romney 2012: Because one John Kerry in a generation doesn’t wasn’t enough.

  • jamesm

    Some familes have 70 adults. Lol

    How in the heck does the RNC give 9 delegates with only 70 total votes. Unbelievable

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    The spirit of your message is wecloming, I appreciate it.

    I’m not a true fiscal conservative. I am more or less a Keynesian as far as fiscal policy, and I more or less supported the bailouts– two major disqualifiers, probably. But while Keynes advocated deficit spending to stimulate weak economies, he also advocated surpluses in strong economies, not permanent deficits. Most “Keynesians” conveniently forget about the surplus part. We are obviously a long long way and a lot of work from running a surplus. So, if we’re going to have a real recovery and at least get close to balancing the budget, much less the ideal of a surplus, during the recovery, I believe Keynesian economics dictates that we need to be passing the deficit cutting measures now, as the economy is turning. It is a delicate balance of course, so the fiscal tightening needs to be phased in as the economy can handle it. I personally don’t think Keynes was a conservative, but he was a conservative compared to the blog left, which is in my view pretty clueless on economic issues.

    I’m certainly no libertarian or pure economic conservative when it comes to spending, though. If I think something I like can be effectively supported or encourage through spending, I support that spending. But I am usually not strongly tied to any particular program– I have few sacred cows. My view is that there are many ways to skin a cat I’m agnostic on the size of government, in that if you have a reasonably competent government, it can be big or small, and that there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches. I can support health care options that range from private insurance to single payer, for instance. If you look around the world, governments are taking a number of different approaches to health care, and the successful ones do not all look alike.

    One thing I strongly support is physical fitness. The state of our national fitness is repulsive to me. I would be open to lots of different ideas to improve that, and would spend tax money to achieve some results. (I think many people oppose intervention in this area because they associate it with the Nazis, which is wrong headed. We’re getting killed on health care costs because so many are needlessly unfit and just expect the health care system to keep them ticking.) I am very anti-drug morally. I abhor drug use, drunkeness. I do not like tobacco use even. I do not like the crudeness and violence in popular culture. I am not for total prohibition or censorship, but I do know that I do not like the status quo in our culture, and I struggle with these issues.

    I support a strong safety net for the young, the old, and the disabled. I do not support Rep. Ryan’s proposal for Medicare reform. I support raising the retirement age and other cost cutting measures if necessary, but we should preserve the basic structure of Medicare– it is a good program that is too costly because of rising health care costs and changing demographics, not because it is a bad program.

    That just scratches the surface. I’m definitely mixed on the economy– not a liberal, conservative, libertarian, or moderate. But I am open to other ideas. In candidates, I look for people who I think are smart and not corrupt, not so much at comparing my views item by item with theirs.

    I run a website for title insurance industry professionals, so I have a special interest in real estate industry issues, foreclosure, mortgage finance, that kind of stuff.

    If it helps easy any concerns you have, I do not hide my real life identity, my real identity is pretty easy to find through by username, my website in my profile, etc.

    Look forward to seeing you around, lineholder!

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    I am generally pro-choice and against the death penalty. Pretty standard liberal there. In my defense, I am hardly alone in being “inconsistent” in that pair of positions, if you consider those positions to be inconsistent (I do not). Many conservatives are pro-death penalty and pro-life.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    So you are partly right. But once we were in there, I supported doing the best that could be done. I more or less supported the surge as the best chance to lessen the rampant sectarian violence at the time, for example. So I was not just knee jerk bring them all home. In fact, I did not like the idea of abandoning the Iraqis to whatever once we were in there.

    It is fair to say that Obama continued many of Bush’s war policies, but I actually thought Bush’s last year in office was his best, and I always liked Gates, and strongly supported him under both Bush and Obama.

    I’m also not a civil liberties purist when it comes to war.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    Are you “generally” in favor of infanticide like Obama who voted against the ban on partial birth abortion? Do you favor any restrictions on abortion? Do you favor the government funding of abortions? Do you favor the conscience objections for those who oppose abortion in the workplace?

    And yes, I consider your positions to be inconsistent. There is a world of difference in implementing the death penalty on an adult who has been judged guilty of a crime under our judicial system and the murder of an innocent baby.

  • lineholder

    There are some people here at RS who might take you up on discussions of various economic theories.

    And there are even more who will probably take on the challenge of defending Paul Ryan’s approach where Medicare is concerned.

    As for myself, I’ll be interested in reading what you might have to say about various health care models.

    Like I said, good luck to you.

  • Kenny Martsolf

    Signed,
    Hank Johnson

  • Kenny Martsolf

    *capsize. My left hand pinkie finger has a mind of it’s own. It can’t spell, either.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    I mean that I am in favor of abortion being legal, but when the details arise– the kind of questions you raise– I decide what I think is best on a case by case basis, rather than default to the pro-choice position.

    I respect your pro-life position, and I understand why it would not be able for you to reciprocate respect for a pro-life position if you believe that all abortions are murder of an innocent baby. I just simply do not share that view.

    My oppostion to the death penalty revolves around the fact that humans err and innocent people get put to death. When flawed human beings judge a person guilty makes them guilty under the law, but innocent-in-fact people are sometimes convicted and sentenced to death. After looking into the evidence earlier this year in the Troy Bell case, I believe he was just such an innocent man, but he was put to death anyway. Regardless, a death penalty means putting to death a certain number of innocent people, and I just find that unacceptable when life in prison protects society from the guilty just as well.

  • http://www.sourceoftitle.com skymutt

    At first blush, for any party to be a 65% party, it seem to me that it would have to be a super big tent party. The Democrats probably came closest to achieving something along those lines during the postwar decades, but it was with an uneasy coalition of socially conservative but populist Dixiecrats and liberals who found common ground on the New Deal more or less. So, at first blush, my impression would be that to get a huge sustainable majority, the best approach would be to rally around a popular economic regime and agree to disagree on social issues and just push those to the back. The deemphasis of social issue almost seems necessary, because the economic issues cannot be avoided, and any box that must be checked on a social just is one more criteria that is exclusive, when to get to 65% you’d need to be very very inclusive.

    I like the concept, though, and liked your comment that you linked to. Let me think about it.

  • Kenny Martsolf

    Trying to move your own party to a more fiscal conservative platform, rather than trying to convince us to move in your direction? You liberals have an awful strange understanding of the word “compromise”.

  • Ann2012

    I can see how you might think that social conservative views would have to be ignored to get to 65%, but for me I think those are such core values to so many people on the right including me, that my framework would include a coalition of social conservatives combined with an economic platform that met the needs of people to the same extent that Democratic policies do and that combination would form a coalition of 65%.

    But these new social and economical programs would be designed and implemented in such radical ways compared to the conventional norms that they would actually lower taxes, increase economic growth and help individuals far more than what we have now. Would also lower the average work week.

    I personally can think of a variety of ways to change our economic and social programs to make them work much better and if I can do it, so can others. But you have to be very creative and use government in different types of ways than are not traditionally thought of. You just need a set of designers with a different mentality than we currently have.

    I think Rick Santorum can defeat Barack Obama more than Newt can in the general election so he is my candidate. But Newt is the one that would actually be open to the type of creative thinking that could foster a tremendous change in our social and economic structure. As I said in before, we have too many lawyers and not enough creative people in our current system. People who artificially limit their options to what already exists can never free themselves enough to find new and better solutions our problems.

  • Ann2012

    solutions our problems = solutions to our problems

    Do the Democratic sites you write on have editing capabilities, the Repubs haven?t quite figured out how to do that yet? : )

  • clowngirl

    on the money JSobieski!

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

    Overall, I think Johnson would be a much better President any of the current crop but he’d never get a Republican nomination because the Santorum droids would be screaming about his social stances. The fact that a President can’t do much to change any of those issues doesn’t seem to register with them.

    HL Mencken was right and especially when it comes to Republicans.

  • filobeddoe

    Who actually sent Republican congressman to Newt events in Florida to disrupt them? So, no, I dont put it past Willard. That’s the guy you’re voting for

  • geotan

    Check the transcripts my friend. Limbaugh has said this extended primary is good because it has forced Romney to the right. Limbaugh is not stupid, he knows Romney is going to be the nominee but his goal is likely to get Romney to be more conservative through the process. A good idea. Everyone is also forgetting one very very important factor. The economy is going the way of Greece and even Barack Obama will be forced to slash the budget. However, I would rather have an experienced conservative Business man like Romney handling the coming crisis than a liberal head in the sand radical like Obama.

  • geotan

    See my previous comment. I didn’t say Rush was behind Romney. I said he is trying to force Romney to be more conservative as the likely nominee. You all keep brushing aside the legitimate fact that you cannot be socially conservative as a Mass. Governor! He was economically conservative and that’s enough for me. He will be socially conservative also because the President of the USA is not the Governor of Mass.

  • earlgrey

    branch, I think the social issues crowd would be better of working on the culture here. Ok, I may be naive and I did just finish reading Breitbart’s book, but the battle for social issues should be fought on more fronts, and I really only see it coming here in political fights. I even was reading a bit on NRO how evangelicals have moved less from giving spiritual guidance to doing works of charity (which is important), but if we aren’t getting the message and value out about social issues, than how do we expect the culture to respond.

    you can also reduce the number of abortions by making more and more people recognize it as immoral. I think SoCons should try other means rather than just relying on picking the right President.

    Of course I recognize that might be an unpopular opinion.

  • JSobieski

    So the idea that Romney is some type of stealth conservative is not comforting because it sounds remarkably unlikely.

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

    it happens to be absolutely right.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    For example, I’d be perfectly willing to stand by the will of the states with regard to same sex marriage. However, the left won’t. They continue the push to overturn the vote of the people and legislate through the courts, while having the support of the POTUS and his attorney general. The left pushes the fight in every arena they can, and I don’t think we can take the position that we’re just going to fight in certain ones.

    I agree that the POTUS can’t do much beyond use the bully pulpit other than make sure he appoints folks, including Supremes, who will uphold the Constitution rather than rewrite it.

    What did you think of Righteous Indignation?

  • APA Guy

    In fact, it has never happened…first time for everything, though :)

    I don’t see Obama beating Romney at this point…that could change…we’ll see.

  • goodgovernance

    He might not get American exceptionalism, because most liberals don’t. But not getting American culture? That’s too far, and most people aren’t going to buy it.

    The guy can fill out a bracket for March Madness and sing Al Green. He doesn’t understand people who “cling to their guns and religion,” but that makes him a liberal elitist, and has got nothing to do with “Kenyan bloodlines.” No need to go there.

  • arthurjake

    Can you have more than one spouse? Can you make your pet your spouse? Deviant behavior is deviant behavior no matter what kind of spin its not hurting anyone. The problem with putting people like homosexual judges on the bench is they tend to become activist judges. When gays can’t get the law to change through proper legislative action they go to the ultra liberal judge who legislates from the bench.

    Also there really aren’t that many “Log Cabin Republicans” when you say gay it usually means ultra liberal. People that liberal usually have a habit of twisting or just ignoring things like the Constitution.

    Another thing I have learned is that tolerance lately does not seem to go both ways. I might say whatever if I am tolerant of someones behaviors and beliefs they will be tolerant of mine. Lets see if that same gay judge would be supportive of me displaying religious symbols at Christmas time or a student leading there graduating class in prayer.

    Where does it end anyway. It started out what someone does in there own bedroom is no one else’s concern. Now it is we want marriage rights and and to be able to adopt. What happens tomorrow? Will someone be forced to perform marriage ceremonies against there religious beliefs? Will private employers be forced to give benefits to gay life partners of there employees?

    Stalin said, “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas , America will collapse from within.” We as a country have been doing exactly that for the last 50 plus years and what have we got besides decay as a result?

  • arthurjake

    Why vote for someone who will govern much the same way as Obama just to say we have beet him? I would rather have someone who doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance but will put out different ideas then someone who will just do conservatives more damage in the long run.

    Besides I am not convinced he is more electable. It is the base that makes the phone calls donates money and time and brings over those independent voters everyone talks about. You will have a hard time getting them to vote let alone volunteer.

  • lineholder

    I’m surmising from the fact that you expressed approval for the comments you responded to that you are a Romney supporter, eh?

    Get this straight. Romney doesn’t have a prayer of winning the general election if he does NOT have support from the Southern Republicans you spoke of so condescendingly in your comments above.

    Don’t dig this hole any deeper, please. You aren’t helping Romney. You’re hurting him.

  • arthurjake

    What is going to happen that is anything different. We get the guy that passed the model for Obamacare, put liberal judges on the bench, and signed a gun ban into law saying it was great for hunters because they could now cross certain streets while hunting. He gets the nomination I will vote for conservatives in every other election this season and vote for none of the above for POTUS. If enough people do that maybe it will send the party establishment a message that we are tired of liberals being shoved down our throats in the primaries.

  • arthurjake

    Romney appointed liberal judges, signed a gun ban and the biggest one of them all Romneycare.

  • earlgrey

    I am grateful to you for that. I could not find it in the bookstore and had to get it from the libaray. I was surprised they didn’t have it at my bookstore. I took it on a business trip and made sure to have it out and visible when getting on the planes and in the airport

    frankly, I am really sad that we let the left take over our culture this way, but I am also inspired by it, which is what spurned my response to mbecker. I am a bit afraid of him by the way, but I like what he has to say.

    while, I am inspired, I look at my wrinkled face and the state of the country and I can’t help but think there isn’t much I can do. Am I just too irrelevant to make a difference? I am 40 so maybe I am a bit touchy, but I am angry that I haven’t stood up for what I believe in before now (or rather before 2009). In graduate school I made the decision not to talk politics with people, becuase I was too passionate about it, and I didn’t want to lose friends. How pathetic is that?

    right now I want to put something touching about Breitbart’s book on facebook status page, but I am afraid eveyone will write me off as kook. I already had one person remove a harmless comment I made about why can’t the muppets (a kids’ thing) leave Fox news alone.

    The thing that haunts me the most is the chapter Breitbart gives about how the left has infiltrated and twisted every part of our culture. It is haunting me. I sit today almost unable to concentrate over the tragedy of letting them go unchecked for so long, perhaps too long to save us.

    Understanding that the fight can and should be carried on in other fronts beyond political fights is somewhat comforting to me. I dont’ really know why. Breibart had plans that have not come to fruition yet. I hope that they do.

    I have always considered myself to not be fully using whatever gifts that I have. I have been told that by work colleagues and I know it to be true. the one thing I am most passionate about is this fight. I literally closed my eyes, and felt the hair on my arms stand up at one point in the book. I felt so touched and so into what it said that I could not move.

    so maybe this is the way I should go about best using my gifts. I spoke at a couple of tea party rallys and some city council meetings and get complimented on how well I speak publicly. I know I am good at it, but I am also content to work behind the scenes, feeding ideas to others (since I work full time I can’t do everything). I am not too proud to do anything. Getting rejected when trying to get signatures on a county ordinance can be great for building character. I’d like to see this somehow become my lifes’ purpose (I know that sound cliche), but I silll haven’t figured that out either.

    The book itself reads like a night at the bar with the most enteraning person you could ever meet. I don’t laugh spontaneously when reading usually, but I did here.

    Back to what I wrote about, I spend a lot of time on a liberal mom blog and they hate socons (except the socons that come on there that lay it on heavy enought to justify everyone else hating him). It occurs to me that socons come off (since I can only go by what I see in the media) as demanding and critical, they don’t offer an alternative. Not everyone believes in God. somehow most people are under the impression that you are only against abortion because of God, which is totally not true. They also say, that socons don’t want to pay for welfare checks for kids, but want people to have them. What is the appropriate response to that?

    Somehow we need to create a narrative for social conservative values as being good for people without letting libs accuse us of wanting to go back to the 1950s culture. Whatever that was.

    Of course, you can’t help but recognize that we have screwed up royally as a society. Everyone (on the mommy blog site) wants to take guns away because these kids go on shooting sprees. So we remove the symptom and don’t address the disease? That is whay you are doing. Fine let kids be miserable and screwed up, just don’t let them near a gun. Sorry went off on a tangent.

    Very glad I read the book, but now I need to go back to something a little lighter. I can only take the heavy stuff in low doses.

  • arthurjake

    He spent his entire life being raised around leftist idiots like you. When your role models are your far left grandparents, mother, or whatever radical reject your mother decided to bed that month its not that hard to end up as far left as Marx.

    Now lets jump ahead to his grown up years. When you start your political career with a jump start from a convicted terrorist who has no love for America I would say you have more issues. When you attend a church year after year that spews out anti-american racist hate(which means he either agreed with it or was too stupid to understand the sermons he listened to) then you clearly are not in line over 230 years of proud American tradition.

    As for his time as president what has he done for me? First after being in the military for most of the last ten years with multiple combat deployments I am about to be out of a job with a lot of other people. That is a really hard pill to swallow for me. Out of all the waste in government they make the most drastic cuts in one of the few things that is a constitutional responsibility of the Federal gov. Not to mention it is just plain stupid. Every time we make drastic cuts we pay for it during the next war(IE Korea). My gas costs 5.00 a gallon while pipelines are denied and offshore drilling in the gulf stays at a minimum. It’s ok we are going to be Brazils best customers. No, wait the Chinese are going to be. My electric bill is about to shoot through the roof because coal plants are going to be shut down left and right. Hey when wait when my fuel and electric costs go up so does everyone else’s so that means everything I buy to include food will cost more also. So I am going to be out of a job I wont be able to afford gas, will be living off of oodles of noodles, and using candles to light my house. Yeah, greatest president in history. True patriotic American.

  • filobeddoe

    vote for someone who doesnt share your conservative values.

  • arthurjake

    Like all things the federal government puts there hands into education has got worse with there increased involvement. The numbers do not lie. are ranking in the world has gone down as federal involvement has gone up. I am just surprised Santorum would change on that issue considering how hard he backed no child left behind.

    As for them bashing Santorum for being anti-college I think that is just silly. Most people who go to college don’t end up with diploma to show for the grant money and student loans they put into it. For a lot of those that do they end up with worthless degrees that will not help them to find meaningful work. That is time that could have been spent being an apprentice or going to a trade school. I am the first person to admit that as a country we a short on engineers, skilled technicians and scientists but the liberal answer is to dump more money into the problem. We did that under Kennedy and the only sciences that expanded were social sciences, not what I think he was going for. In the meantime we are short people to fill in jobs that take skills that are important and don’t come with a college degree.

  • geotan

    I am glad that you are honest enough to admit this. There are those on this site that deny Romney’s religion is a factor. I respect the fact that Romney’s changes in social positions are a legitimate criticism but his religion is not. We are not electing a Pastor or Priest but President.

  • geotan

    The reason we are having this long primary is because the frontrunner is from Massachusetts and had to govern as a moderate. He is now running for President which has allowed him to be a conservative in both economic and social issues. Unfortunately, many in the Republican party don’t accept this as a legitimate change and have a mistrust of this candidate. In addition, he is Mormon which a significant percentage of Christians will not vote for even though Bill Clinton or George H Bush weren’t “born again”. If Romney was not Mormon and we didn’t have the Tea Party issue come up in 2009 then Romney would have sailed through.