« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Louisiana Primary Open Thread

By: Steve Maley (Diary)  |  March 24th, 2012 at 10:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

With 3/4 of the precincts reporting, Rick Santorum is leading with nearly 50% of the Republican vote. Romney has 26%, Gingrich 16%.

Update 10:18 pm CDT: That margin looks like it will hold. See TheHayride’s analysis here.

Incumbent President Barack Obama has 72% of the Democratic vote against a powerful field that includes Bob Ely, Darcy G. Richardson and John Wolfe.

Unofficial tally here.

Open thread.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • jc230

    For those who continue to see these victories as a Santorum appeal, do not fall for the illusion. I’ve experienced these bull s–t primaries where the most motivated party members vote their candidate only to lose in the general election. Santorum is a nice guy, a social conservative and fiscal moderate. He has the same executive experience as Obama, little. Can we afford another learn-on-the job POTUS?

    • cheetah2

      Why is this not more of a concern?

      • garfieldjl

        He could always get someone like Gingrich to be his VP whom has executive experience.

        That said I would rather have an inexperienced person whom is honest with us, than an experienced person that is a pathological liar.

        The honest person can potentially learn and get experience, the dishonest one on the other hand is likely to steal from you.

        That said, there is a reason I support Newt over Santorum.

        • septembergurl

          Let’s compare career paths:

          Obama; Community organizer – Legislative career – President

          Santorum: Lawyer – Legislative career – Lobbyist

          Newt; College Professor – Legislative career – Lobbyist

          I missed the part where Newt has more executive experience than Santorum or Obama.

          • rabun1016

            Obama has no better friend in this campaign than Rick Santorum. Santorum has less experience in private sector than even Obama. That said, Romney’s campaign team has run an awful campaign. Unfortunately, he is so tone deaf politically, as many devout Mormons are, that he doesn’t even know whose rear to kick. Hint…it’s his campaign manager.

          • garfieldjl

            Gingrich has executive experience, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not is irrelevant.

            Also that lobbyist smear is getting old rather fast, the fact that Romney can’t tell the difference between a lobbyist and a consultant makes me think that Romney has been out of the private sector for too long.

          • texastaxpayer

            Quite successfully I am lead to believe..

          • benson1

            Newt Gingrich served the Sixth District of Georgia in Congress for 20 years, beginning in 1978. In 1995, Gingrich was elected speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, where he served until 1999. Gingrich is considered to be the architect of the ?Contract with America? that led the Republican Party to victory in 1994, capturing the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. Under his leadership, Congress reformed the welfare system, passed the first balanced budget in a generation, and cut taxes for the first time in 16 years. In addition, Congress restored funding to strengthen U.S. defense and intelligence capabilities, an action later lauded by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission.

            In 1999, Gingrich was appointed to the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century, also known as the Hart-Rudman Commission, to examine U.S. national security challenges as far out as 2025. Recently, he was named co-chair of the United Nations Task Force, a bipartisan congressional effort to reform the United Nations.

            Recognized internationally as an expert on world history, military issues, and international affairs, Gingrich serves as a Member of the Defense Policy Board. He is the longest serving teacher of the joint war fighting course for Major Generals. He also teaches officers from all five services as a distinguished visiting scholar and professor at the National Defense University.

            Gingrich serves on the Terrorism Task Force for the Council on Foreign Relations. He is an editorial board member of the Johns Hopkins University Journal, Biosecurity and Bioterrorism, and is an advisory board member of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Gingrich is also chairman of the Gingrich Group, a communications and consulting firm that specializes in transformational change, with offices in Atlanta and Washington. He serves as general chairman of American Solutions for Winning the Future, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, a distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and an honorary chairman of the Nano Business Alliance.
            This doesn’t even include writing 26 book, fiction and non-fiction and producing 6 videos, running a national symposium on education through the internet with educators from all over the U.S.

            Newt/2012

          • septembergurl

            Newt is brilliant and one of the most important speakers in our history.

            Still, speaker is a legislative position, not executive. It deals with organizing policy in broad legislative terms. It simply isn’t the same as being an executive, which, again, is a position of leadership over a complex organization: an army, a corporation, a cabinet position, a governor, perhaps a mayor or county executive.

            As to business experience, Newt’s is limited to companies that exist solely to produce and promote his books, movies, etc. They are extensions of Newt. That’s not a business in any real sense of the word.

        • cheetah2

          Is Romney a pathological liar? I didn’t know that.
          Why oh why do we end up with people that haven’t got the right resume for the most powerful job in the world? I think it is just insane. OJT for POTUS. insane.

  • vastrightwingconspiracy

    …a nice guy? I’ve never met him.

    He seems very angry to me.

  • jamesm

    doesn’t give a damn about who the establishment endorses. Plenty of fresh air down there for clear thinking people.

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

      A ringing endorsement for the old-line Senate leadership from Louisiana, tonight.

  • ddawg

    If Romney is to clinch the nomination, I’d rather see it happen as a result of a contested convention than an electorate deciding, “Well, I guess he’s the nominee since that’s what everybody is saying, Coalesce (TM), etc., so I guess I should vote for him instead of Santorum or Gingrich or Paul, whom I prefer over Romney.”

    Primaries seem to be the only sport in which the league officials like to call the game at halftime if one team is up by enough, even though the game is set up to last the full four quarters.

    It appears Louisiana voters did not get the memo. Santorum will defeat Romney by over 20%, and probably closer to 22%.

    Let the process play itself out at the ballot box, and not in the media or among the party establishment.

    Let the voters vote.

    • rabun1016

      Certainly, your thinking matches the desire of the DNC. I am hardly part of the party establishment – far from it, but it is clear to me that Romney has a much better chance to beat Obama than Santorum. So, I am not holding onto a prideful sense of political purity, nor is anyone who understands how important this election is. Businessmen, all businessmen, like Romney are open to all ideas but act only on facts. That is how you achieve success. He does an awful job of articulating that. Unfortunately, Santorum and Obama are nearly mirror images in terms of lightweights with good political instincts.

      • ddawg

        …are with conservatives on Obamacare. Romney cannot effectively run against Obamacare due to Romneycare. Attempts to do so run the risk of alienating independents due to a candidate saying he completely opposes something that looks very similar to something the candidate himself implemented. Romney cannot appeal to independents on this count due to his implementation of and continued advocacy for Romneycare. Santorum has consistently opposed Obamacare and the mandate and can appeal to independents on this issue.

        …are often concerned about issues of fairness and responsibility, and the Wall Street bailout is fertile ground to appeal to independents. Romney cannot appeal to independents on this count due to his support of the bailout. Santorum has consistently opposed the Wall Street bailout and can appeal to independents on this issue.

        …are willing to examine evidence and question the claims of science when the evidence calls for it. Man-made global warming, and the leftist impulse to use government to regulate emissions, has increasingly been shown to be shaky at best, and a conspiracy at worst. Romney cannot appeal to independents on this count due to his embrace of the need to “do something” about man’s impact on global warming. Santorum has consistently opposed any government intervention regarding global warming and can appeal to independents on this issue.

        …often include, practically speaking, typical Democrats who are willing to cross over and vote Republican under the right circumstances. One of the main reasons such Democrats might consider voting Republican are family and life issues. Even if his current position is genuine, Romney has changed his positions at all the wrong times, which looks like political opportunism to the independent voter. Romney will have great trouble appealing to possible crossover voters due to this. Santorum has a lengthy, consistent record and has advocated for family and life; he can appeal to independents and crossovers on these issues.

        …often value intangibles over policy. Independents tend to desire trustworthiness and someone who seems less a political creature. Romney will have great trouble appealing to independents due to his many changes over the years at coincidental times, his packaged politi-speak, and his campaign’s tendency to highlight inside baseball issues of delegate math, organization, and money over policy. Santorum has a consistent record of policy positions and a willingness to admit when he made a mistake. He speaks from his heart in unscripted fashion on the campaign trail. His consistency and empathy with voters mean he can appeal to independents on these counts.

        That is my case for why Romney will have difficulty appealing to independent and crossover voters and why Santorum can effectively appeal to such voters, who will be necessary to win the election.

        What is your case for the opposite?

      • snowshooze

        So if Obama wins, Mitt loses, and if Mitt wins, we all lose…
        Sort of a Hobson’s choice here..

        • trutexan

          Love it.

          • snowshooze

            Honored.

  • robnoftz

    I’m not surprised by this victory. What does surprise me is how vigorously many of Santorum’s current crop of supporters are digging in there heals and insisting he is the only option. A couple of months ago most of them likely thought he should get out of the race so Gingrich or Cain could get a bigger share of the vote, and few if any took him seriously. Now his supporters are entreching themselves and telling Romney supporters that they will not support him. According to them, we should let them have their way, or they will just take four more years of Obama. I don’t know if Santorum really meant it when he said we might as well just take Obama if Romney is the nominee, but he is echoing the sentiment of some of his followers, and he provided a great sound clip for the opposition to use this coming fall. It is not surprising Santorum won Louisiana, and he may win a couple more. What will be telling is when some of the cuacus states that Santorum supposedly won have their state assemblies. In many he hasn’t really won anything yet, For example, my state, Colorado, doesn’t have it’s state assembly until April 14th, and until then, Santorum hasn’t won a thing. If the party continues to coalesce around Romney, then Santorum may lose a state he “already won.” The only thing Louisiana provides is more evidence that the Gingrich campaign has failed to achieve its objectives.

    • mong001

      on RS for endorsing liberal Republicans Specter and Christie Todd Whitman, but is now laughingly being accused of supporting Obama over Romney. At least Santorum has been a key player in passing conservative initiatives such as welfare reform and the partial-birth abortion ban. What exactly has Romney every accomplished legislatively other than the albatross called Romneycare? Romney’s only conservative accomplishments have been in his dreams.

      • civil truth

        Santorum has his legislative record; Romney has his record as governor.

        Both have serious flaws in terms of conservatism today.

        It probably comes down then to assessment of character and who you think has learned their lessons and who will be better a getting conservative programs through Congress – and who will make better appointments and judicial nominations.

        These issues have been thoroughly discussed at RedState and little resolution has resulted.

        • clintonformccain

          NT

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

            Santorum clearly has a better conservative record but that Mitt is a better candidate in terms of discipline, maturity etc

          • jamesm

            Methinks GC thinks right,

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

            thx guy

            Yes, Santorum just seems totally exhausted and frantic in his long rambling answers to questions even from friendly media and his stream of consciouness style…

            Mitt seems to be moving right…it is what it is…BEAT OBAMA!

          • garfieldjl

            We have to beat Obama with someone that is actually serious about getting rid of Obama’s destructive policies, otherwise (even though Santorum walked it back (and he shouldn’t have)) Santorum was right. We’d be better off with Obama winning re-election and praying we managed to take the House and Senate to stonewall Obama’s destructive agenda (or hopefully override Presidential vetos and do the repeals in spite of the President).

            It is a lot easier for Republicans to stand together against a President of an opposing party, than it is for them to have to fight a President from their own party whom constantly veers to the left.

            I’m sorry to disappoint you, but if Romney is the nominee it is a toss-up as to whom would be worse and it would depend entirely on whether or not Romney has honestly changed his ways and turned his back on liberalism (his behavior indicates that he intends to revert to his liberal leanings).

            If Romney has genuinely changed his ways then he seriously needs to start to work at proving it instead of smearing his opponents, if he hasn’t then in all honesty it would be better for us to take the house and senate and vote third party in the Presidential even if it means that Obama gets a second term.

            If Santorum or Gingrich is the nominee then they are obviously better choices than Obama and should have our complete support, Romney is the only candidate where this situation comes into play.

            If he has changed his ways he needs to prove it, he needs to admit Romneycare was a mistake, heck he could even call Obamacare a perversion of what the intent of Romneycare was and why Romneycare should go bye bye too, because Obama demonstrated how that kind of power can be abused. He’s done none of that.

            Blaming Conservatives that are saying they will not support Romney even against Obama unless Romney shapes up and proves he actually intends to govern as a conservative, doesn’t help matters it only alienates the people that the Republicans need the support of in the General even more. The only one to blame for this situation is Romney, and the only one that can fix this is Romney and he can only do this if he’s genuinely turned his back on liberalism.

          • renl57

            …just because you don’t like Romney is not an option.

            Winning the House and Senate will be more difficult if Obama wins re-election. (It’s already difficult with the Snowe retirement.) He may have coattails here and there.

            But even if you do win the House and Senate, the President has Constitutional responsibilities that controlling Congress doesn’t compensate for.

            Obama will put two more ultra-liberal judges on the Supreme Court, creating a Court as liberal as the Earl Warren Court which changed America’s culture–and not always for the better.

            And do you really want Obama to be Commander-in-Chief when Iran test-fires its first nuke–or Israel launches pre-emptive war to head that off?

            Romney may not be to your liking, but he’s not going to appoint ultra-liberal judges and he’s not going to throw Israel under the bus.

          • Scope

            when he was Gov. says otherwise renl. What’s the difference between ultra-liberal and liberal? they are both still liberal.

          • garfieldjl

            Fact is if we manage to take the Senate and keep the house, then if it came down to between Romney and Obama. There is a good chance Romney would be more destructive to this country than Obama.

            It is a lot easier for politicians to go against someone from an opposing party than go against a sitting President of their own party. Obama’s radical judge picks aren’t nearly as likely to go through, while Republicans would have a hard time going against radical judicial picks by Romney.

            If nothing else, we know Santorum and Gingrich would appoint conservatives to the bench that are strict constitutionalists, same can’t be said for Romney.

            I know Romney supporters would like to believe that I have an irrational hatred of Romney (like everyone else whom is critical of Romney supposedly is), unfortunately for their world view, it’s Romney’s record that is what I dislike, it’s his record and behavior that causes me not to trust him.

            So in all honesty, Romney is really the only one in this race that could potentially prove to be more destructive to this country than Obama.

          • renl57

            …if you were the governor of MA.

            Because it’s either appoint moderate judges or no judges, given that the MA legislature is 80% Democrat and 20% Republican.

            What I like about Romney is precisely what you don’t like: He makes the best of a constrained situation.

            MA isn’t a state where you can gain anything by nominating conservative judges who the Dems will vote down. Or propose conservative legislation even though you know it will be dead on arrival on Beacon Hill.

            In some other state you might be able to score some political points with some voters that way. But MA is a state where only 11% of the voters are registered Republicans.

          • vastrightwingconspiracy

            …to confuse them with reality.

            You’re just rocking the theo-con boat.

          • littlehouse18

            Even though I still support Santorum. Ddawg’s comments above reinforce that for me. But he indeed seems exhausted which is leading to mistakes. Running a grassroots campaign and trying to speak to (figuratively) every voter in the country can do that to you.

          • rabun1016

            Yes

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

          He needs a rest

    • garfieldjl

      I don’t think Santorum is going to be the nominee, he’s better than Mitt but Santorum doesn’t get support from fiscal conservatives.

      An additional perk for Newt continuing to stay in this is he’s putting Obama on the defensive while Santorum and Romney are duking it out.

      As long as Newt puts the majority of his attacks on Obama while Romney and Santorum beat each other bloody, Newt has a pretty good shot of being the nominee, because the Santorum delegates will be so against Romney that they absolutely will not support Romney. The Romney delegates will be so totally against Santorum that they absolutely will not support Santorum.

      All Gingrich has to do is make sure that Romney can’t hit the magic number even if Paul throws his support to Romney. If you’ll notice he’s largely focusing fire on Romney and Obama (but mostly Obama).

      If Gingrich determines that he is only benefitting Romney by staying in, he’s rather likely to leave the race and endorse Santorum.

      Santorum needs to keep focusing his fire on Romney and Obama, he’s probably not going to pick up to many Romney supporters but will likely drive them over to Gingrich.

      One thing I think this has proven is just how “electable” Romney is, or to be more accurate how unelectable he is.

      One thing I know for sure, if Romney is the nominee we’re going to lose in November, and it will prevent us from taking the senate, and worst case it will cost us the House too. He’s burned too many bridges, plus Santorum’s comments (no matter how much he tries to walk them back), plus the “etch-a-sketch,” Bain Capital, Romneycare, etc. nominating Romney would be handing Obama four more years on a silver platter.

      Santorum has burned quite a few bridges and that could hurt him in the general, however he has a much better shot because he doesn’t have the Romneycare issue.

      Gingrich may be simply directing his attacks on Obama while letting his opponents beat each other senseless, because nothing he says will get them to stop.

      • Scope

        giving speeches in Fla. on the day of the LA primary, and when Fla has already had their primary? Vacationing in Fla. in the wintertime is fun, and as long as you go out and give a speech, you can charge that vacation to the campaign.

        • sandollar

          on You Tube, this was over a month ago.
          I thought I had seen that woman before, so I checked.

          Not sure why it’s being brought up now.

          • Scope

            It is curious that it is posted here now. That’s very odd.

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

      not that far apart when it comes to what they believe, then there is not going to be very much excitement from many conservatives.

      Look, this is easy, I cannot trust anything Romney has said this cycle, and I can only go on what people have done. Romney has proved time in and time out he would say anything to win, I frankly could care less if the GOP think he is electable, he is a fraud. Now will I support him over Obama, yea, more than likely, because Obama will tick me off as much as Romney has, in fact he already has. But do I think conservatives will really care if Romney wins, no I really do not think people will back him unless he runs really far to the Right of Obama. You look at Romney?s past and you will not find that much different than Obama.

      As an independent conservative, why should I believe Romney, I do not like him. I really do not like him. In fact I believe Obama is wrong 99% of the time, But most people in this country like him. If Romney was a real conservative, I still would not like him The way he does things, the stuck up look on his face, the superiority complex. The lies, the dirty tricks. I want my president to be above depending on the insiders to win the race for him.

      • Scope

        Tomorrow starts the oral arguments at the SC that will mostly decide if the individual mandate is constitutional. The whole Obamacare/Romneycare issue will once again be front and center (no pun intended) and with the majority of the population against the legislation, and Romney 2010 WSJ article praising the push for the individual mandate, it will come flying back in Romney’s face. It should have been one of the most major issues against Romney from the get go. It is by far the worst thing on his record. The timing of the hearings couldn’t be worse for both Obama and Romney.

        • rabun1016

          Really, so you don’t understand federalism? The notion that states can do some things that the federal government cannot. And this is exactly how it was designed, so Mass can do things the federal govt cannot do. I have no problem with their attempt, but it doesn’t mean i support a fed takeover of health care. Please read some more.

          • garfieldjl

            Romneycare is probably just as unconstitutional as Obamacare.

          • lapert

            On what basis do you say that?

          • renl57

            The 10th Amendment to the Constitution states that powers not provided to the Federal Government are reserved for the states. And since the Federal Government’s powers are limited by the Constitution, the state government’s powers can be far wider!

            That means that even if the Federal Government can’t mandate you to buy insurance, a state government certainly can. If you don’t like the MA RomneyCare mandate, don’t live there.

            The 10th Amendment works both ways, you know. It doesn’t just constrain the Federal Government, which is what many conservatives cite it for. The flip side is that it gives wide latitude to state governments.

          • littlehouse18

            ..

    • rabun1016

      Let’s be honest. Santorum has nothing else to do. He has spent more than half his life in political campaigns. Running for office is his career. Jason will give up on “Halloween” but Santorum quits running for something. It’s an ego trip.

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

    but when it comes to most of the measures that they talk about, Romney just got killed, This was a blow out, nothing less than a blow out, and should be worrying the Romney team and the GOP big wigs, who will not admitt it, Romney has a real problem.

    • garfieldjl

      The least likely scenario would be for Romney to take the hint that he can’t win the general and should get out of this.

      Then maybe we can finally have the campaign be about issues instead of the latest smear.

      • Scope

        going after Santorum big time. The problem for Romney now is that everyone watched him and his surrogates do it with every single other candidate in the race, and many are not buying his crap anymore. Santorum get’s whacked hard for saying that there isn’t much difference between Romney and Obama, but it’s OK for Romney to say that Santorum is an economic lightweight, and that we already have that in the WH now. Huh, finally the voters in one state, who believe economic issues are the most important, went for Santorum over Romney. That should have the Romney camp shaking in their boots.

      • deVere

        Santorum is very capable of opening his mouth and smearing himself.

        • garfieldjl

          Cause he probably is already spending money on a ton of new anti-Santorum ads.

          If Romney were really as electable as he claims, this primary would have been over back in January.

          I’m a nobody but Newt supporter, but I will acknowledge Santorum is way better than Romney.

          • deVere

            Rick opened his mouth this morning about the Zimmerman/Martin altercation. I really could never vote for Santorum after what he said today. He is very unfortunately just an unsuitable person to become POTUS:

            http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/25/santorum-zimmerman-has-a-very-sick-mind-motive-a-malicious-one/

            Romney is a Liberal and the father of gay marriage, but it seems he has better judgment than Santorum.. Perhaps Newt Gingrich can rejuvenate his campaign once again. I hope so.

          • deVere

            ?What happened to Trayvon Martin is a tragedy. There needs to be a thorough investigation that reassures the public that justice is carried out with impartiality and integrity.?
            Mitt Romney

            ?I think that Americans can recognize that while this is a tragedy, and it is a tragedy, that we?re going to relentlessly seek justice. And I think that?s the right thing to do.?
            Newt Gingrich

            I’m really sorry that Rick Santorum is clearly not suitable to become POTUS, but that is now the obvious fact to myself and a lot of other conservative Republicans.

        • snowshooze

          When he goes and says what he really thinks…
          I hope you saw the Mitt-Meltdowns.
          Don’t worry, he has more ready to go.

          • jamesm

            ..

          • Scope

            that Romney is the R version of O’Biden are you? LOL The very saddest thing is going to be when he runs his mouth in error when he is already the nominee.

            With the Ocare case in front of the SC tomorrow, Pluffey has already brought up today on TV that Romney and one other candidate, not named Santorum have been in favor of the individual mandate. The D’s are going to hammer Etch-a-sketch really hard on this, while trying to give messages to the SC that “hey, these Republicans were for it also.”

          • vastrightwingconspiracy

            “Conservatives” didn’t really have a problem with it until Obama did it.In fact, it was lauded by conservative think-tanks.

            Is the problem with Obamacare the mandate or is the problem that it’s terrible economic policy?

            Newsflash – every law is a mandate. You buy a car, right? Well, the Feds require that cars have seatbelts. You think they’re free? Guess again slick. You/we are up to our necks in mandates. Funny how “conservatives” are now just objecting to them.

          • JSobieski

            The tax code in conjunction with the income tax has in the end, the same impact as the Obamacare mandate.

            There are all sorts of things you can either (1) spend money on or (2) have your income taxes go up.

            Nobody is going to be locked up for not buying insurance under Obamacare. People will have their tax liability go up however.

            The irony is that the no mandate argument can pave the way for government option and single payer. Nobody disputes the constitutionality of raising income tax rates . . .

  • hisgirlfriday

    Even in Illinois, the first state abutting the Mississippi River that Rick lost, he won the counties next to the Mississippi.

    Now he dominates Louisiana, nearly denying Romney any delegates at all if he had just kept Romney 2 points lower. This is how Newt getting out of the race could have made a difference.

    I doubt it means much because the campaign press have all decided they want to leave the trail to go home for a while before the general starts in earnest so every gaffe Rick makes will be maximized while every gaffe Mitt makes will be minimized. But it’s just interesting to me.

    But this result seems to reinforce the idea that Santorum is going to keep going all the way to Tampa unless Romney racks up enough delegates to send him home.

    • Scope

      This is a point I’ve made elsewhere. If Newt wasn’t still in the race, Santorum would have gotten over 50% in LA. No question at all. I don’t know if LA gives all the delegates to someone who wins over 50%, but Santorum, with Gingrich out, could easily have gotten there. I’ve heard that Newt and Paul didn’t get any delegates in LA. So Gingrich helped Romney with the delegate count it appears. His game is backfiring badly.

      • garfieldjl

        Could be the Gingrich people that lean more towards Santorum voted for Santorum in an attempt to try to make it clear that everyone is rejecting Romney.

        • Scope

          Santorum won with 49%. Gingrich had 16%. All Santorum would have needed was 1% of the Gingrich voters, which there is absolutely no question he could have gotten. If the other 15% voted for Romney, which is unlikely, then Santorum would still have beat him, and possibly gained all or most of the delegates because he hit the 50% mark. This has been the exact scenario I had anticipated happening with Gingrich still staying in, and I wrote that prediction a few weeks ago. From the way it seems to be shaping up right now, Gingrich can do the same thing to Santorum in NC, and again help to give more delegates to Romney. I really really dislike Gingrich, but if he were the one with the number of wins and delegates that Santorum has, I would absolutely be screaming for Santorum to get the hel! out. I don’t know if you read the article at the link that Moe provided, but they said that after yesterday, there is no path at all for Gingrich now. Also, according to RNC rules, there is no way that Gingrich will win at least three more states. Without that, his hope of winning at the convention on the second or any other round is impossible. His name won’t even be included as a possible at the convention. The voters, or “we the people” have been speaking, and every state out of 28ish but two said no to Gingrich. Some told him very seriously no.

          • garfieldjl

            There are some places coming up that Santorum is not on the ballot, but Gingrich is. Unless you want Romney to grab a bunch of delegates in those areas, it’s imperitive Gingrich stays in.

          • lapert

            Can you name one such place other than DC which is winner take all and going for Romney regardless?

          • Scope

            as lapert said below, the only state that Santorum is not on the ballot is in DC. DC is WTA, and you can bet your entire bank account on the fact that Romney will win it in the primary, but then lose it big time in the general.

            Santorum is currently leading in NC, and other than NC, there isn’t another area in the country Gingrich has won in.

            I agree that Gingrich’s voice is important, and I love when he goes after Obama, but he could do a whole lot more with that voice off the campaign trail rather than staying in and and looking more and more foolish with every primary. I’d go so far as to say that he is even ruining his chances of any administration post in any R WH.

      • lapert

        Louisiana doesn’t give them any more for passing 50%. They allocate 20 delegates in total proportionally to anyone who receives over 25% of the vote. Depending on how Gingrich’s voter split it is possible it would have changes the delegate allocation +1 or 2 in either direction (most likely it would have at most switched it by one delegate).

        As with the rest of his campaign at this point, his presence was irrelevant.

  • winning2012

    they don’t understand we’re nominating a Presidential candidate, not the guy that’s going to be teaching your kids at Sunday School.

    I’m sure Santorum’s 20 point victory was all over policy issues. /sarc off

    • garfieldjl

      That they really don’t understand the fact people have rejected Romney because of his behavior. Furthermore, insulting people because they didn’t vote for Romney, turns them even more against Romney.

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

        .

        • http://www.thestandardcandle.com Justin Spagnolo

          nocontextthere.

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

      I don’t know what is the origin for your bigotry against the South, but you’re ignorant and you need to catch up with us in the 21st century.

    • hisgirlfriday

      This goes back to the Huey Long days. Louisiana and most Mississippi River valley locales are POPULIST and don’t trust Wall Street elites any more than they trust Washington elites.

      If Mitt Romney was a quarter-billionaire Methodist businessman from Massachusetts with the same record of statements and achievements rather than a quarter-billionaire Mormon businessman from Massachusetts, I don’t think the vote would have come down much differently against Santorum.

      • renl57

        The LA exit polls don’t fully support any of these contentions.

        77% of LA voters self-identified as conservatives.

        40% of LA voters said that Santorum best identifies with the problems of average Americans.

        On the other hand:

        43% of LA voters said that it’s important that a candidate share their religious beliefs.

        http://tinyurl.com/87zajcw

      • califgal

        a paragon of honesty and integrity and then there was that governor not long ago who wound up in prison…wow, a state just like Illinois. Long history, much of it bad, but I can say that about many states, including my own. They just don’t get jailed here.

    • Scope

      members here at RS don’t appreciate you in essence telling them they are all idiots because of their candidate choice.

    • califgal

      to whom you just referred would vote for William Jennings Bryant if they could , but hey, we did say we too are a party that has room for many voices .

  • Jim Mullins

    According to the unofficial results, a total of 150,536 people voted in the Democrat primary, while 186,377 people voted in the Republican primary. Unlike most southern states, Louisiana registers voters by party and has closed primaries. As of January 1, 2012, Louisiana had 1,407,885 registered Democrats and 773,150 registered Republicans.

    Underscoring the Louisiana Democrats’ lack of enthusiasm for President Obama, President Obama lost to John Wolfe in 3 parishes–Cameron, Grant, and Lasalle–and won only a plurality of the vote in 10 others–Beauregard, Caldwell, Jefferson Davis, Lafourche, Livingston, Sabine, Vermilion, Vernon, West Carroll, and Winn. This follows the Oklahoma primary earlier this month in which only 57% of the Democrat primary voters voted for President Obama, who lost 12 counties and perhaps 1 national convention delegate to activist Randall Terry.

    While we go through a contested primary season in which literally every state and every vote might count, we should not lose focus of the facts that (1) the 50-state Democrat contest in 2008 strengthened Obama as a candidate by forcing him to build organizations in every state early (I believe his general election wins in Indiana and North Carolina, whose May primaries normally occur after both parties’ nominations have been clinched, can be directly attributed to the work he did during the primary campaigns in those states) and (2) this year, Obama is the weakest candidate in the field by virtue of the disastrous effects his policies have had on this country–which may have been bamboozled by the Hope and Change platitudes of 2008, but was never prepared for the type of radical transformation Obama is trying to implement.

    • snowshooze

      Those are good numbers.
      I didn’t know Louisiana was tilted so far to the Democrat party, and I hadn’t heard of the challenges on the Democrat ticket.
      I hadn’t head a single word on Oklahoma either.
      Now I wonder why that is…

  • deVere

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/25/santorum-zimmerman-has-a-very-sick-mind-motive-a-malicious-one/

    • westcoastpatriette

      if he were elected to be President. Once more, he has shown his capacity to say the most foolish things. I can hardly believe he would speak like this before all of the facts of the case have been discovered. His tendency to be one-sided in his views is worrisome no matter what the issue he may be addressing.

  • lesliemj

    Say what?

    Romney in ?02: ?Only Connection? to the Republican Party Is My Party Registration
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/romney-in-02-only-connection-to-the-republican-party-is-my-party-registration/

    Romney: ?The Gay Community Needs More Support from the Republican Party?
    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/romney-gay-community-needs-more-support-republican-party

    Romney believes that strapping a dog to the roof of a car is just fine. Even more bizarre but revealing is that Romney is unwilling to admit wrong or apologize. How we treat animals reflects the core of our characters.

    http://www.adn.com/2012/03/20/2384227/why-does-romney-defend-strapping.html#storylink=cpy

    • vastrightwingconspiracy

      …come lately with “gotcha” quotes.

      Come with something original or relevant next time.

  • JimmyGee

    I hate to say it, but I think ObamaLite is locking up the nomination. Santorum has to do well in Wisconsin. Despite the 13% advantage ObmmaLite has on Santorum in Wisconsin, I think Santorum can pull off an upset. Maybe wishful thinking.
    Why, or how did we get such a pathetic field of nominees? There is real talent in the GOP why didn’t they run? Why!? I cry out as I fall to my knees sobbing. Why?

    • jamesm

      The demographics are more like Minnesota than Illinois.Two separate polls in February has Santorum up by double digits. The Rasmussen poll may be an outlier. We will see as more polling come in in the next week.

    • sigmasix

      If he doesn’t, he is toast in November when it counts. Two can play this game.

    • vastrightwingconspiracy

      …about your family, would you be willing to pit yourself against the likes of these four and take their abuse for 8 months?

      There’s plenty of good people. Problem is, “good people” don’t want the job because of the accompanying BS.

  • sigmasix

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c

    Conclusion:

    If you are a Romney supporter, I do not see you as a Republican voter to begin with. Some of you may in fact hate conservatives. In fact, even with Romney as the nominee, it is likely many of those pushing for Romney are likely to vote Obama regardless. George Soros supports you, he wants Romney/Obama as the two choices, it is pure win/win for him. I know, you will scream at bloody murder levels that you swear to God even though you are an atheist that you will be supporting whoever the nominee is, and I believe you as much as I trust Obama to help America produce more energy or as much as I trust Romney will govern in a positive conservative way.

    Make your objections known now, stand on principle. Both Obama and Willard are pathetic candidates. Support neither.

    • vastrightwingconspiracy

      …I’m glad that you do not see me as representing the same party as you do. I am a Republican and I couldn’t care any less about what you consider “conservative.” You say “stand on principle,” yet you can’t even define what your principles are because they change from day to day. You can’t even define it except to say, “It’s the opposite of whatever Obama does.”

      It’s people like you that have hijacked the term “conservative” and turned it into some club with a religious litmus test required to partake. Guess what? True conservatives don’t want to be told what to do/think any more by the right than they do by the left.

      What’s hilarious is that you think you’re the majority becauseRush says you are. I hate to be the one to break it to you but theo-con/so-cons are not the majority. Rush makes money by telling half-truths to rile up the extreme right and keep them angry. Happy people won’t listen to him. Also, there is no Santa Claus or Easter Bunny.

      Ironially enough, it is, steady as a rock, “team player,” Santorum who wishes to re-elect Obama rather than see Romney win.

      Santorum said so, and Rick never lies.