Hello, Super Tuesday
[Posted by Karl]
Who could hang a name on you? Here’s the big Google/AP Map for tracking results in the various contests tonight. Nate Silver provides a range of possibilities for gauging the expectations game. My own preview should give you an idea of how the delegates may stack up as the votes are announced. ABC News has a decent round-up of the narratives that will invariably follow. And not to be a wet blanket, but it is all-but-mathematically-impossible for Gingrich or Santorum to win a majority of delegates at this point. So it’s Romney or a brokered convention (with all the downsides that would bring).
Discuss.
–Karl
Ding!
Karl (73d46c) — 3/6/2012 @ 2:57 pmIt looks like it’s Mitt time. I doubt my opinion or my vote will matter since Texas doesn’t vote until late May.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/6/2012 @ 3:15 pmDown the GOP.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/6/2012 @ 3:17 pmbring on the brokered convention.
i still say Mittens would have done better to have run as the Demoncrat he is in a challenge to the SCOAMF.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 3/6/2012 @ 3:25 pmWhat red said.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 3:40 pmjust how ugly would
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:10 pmfour more Big Zero years be?
coyote ugly
Each one of these candidates should be applauded for having the fortitude and energy to put themselves out there and in the running. You want to find fault, there’s plenty to be found with the weak-sisters who chose to stay safe at home.
Apparently, they’re content with Obama destroying the country.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:16 pmbrokered convention? Yeah, let’s reward weak-suck behavior.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:21 pmThat is absolute BS, Haiku, but par for the course with you.
JD (8921d4) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:21 pmThat’s the God’s honest truth, and if you want to court one of those Nancys, JD, have at it.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:24 pmIt’s a fairy tale scenario. One for the unicorn believers.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:25 pmBut, hey… time will tell. I trust that the sane among us will prevail.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:27 pmbrokereth not our convention but deliver us from urkel
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:29 pmRomney wanted a federal ind mandate. He is philosophically the father of Obamacare, having asked Obama to change to a federal individual mandate. They did a good job memory holing this, and shame on Romney’s competitors, such as Perry, for failing to get this to the voters months ago.
As things stand, it’s really not fair for me to bash those who choose Romney over Gingrich or Santorum. I would prefer Newt or Rick drop out and endorse the other, but both of them fall short of what we need and Romney does have much more substantial leadership experience. He just happens to be more liberal and much more shameless about his flip flops.
Maybe the American people are stupid and will believe the promises of a flip flopper. They did elect Obama, after all… they clearly aren’t on the same page as I am regarding this ‘prove it with your record’ business.
It’s clear that anyone of these three will emerge from the primary damaged and be far from a strong candidate. And that damage is the fault of the candidates. The rift in the GOP is a result of reality that only a fool would attempt to hide. I do not think a brokered convention will happen, but if it did, it’s hard to imagine the result would be as bad.
Regardless, small government bona fide conservatives had their candidate. He lost. It’s tough to accept, but it’s gotta be accepted.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:41 pmLook at the way Haiku savages everyone but Romney, then has the temerity to demand unity.
JD (8921d4) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:50 pmDear Karl,
It was George Bush and “Compassionate Conservatism” that got the ball rolling on this decline – why else does Obama’s blame-Bush strategy have so much political traction after 3+ years? “Miss me yet?” the billboard asks. On this, even most Republicans agree: No Way! So why in the world do otherwise rational Republicans think the path to victory runs through the mushy middle? You wouldn’t know it from recent presidential cycles, but those curious yokels in the party’s base believe that politics should be guided by principles, not seniority or sorry notions of “electability.”
There are two critical jobs ahead for conservatives. The first and most important task is to put our own party in order. If that means a brokered convention and four more years of Obama, so be it. Only a competent and confidently conservative Republican Party will be able to accomplish the second task, the task of putting the nation in order.
Now that we have elevated Andrew Breitbart to sainthood, we should ask ourselves “Would St. Breitbart want me to throw in the towel and pull the lever for Romney when the primary comes to my state?” That’s an easy question to answer.
Come November, if I think Gary Johnson – another conservative casualty of the current GOP nominating mess – is the best man for the job, I’m voting for him.
Yours truly,
ThOR
ThOR (94646f) — 3/6/2012 @ 4:54 pmIt’s a sick little game, any candidate that has anything to say, be it Newt or Santorum or even
narciso (87e966) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:00 pmPerry, is stomped underfoot.
Thor – Breitbart was an ABO period.
JD (8921d4) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:01 pmAmen, Narciso. Stomped is exactly right. Especially if they are a credible conservative who could actually get the spending under control. It’s like the establishment(sorry, it’s a real thing) hates the idea of less government spending and intrusion.
http://i.imgur.com/lRwAX.png
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:03 pmI think Breitbart would have done that. But I also don’t wish to play the ‘speak for the recently dead guy’ card (no disrespect intended). I recall Breitbart admiring the authenticity of Santorum. I think every mention of authenticity and honesty comes across as a criticism of Romney, but that doesn’t mean it was intended that way.
The primary hasn’t ended… when it does we will need to accept the result… and I mean after the convention has ended. Until we have a nominee, it’s fine to hold these guys’ records up (such as Romney asking Obama to change his position to a federal individual mandate, aka Obamacare) and hold them accountable, but after we have a nominee, my guess is that this nominee will be the only real alternative to Obama and therefore the best one remaining.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:06 pmThOR:
I think you should vote for whomever you want but you’re right that it’s easy to answer what Andrew Breitbart would encourage you to do: He’d tell you to vote for the Republican nominee, whomever it is and join him “in the war against the institutional left.”
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:38 pmI’m surprised I made it to Super Tuesday, but here I am.
Barbara Bush was right. This race sucks.
I’m beginning to root (in the Anglo, not Australian, sense) for Romney, and this is depressing on an order of magnitude unique for politics.
Random (38d59c) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:43 pmYeah, exactly DRJ. People can make their own voting decisions, but it was obvious to me Andrew would have supported the nominee against Obama. I’m surprises ThOR didn’t know that, but there is such a thing as “wishful, self-justified thinking”.
Random (38d59c) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:45 pmLook at the way Haiku savages everyone but Romney, then has the temerity to demand unity.
Comment by JD
No disparaging words about the other candidates from me for several weeks now. I’ll be supportive of any of the remaining three – and for that matter, in the off-chance that Paul would win, even supportive of him.
Why should anybody who was too timid to enter the fray win support? This is a demanding, grind ’em down process and my hats off to all of them.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:56 pmIt’s a sick little game, any candidate that has anything to say, be it Newt or Santorum or even
Perry, is stomped underfoot.
Comment by narciso
That’s funny. Like Romney wasn’t subjected to the same thing from so many of you. Get real.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 5:59 pmVery selective outrage.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 6:00 pmIt’s like the establishment(sorry, it’s a real thing) hates the idea of less government spending and intrusion.
Which should be expected. Their careers are the product, and their future prospects tied up with, government spending and expansion.
That’s why I think (as I’ve said before) it would be a rational option for a conservative to prefer an Obama victory to a Romney victory, because the establishment will under the umbrella of GOP partisanship (and meanwhile trying to play conservatives for suckers) help enable all leftward moves by Romney but be an active opposition to all moves by Obama. That is, Obama would move us down the path of leftism less than Romney would because the GOP will oppose Obama but help Romney.
[To make the limits clear of what I’m saying there–this would apply only Romney as GOP nominee, not Santorum or Gingrich; I’m calling it an option and not a preferred course of action; and it’s not a suggestion that any of you not vote for Romney if he is the nominee. It’s really my way of voicing my low opinion of the GOP organization. If Romney does make it to the White House, conservatives will need to be active in opposition, if not more so, than they have been for the last four years.]
JBS (2d88a8) — 3/6/2012 @ 6:23 pmThor, I don’t blame you for your rationale, btw, and I don’t think anything you said justifies insults.
DRJ’s response is correct (and I note she offered it with respect).
The more partisan among us should consider that they lose support of conservatives like Thor when they react to his points with insults. It’s *good* that people are demanding more of the GOP. These fed up folks are reasonable and patriotic and serious, and the one thing that best proves the GOP is not serious is treating their complaints with derision… as though such points should never have been offered.
Thor, Gary Johnson won’t beat Obama. And we need to get the White House out of Obama’s hands, even if it goes to a liberal Republican.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 6:29 pmJBS, I think your point is valid.
Let’s hope and pray the GOP nominee is at least a fighter for conservatism. For all the flaws in Santorum and Gingrich, they both are that (but one needs to endorse the other for either to have a chance).
However, though I think a Romney administration would have many liberal results (With the same ‘democrats wanted more’ excuse we’re already hearing), I think Romney would still be preferable to Obama because Obama is particularly reckless on foreign policy, particularly corrupt in results, and the Supreme Court is teetering on a single vote. I don’t know for sure that Romney would nominate good judges (he hasn’t in the past… and not because democrats had any control over him and he already knew he wasn’t running for reelection), but I know Obama’s would be worse.
I do think your view is understandable, but Obama’s gone too far in some cases and if he’s reelected, I think he’ll be pretty lawless. I am willing to stomach a liberal administration to avert a second Obama term.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 6:34 pmThat’s funny. Like Romney wasn’t subjected to the same thing from so many of you. Get real.
Comment by Colonel Haiku — 3/6/2012 @ 5:59 pm
Totally agree. If you think the ads from Romney are bad, just wait till you see what Obama does.
But when Obama does them, the same media that attacked Sarah Palin for all things real and imagined will echo and amplify any attacks on the Republican.
And I would remind everyone that the worst attack ad of this campaign that included outright lies wasn’t from Romney but at Romney – it was Newt’s “King of Bain” ad.
Kaisersoze (298188) — 3/6/2012 @ 6:54 pmLike Elliot Abrams lying about the Contras, or Brokaw lying about the ethics committee settlement,
narciso (87e966) — 3/6/2012 @ 6:57 pmdream on.
Meh.
I think the most dishonest attack ad was “Rick Perry wants to Kill Social Security”, offered from many levels of the Romney campaign. But perhaps it was the attack that Newt was disgraced for the ethics investigation that showed Newt to be vindicated.
Anyway, Romney took credit for absolutely every job even touched by Bain, and even then it seemed exaggerated. Suddenly he’s not accountable for the rest of the story, and any attack on such a business is an attack on the free market.
Newt’s recent comments about Romney’s wealth have also been class warfare, and I think he’s out of line much of the time, but he’s paid the price for it. Liberals (such as Romney) do not pay much of a price for demagoguery against Social Security reform.
Some folks are still upset that romney took honest attacks, as though this has somehow harmed the guy, but it’s called vetting. There’s a reason Romney is barely handling Super Tuesday with a huge state that ripped his opponents off the ballot. There’s a reason he has a hard time beating Santorum, a much weaker candidate. He’s being vetted for electability against two rather imperfect opponents. There’s no crime in that.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:08 pmI wonder how Rick Santorum appeals to Republicans, given that he was defeated for re-election to the U.S. Senate by over twenty points.
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:12 pmI don’t know how much attention anyone was paying to the speeches but once again Santorum gave what I thought was a pretty bad speech. I have no idea what the theme was. Romney’s speech was excellent.
Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:15 pmThere’s only possible candidate who did well in 2006, so much for that squirrel.
narciso (87e966) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:17 pmWell he’s been reelected many times, though, and 2006 was a very tough year for the GOP.
And Romney has never even been reelected to anything. Not anything. And he would have obviously lost had he run for reelection. Obviously.
In other words, the reason Santorum appeals is probably because the competition is also very lacking.
Rick Santorum’s comments about education are rare honesty. His energy platform is excellent. His work with welfare reform is, alone, more impressive to reform minded Republicans than everything Romney has ever done at Bain, to say nothing of asking Obama to embrace a federal individual mandate before swearing up and down he never wanted that.
Rick Santorum is unappealing to me in many ways. I don’t like how the guy talks, even. But he is authentic and I know he means what he says. I know his values are more representative of the American people than the MSM claims (and more representative than the typical say whatever the polls say politician).
Santorum’s real problem with me isn’t his losing one race. He polls much better with independents than Romney or Newt, and the conservatives will come out for him.
My worry with Santorum is that he simply doesn’t have sufficient experience running anything. Romney has much more of that, and it’s an important skill.
I think Santorum is probably more electable than Romney, despite the conventional wisdom, so this leads me to prefer Santorum win, but honestly I don’t know which would be the better nominee.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:18 pmTo disabuse a few of the know-it-alls that, well, they know it all, as just pointed out by Rove, Super Tuesday could very well end with Romney winning more votes and delegates than all of his competitors combined.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:19 pmI admit he is easily the best speech giver who ran for President this year. I think he’s a better speech giver than Obama, too. On prompter, Obama is also very, very good.
The problem with his speeches is not that they are delivered poorly, but that they are not sincere. After a wall to wall ad campaign pointing out all the flip flops, it won’t matter how well Romney can read off a teleprompter.
Santorum’s speeches often bug me, but independents see something in him.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:22 pmI don’t know how much attention anyone was paying to the speeches but once again Santorum gave what I thought was a pretty bad speech. I have no idea what the theme was. Romney’s speech was excellent.
Comment by Gerald A
funny you should mention Rick’s speech… this is what Jonah Goldberg wrote about it: “Santorum talks like he’s trying to remember the speech he forgot to write. Makes me uncomfortable because I know that feeling.”
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:24 pmI just can’t get over Romney asking Obama for a federal ind mandate in USA Today in 2009, then laying low and editing his book as the Tea Party emerged and railed against that very thing. Then criticizing Perry very harshly for suggesting Romney did what he did.
Not because of Romney, either. I mean, I’m smart enough to expect nothing else from Romney by now.
I’m shocked because the other candidates were incompetent. There’s no other word for missing this egregious behavior until now, when it is too late.
In reading Romney’s op ed laying out Obamacare, I note how he says the GOP will fall in line and work with Obama and support this. It notes the Mccain way, basically, even naming him as an exemplar.
This would be the Romney administration. I think such a bipartisan administration is substantially better than Obama’s administration, and I think Romney is, in his heart, a good man who is simply pretty liberal.
It’s just that I am conservative and I think we need to get serious about spending reform. It is unlikely for this to be something the democrats cooperate with. It’s not personal. I just realize the simple fact that Romney (And to lesser extent Santorum) fall short of what this country needs. If we wind up with a candidate who isn’t good enough, I’ll support him anyway.
But will I knock on 10,000 doors, like I did in elections past? Not if my impression of Romney supporters is accurate, I won’t. Life’s too short to spend it working with people like that. Politics matter to me, but not that much.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:31 pmWhy is there no republican alternative to Paul? Why is it only the crazy nutjob who can’t win a state left to be the sole defender of the constitution? The hell is wrong with us?
The closest we got was Gary Johnson, who wasn’t allowed to debate despite polling above huntsman, and Rick Perry, who endorsed freakin Gingrich.
We’ve lost all right to complain about the excess of big government when we elevate these people to power. We have no right to complain about government intrusion or ballooning deficits, because we asked for it.
“I can no longer contemplate if God has abandoned us. The only thing he’s heard us screaming is, ‘give us Barabbus.'”
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:32 pmI don’t get it either, Ghost.
I think we had our guy (at least 90% on this point… he’s fallen short a few times) in Rick Perry, and he lost. He was a dud in the debates, but that didn’t seem super important to me.
I agree that we are likely to have a deficit government that involves itself in our affairs, more and more. That was the case with both Bushes, and if the current crop do better I will be very surprised.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:39 pmAnything is possible,
Tonight in Wasilla… Asked if she would be open to having her name put on the floor for the nomination, Palin said: “Anything is possible.”
“I don’t close any doors that perhaps would be open out there. So, no, I wouldn’t close that door. And my plan is to be at that convention,” she said.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/6/2012 @ 7:51 pmPerry’s gaffe on “heartless” opponents of his tuition policy on illegals seemed to be the beginning of the end. He then tried to rebound in the next debate by trying to make something of Romney’s illegal alien employee which was pretty stupid. And finally there was the apparent insufficient preparations which manifested itself in various ways. For example Brian Williams asked him what scientists formed the basis for his views on AGW and he couldn’t name one. He was aggressive in calling AGW a fraud and you would think he would have studied up on it a bit.
Gerald A (cc0aaa) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:05 pmAnyway, Romney took credit for absolutely every job even touched by Bain, and even then it seemed exaggerated. Suddenly he’s not accountable for the rest of the story, and any attack on such a business is an attack on the free market.
Comment by Dustin — 3/6/2012 @ 7:08 pm
That would be a valid criticism if Romney was in Venture Capital, where you are taking very small companies and a few become huge but most wash out. Romney was primarily in turnaround private equity where most of the companies you invest in are on a fast track to being Tango Uniform and not all can be saved.
Another data point FWIW is that if you talk to people who were around Bain when he was there or people in Boston in the tech community there, Romney is almost revered there. Newt on the other hand has little support from the people who worked with him closely (and his claim to have created jobs as Speaker is really annoying to me, and I like Newt). Santorum to my knowledge doesn’t have “people” in the sense that anyone really worked for him along the way.
I don’t dislike anyone in his race but I do think Romney has a much better chance of beating Obama.
Kaisersoze (298188) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:09 pmPerry’s gaffe on “heartless” opponents of his tuition policy on illegals seemed to be the beginning of the end. He then tried to rebound in the next debate by trying to make something of Romney’s illegal alien employee which was pretty stupid.
Gerald… I faintly remember one of our fellow posters making that last point here more than once and a few of us thought it rather… I’ll be polite… backward.
Looks like Romney wins Ohio… man, was that a squeaker.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:10 pmDana,
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:13 pmWith hbo already in full campaign mode, I wouldn’t think it’d be the wisest move on her part.
Dustin,
I could have gladly voted for perry. I’m still voting for Paul in the primary, but at this point, save an awesome VP choice, the one thing that is absolutely clear is that states rights are gone. Romney and Santorum would both use the Obama precedent to extend the federal law into the state level. Unless Paul pulls a delegate victory, it’s going to be one McCain like road for the nominee: trying to convince the left that he’s moderate enough, while still trying to convince the rest of us that they’re not economically insane. I’ve never voted for someone who was pro-abortion before, so I don’t think I can vote for Johnson either. This election sucks.
Turn-out in Ohio is up 144,000 over 2008.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:15 pmThere’s certainly a role for raiders to play in selling companies in the short term. It’s a valuable part of the economy, of course.
They also like Obama. Just saying.
The thing about Bain (which again, I think is a role that has to exist in our market) is that it needs government. It’s dealing with Bankruptcies. sometimes it negotiates deals with the FDIC. It’s the kind of business that rewards those who, for example, had tons of connections.
I say that not to demonize those who succeed there. I say it because it’s unlike the business that is the true backbone of our economy. Small businesses such as those that Romneycare is burdensome to. The kind of business that did not prosper in MA on Romney’s watch.
That’s my main worry with Santorum. My other worry is that he’s not conservative on many of the issues I find critical, such as the role of government, but compared to Romney I think he’s got the edge.
That’s the conventional wisdom. I disagree. I think Romney wins by outspending and out attacking, two things he will not be capable of doing in a general with Obama. Santorum wins by being authentic, for better or worse.
I think Romney is so vulnerable on this flip flopping meme, and Santorum’s vulnerability is that the left will think he’s extreme, which I think is actually a net plus as it makes them look out of touch.
All of the GOP candidates are better than Obama (I don’t consider Paul one).
Agreed, but that isn’t how he phrased it. And frankly the way Romney handled this is a huge liability in a general election. Perry’s handling would have been an asset. And he walked the walk on border control. But he lost and I just have to deal with that.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:16 pm“That would be a valid criticism if Romney was in Venture Capital, where you are taking very small companies and a few become huge but most wash out. Romney was primarily in turnaround private equity where most of the companies you invest in are on a fast track to being Tango Uniform and not all can be saved.” – kaisersoze
There’s certainly a role for raiders to play in selling companies in the short term. It’s a valuable part of the economy, of course.
See how that works? LOL.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:20 pm“Perry’s gaffe on “heartless” opponents of his tuition policy on illegals seemed to be the beginning of the end.” – kaisersoze
Agreed, but that isn’t how he phrased it.
It sure as Hell was how he phrased it and that’s why Perry had to backtrack.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:22 pmI don’t like any of ’em. But my real problem is how VA was handled. It’s actually disgusting. Way to go, Romney, winning VA while Ron Paul for 40% or whatever. Not that Romney was the architect of that, but it shows the GOP running an election will do things that are unconstitutional and disrespect the voter. Everyone knows Newt was a legitimate candidate. It was stupid to twist the rules up so that even major candidates have difficulty getting on ballots.
There is only one way that makes sense, and that’s if you want to exclude outsiders who aim to reform. The only candidate deemed eligible in VA and a few other states are those with a gazillion dollars far earlier than most supporters will even have heard of their campaign.
Anyway, that seems to have made a huge impact on our primary, and therefore the primary was not legitimate. A brokered convention just keeps sounding like the least bad way to go.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:22 pm_____________________________________________
That’s why I think (as I’ve said before) it would be a rational option for a conservative to prefer an Obama victory to a Romney victory
Not sure if I follow your logic, but I think if President “Goddamn America” is given 4 more years at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, he and his toadies will have infused so much leftism into this nation, that the damage will be unrepairable.
But, yes, Romney is full of philosophical mush, so if he’s the next president I can imagine instances where he’ll try to mask his liberal tendencies by explaining they originate from a place of “compassionate conservatism.” However, I’ll blame him less for that than the fact far too much of the electorate leans not just as much leftward as he does, but even more to the left.
If that weren’t the case I’d have quite a bit of confidence that any variety of conservatives running against President “Goddamn America” in 2012 could beat him without breaking a sweat. But the fact that Barry Soetero still polls as well as he does, in spite of his cruddy record and ultra-liberal background, reflects the fact that idiotic liberalism infuses the brainwaves of an overly large portion of the public.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:25 pmUnicorn farts…
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:26 pmGood point. It’s not Romney’s fault the GOP and the country don’t reject folks with liberal (or squish, if you prefer) records and do reject the conservatives. He showed up. His attacks wouldn’t have worked at all without liberalism. “Rick Perry wants to kill social security” would have been Perry’s argument if the party was conservative enough.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:28 pmAny one of these candidates would be an astounding improvement over another four years of Obama.
Some folks just need a good kick in the pants to help them realize that “perfect is the enemy of good”.
Colonel Haiku (f2b4ef) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:29 pmDo you beat someone with nothing, and more to the point, like Redford’s character said in ‘the candidate’ what do I do when I win, the kind of
threading the needle isn’t conducive to a mandate.
Now Mexico has been in the hands of the PAN, for the better part of dozen years, the Peronists won reelection in large part due to QE 2, (thanks Ben)
narciso (87e966) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:31 pmas for Greece, is there that big a differences between Samaras and Papandreou, how did they end up here in the first place,
Mitt won the nomination tonight.
If Santorum could not hold his large Ohio lead of only a week ago, there is no way he can win before the convention. There is absolute zero chance Santorum wins a brokered convention.
Yet again, Mr. Newt screws over his ideological mates in the conservative movement. Had he done the proper thing and got out two weeks ago, this could have been a historic night for the Right. Way to go, Mr. Speaker, you egomaniacal tool.
Ed from SFV (c11180) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:49 pmPerhaps. I think the real lesson is that money can overwhelm a state with negative attacks, many of which avoid backlash by not stating the candidate they are in support of.
Also, Romney has lost tons of support in states he was leading and then couldn’t bring across the finish line. But I take your point anyway.
True.
I think you’re right that Newt probably should have dropped out, but I also think with these weak candidates, they each assume/hope the others will screw up.
Either Rick or Newt will have to endorse the other, or Romney probably wins. And it would need to be Newt, which is sad because I much prefer Newt.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:53 pmWho could hang a name on you?
it would appear that one Mr. Mittolomew T. Romney can hang a name on this here Super Tuesday.
Congratulations Mr. Governor Romney on this hard-fought victory!
Your opponents have been humbled as much by your might as by your graciousness in victory.
Today is a good day my friends.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:59 pmI an an ABO, even to the point of voting for Ron Paul, if that were necessary. The harm he would do by cutting spending with an ax and cutting aid to feckless allies would still be less than another four years of Obama.
I wish Newt hadn’t been such a horse’s ass for years. I would love to see him take it to Obama. I am praying that Mitt adopts some of his bad cop routine in the general. Please, Mitt, take it to him, go down fighting like a man if you go down!
Patricia (e1d89d) — 3/6/2012 @ 8:59 pmOn a brighter note, Dennis Kucinich loses.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:03 pmSarah voted for Mr. Newt.
Ugh.
Ed from SFV (c11180) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:09 pmhahahahaha
That’s awesome. Maybe he can go work for Raw Story now.
I don’t see how he’s any worse than the other two. He’s been more annoying than usual lately… I’ve gone from being a supporter to being annoyed with some of his comments. But he’s got the most conservative actual record.
Anyway, kingmaker Palin is not, apparently. I think she could have been, at an earlier date, but for some reason it wasn’t meant to be.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:16 pmRomney signals he’s not up for the fight, meaning really put forward what is at stake, and it’s not just the economy, even though that is a big issue,
narciso (87e966) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:19 pmYeah, well there’s that fight, but then there’s the other fight… the one where Romney wants to win more than the other candidates do. This has been what Romney’s lived for since the middle of his governorship, and perhaps much longer than that.
I suspect he will be a more effective self promoter candidate than Mccain, and I meant that in a good way actually.
Fight for what I want done? Not a chance in hell. But at least he isn’t Obama.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:23 pmAh, Super Tuesday. This cat has been kenneled in three of those states voting today. Yes, three. Not that it’s any of your business, but a cat is older than he looks. Those three states will all go for Mittens. Eventually most rational voters will realize that the only candidate remaining who has ever reduced the cost of government is Romney.
Cats Suffocating
Mew
acat (698e89) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:35 pmacat
This is hilarious.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:46 pmI mean, Santorum helped write the welfare reform act. Newt led the house to pass a balanced budget… something that seems completely alien to the fed today. Romney proposed an increase of ten percent in a single year to an entire state budget and also supported Romneycare (which is very costly).
But Romney is the only candidate who has ever reduced spending. Sometimes some folks remind me a lot of Obama supporters who simply were unreasonable in their view that Obama was able to do everything.
No, you can’t use government to solve a lot more problems AND have a less expensive government. You can pretend you’re genius will make it happen, but it’s not really going to happen.
Romneycare was supposed to save money, for example. It didn’t work.
There are arguments for Romney over the other candidates, such as executive experience and political skill. But being the ‘only one’ who cuts spending is not a sincere reason anyone supports him.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 9:52 pmif “Romney” is the answer, then the question was as stupid as the one where “Obama” was the answer.
as i’ve said before, the best thing about living in California today is that i don’t have to hold my nose and vote for Mittens.
screw him and every worthless weak brained scrunt who thought that he was the good way to do.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 3/6/2012 @ 10:40 pmI guess you’re right. I’m in Texas and if they needed my vote they were already doomed.
But I have cherished my chance to vote against Obama ever since the last time I voted against him, and I’m going to take that chance. Hell, voting for a RINO like Romney is more of a statement against Obama than voting for someone I like.
Rush thinks the democrats wanted Romney all along. I don’t know… all three seem vulnerable.
I also saw an amazing exchange between Romney and an Obamacare critic. There’s a reason he’s evasive, falling back to that “I’ve always said” and then non-answer like Obama does.
The guy is OK with the federal mandate. He recommended it to Obama before Obama was OK with it.
I can support Romney over Obama anyway… I think he’ll be a better president. But man this primary has been a mess for conservatives. I had my hopes up.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 10:48 pmRemember: If you don’t have hopes, they can’t use them against you.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 3/6/2012 @ 11:13 pmSMOD
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 11:20 pmDustin, your comment about Romney and ObamaCare just made me throw up in my mouth a little.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (986fac) — 3/6/2012 @ 11:23 pmt(‘.’t)
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 11:58 pmOh wait, that looks like he’s flipping two middle fingers. Not intended.
/Obama intended it, though
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/6/2012 @ 11:59 pmWell Hai, you were right and I was wrong. TN and OH disappointed me. Brokered convention buh, bye.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:51 amOK Romney detractors let’s hear what the next “standard” he has to meet before we move on. He had to win in NH and Florida… he did. He HAD to win in his “home” state of Michigan where he hadn’t lived in 30 or 40 years and he did. Newt won his “home” state by a good margin but Romney won his home state by 72% thus killing that argument that Newt is more loved in the state where he served and who know him best. Virginia, the actual home state of Gingrich and Santorum was completely dismissed and Mitt won that handily because they didn’t even have the organization to get on the ballot. No big deal for a Presidential candidate trying to persuade us all that he’s the one that should face Obama and not Mitt. Then Ohio was the big prize, especially when Santorum was leading… until he lost it to Mitt. Ohio was the “bellweather” state for all elections… until Mitt won it. Now it’s a “moral victory” for Santorum.
How about the speeches by all the candidates? Gingrich and Santorum sounded like the true career politicians they are yet Romney was the one that congratulated them (while they sniped at Romney) and sounded Presidential.
I’m tired of giving a pass to everybody complaining the Romney has all the money and hearing complaints about his “negative” campaign while at the same time he has the MSM, conservative radio, and conservative bloggers eviscerating him every day at no expense to the other candidates. How much money would that cost if they had to pay for it?
Let me guess. If Romney doesn’t win Mississippi then it’s all over for him.
Dave B (982f20) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:14 amHe has to get the most delegates after 50 states have voted. Till then, the show isn’t over.
Or what do you mean by ‘move on’? just hand the nominee to the guy you prefer? Why? Let’s have 50 states vote on it.
Actually the word the court used was “unconstitutional”. It’s not Newt’s fault that the GOP violated the constitution and disrespected the election to favor those with “the organization to get on the ballot” AKA tons of funds and paid staff months before the campaigns are relevant to most grassroots activists and donors.
Newt would have won that state. They gave Romney 4% support in 2008. It’s a huge factor in Romney’s success last night, and that’s sad.
It’s sad you boast that romney won that state handily. This is a major reason the primary is not legitimate and there’s no good reason not to have a brokered convention.
No one is asking for a pass. Romney’s campaign has been negative. And the reason conservatives criticize him is because of his record.
A lot.
Good for Romney winning Ohio. He needed to win to survive, just as he needed to win Michigan to survive. He did what he needed to do.
And it’s impressive how Santorum came out of nowhere, with no executive experience and few accomplishments, has little organization, and seems to be able to go toe to toe with the better spoken and coifed establishment next in line Obamacare guy. Just imagine if we could combine Romney’s presentation with Santorum’s authenticity! Actually, I don’t think that’s possible on a fundamental level.
No, I think we are beyond that. It’s Romney’s to lose and he probably won’t. But let all 50 states have a say. Let’s see if Santorum and Newt can make a deal.
And let me just say that Romney’s respectful tenor in his speech after a good day at the polls means less than a respectful tenor during the campaign. I hope Romney can fight Obama like he fights conservatives.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:46 amThe south is not buying mittens this winter.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:09 amDustin: I never said anything that would lead anyone to think that all 50 states shouldn’t have a say. On the contrary that’s what I want. My complaint is that many of us refuse to accept what the rest of us are voting for and are setting unreasonable hurdles for Romney when we don’t for the others. One problem has been the refusal of many conservatives to identify that other conservatives like the guy, have already gone through the thought process on what is at stake, and have made our decisions despite everything else. I, for one, could care less who thought what conservative thought longer than the other guy. I, for one, care more about beating Obama and replacing him with someone that has executive experience and business acumen as opposed to career politicians that have never governed a single day in their careers who have lived off the public teat their entire lives. The problem that many Romney conservative supporters have had is NOT that others support other candidates. It’s that WE are being questioned and minimized if we come to the conslusion that we want Romney. I’m a Christian and a devout Catholic and it hasn’t escaped me that many “Evangelicals” openly support other candidates because they don’t like Romney because he is a Mormon. Are you kidding me? Ignoring that Mormons are some of the kindest, most gentle, charitable, and honorable Christians on the face of the earth I still can’t understand how people could vote like that while Obama kneels at the alter of Reverend Wright.
I’m going to come right out and say what a lot of people suspect. I distrust anyone that wears their religion on their sleeves. Most good people don’t do that. They just live their lives with no pomp and circumstance. Beware of people that feel the need to preach to others or who feel the need to demonstrate how religious they really are. Instead look at those who hesitate to brag about what they do or have done. Romney is frustratingly humble about what he has done socially to the point pundits are yelling at him about it while Newt wanted to sign a “contract” not to cheat on his wife and Santorum continues to lecture everybody.
Dave B (982f20) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:04 amWhat was with Newt carrying on like he was Uncle Rico for 25 minutes last night?
Colonel Haiku (8c744f) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:39 amNote to SarahP: looks like he convinced the folks in Alaska, Sweetums…
ROMNEY: ID, MA, OH, VA, VT, AK…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/super-tuesday-mitt-romney-focuses-on-economy-while-rivals-seek-openings/2012/03/06/gIQAr7npuR_print.html
Colonel Haiku (8c744f) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:44 amKarl, you didn’t mention my favorite space rock. I’m still thinking he could bowl over ALL the delegates.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:24 amAlso, as a Virginian, I wuz robbed. Gingrich should have been on the ballot, and it’s VAGOP who rigged it to keep him and others off.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:26 amthis process needs a little more chop chop
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:43 am“Actually the word the court used was “unconstitutional”. It’s not Newt’s fault that the GOP violated the constitution and disrespected the election to favor those with “the organization to get on the ballot” AKA tons of funds and paid staff months before the campaigns are relevant to most grassroots activists and donors.”
Dustin – Actually, the Virginia rules have not changed since 2000 and plenty of candidates managed to make it on the ballot in 2008. So I fault Newt, Perry and Santorum for excessive whining after the fact.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:02 amAcme® anvil drops
Colonel Haiku (8c744f) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:25 amon coyote narrative
hate when that happens!
primaries are fun
Colonel Haiku (8c744f) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:27 amwatching repetitive bets
coming up snake eyes
If he wins the GOP primary and is elected President, I hope Romney remembers what a weak candidate he’s made and he spends the next four years trying to please his base. My fear is he will see his election as a mandate to be bipartisan.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:35 amHe’ll be a McCain who is animated and with better hair.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:50 amWhy are you addressing me? I do not think Mormonism is relevant any more than Obama being black is relevant. I do not accept those who assert this is the explanation, especially when Romney urged for a federal ind mandate and also has Romneycare on his record.
There are ideological reasons conservatives reject Romney. I assume there are some out there who supported Romney because he is Mormon and some who rejected romney because he is not, but if that is the case, in both cases I think that is very misguided.
Naw, the courts said excluding signatures for the basis they did was unconstitutional.
The rules were wrong. Period. Mitt Romney’s state chair complained that putting the popular candidate on the ballot would be unfair to Mitt, but it would have been fair to the voters who preferred him.
Having bizarre access requirements that are administered in an arbitrary and unlawful fashion (again, it is simply a fact now… it was unconstitutional) favors those with the most access and the most funding far earlier than the politicians that build support closer to elections.
Also, you are mistaken on the facts. This 15k threshold to avoid scrutiny… they didn’t do that before. Prior to the 2012 election, and candidate that offered 10k signatures did not suffer this scrutiny (again, unconstitutional scrutiny) unless another candidate challenged them.
What legitimate ballot access principle would keep Newt off the ballot when he indeed did produce over ten thousand signatures and was by far the most popular candidate there, leaving only Romney who got 4% in 2008, and the space alien?
It’s not legitimate.
The reason the threshold was raised from 10k to 15k this year was a response to a lawsuit that hasn’t even finished yet. They indeed changed the rules this year.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:05 amDave, I had a typo so my comment is less clear than it should be.
Those who supported or rejected Romney because of Mormonism are misguided, but the same is true of those who reject Santorum because of his religious preferences (such as his personal view of contraception, which he has noted is not something he would enforce as president, which is something he’s been criticized for even by Republicans who support a different candidate).
Daleyrocks, Perry and Newt would have easily made the ballot under the 2008 rules. Do you understand why the GOP changed the rules? Do you even know what changed?
What benefit is there in requiring 15k instead of 10k? And the way they excluded signatures was unconstitutional.
The result was also just obviously wrong. Newt would have won the state and is eligible, so why exclude him? If candidates and Newt and Perry’s level are excluded, the only result will be ‘next in line’ candidates who have lined up support years in advance. I want reformers instead.
This has really got to bug a lot of VA Republicans.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:11 amI think we’ll see Romney return to his pro Obamacare ways.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:13 am80. “The south is not buying mittens this winter”.
Nor the Mid-West.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:16 amI don’t think the GOP is stronger when its state level organizations winnow out the competition from the primaries. I think it’s weaker. The primary should be a test of who can get the most votes (and to be fair, that is Romney nationally, however that is after a large number of Newt votes were changed into Ron Paul and Romney votes).
The final result would have been quite different too. Romney needs to outspend his foes 4:1. Fighting in an additional state that goes to Newt would have completely changed Super Tuesday. He easily could have lost Ohio since he had to plaster the state with ads to squeak out a win. And Romney merely did OK yesterday.
It’s not fair to blame Romney for VA’s mistake, even if those who governed over this mistake like Romney. I think their support of insider friendly ballot access simply reflects their vision for the GOP and their opposition to the Tea Party, and Romney does too. No corruption there (I’m not being sarcastic). It’s not the only state like this, and these rules need to be changed. Also, they need a write in option. If they had one, that would have given the conservatives a fighting chance.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:23 am“Dustin – Actually, the Virginia rules have not changed since 2000 and plenty of candidates managed to make it on the ballot in 2008. So I fault Newt, Perry and Santorum for excessive whining after the fact.
Naw, the courts said excluding signatures for the basis they did was unconstitutional…….
Also, you are mistaken on the facts. This 15k threshold to avoid scrutiny… they didn’t do that before. Prior to the 2012 election, and candidate that offered 10k signatures did not suffer this scrutiny (again, unconstitutional scrutiny) unless another candidate challenged them.”
Dustin – They’ve been unconstitutional since 2000. Deciding to finally whine about them now after not making the ballot is a sore loser’s game, especially when it has not been an obstacle in prior elections.
You are dead wrong in your assertion about the 10,000 signatures as I have pointed out on numerous occasions. Erick Erickson himself wrote about the signature checking in the 2008 primary. It’s just another myth propagated by the NotRomney’s as Dave B. pointed out above.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:03 am“Daleyrocks, Perry and Newt would have easily made the ballot under the 2008 rules. Do you understand why the GOP changed the rules? Do you even know what changed?
But what has not been reported is that in the only other presidential primaries in which Virginia required 10,000 signatures (2000, 2004, and 2008) the signatures were not checked. Any candidate who submitted at least 10,000 raw signatures, on notarized sheets, and which had at least 400 signatures from each U.S. House district, was put on the ballot.”
Dustin – Did you read Erickson’s first person account of signature checking in the 2008 election?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:16 am“If he wins the GOP primary and is elected President, I hope Romney remembers what a weak candidate he’s made and he spends the next four years trying to please his base.”
DRJ – I’m not sure I understand your comment and what it say about the other candidates.
That Romney is still in contention at this point signals to me that voters think he is a stronger candidate than those that have dropped out – Pawlenty, Bachmann, Cain, Perry, and Huntsman.
He’s demonstrated a solid base of support throughout the campaign, unlike the remaining candidates.
I admire Santorum coming from nowhere, but I think a lot of that is picking up support from candidates falling by the wayside or their unforced errors.
A lot of people don’t like him as a candidate, but I think it’s a little unfair to call any of the remaining three, with possible exception of Newt at this point, weak after watching five others drop out earlier.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:27 amSantorum is weak because he is very dividey plus also bigoty and he will never be president no matter who he blows.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:32 amMr. Feets – Mr. Obama will always have Larry Sinclair.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:43 amReal Clear Politics estimate of how the 731 delegates from all primaries and caucuses to-date will be divided:
Icy (a4ce3e) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:53 amRomney = 55.3%
Santorum = 22.0%
Paul = 8.3%
Gingrich = 14.4%
daleyrocks:
I’m not saying anything about the other candidates. I’m saying Romney is not a reliable conservative. I also think Romney is a weak candidate who has trouble beating opponents despite having more money and organization — things he claims are his strengths but that don’t seem to be paying off that well for him up to this point.
If Romney is only squeaking by in the primary, I fear he won’t be able to beat an opponent like Obama who has the media on his side … plus more money, organization, and likeability than Romney’s GOP opponents have.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:54 amBut I’ve always had these fears about Romney, daleyrocks, so feel free to take my opinion with a grain of salt.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:54 am102. March will not decide the contest:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/07/no-clear-path-to-victory-for-romney.html
The superdelegates have insufficient reason to be coerced at this point.
And the reason being the only electoral votes the GOP can count are MA and the Mormon West.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:03 pmThe situation in Virginia was unfortunate, but Santorum’s big mistake was in Ohio. He would have won the popular vote if he had manage to qualify in all districts.
Icy (a4ce3e) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:04 pmOne of Romney’s staffers saying it would take an act of God for anyone else to get ahead of R. Which is likely true, but cheez, that’s just asking for it.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:04 pmGary, unless Santorum or newt endorse the other, I think Romney is very likely to prevail. And even if they do, I think Romney will probably prevail.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:04 pmGiven all this electability trumps ideology and authenticity and honesty talk, Romney sure better win in November or a lot of people will look like idiots.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:05 pmRomney will never get a clue:
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=38076
No sense waiting for the epiphany, it will never come.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:06 pmGood post Dustin @ 109
I was about to note my personal feelings that if Romney wins the nomination and he loses, it will be a bad bad thing for the GOP. A third party will be a very real option for many.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:09 pm“I’m saying Romney is not a reliable conservative.”
DRJ – I understand that’s your position. What I’m pointing out is that there are apparently enough people out there supporting his presence in the race while others have gone by the wayside to say that a good chunk of Republicans do not necessarily view him as a weak candidate or at a minimum the least bad candidate to take on Obama.
To me, the primaries are a referendum on the candidates running, not those not running. You have to choose from what’s in front of you and it’s wasted energy to moan about who shoulda, coulda, etc.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:11 pmGood point, Icy. I have a larger point than just complaining about VA. I think ballot access shouldn’t be that difficult. If a candidate sucks, let the voters prove it. We do not need to make it so difficult. This is a huge country and any true reform outsider candidate will have a very difficult time qualifying everywhere. This is particularly relevant today, with the new rules for how delegates are assigned. Even states you’re going to lose are relevant.
This heavily favors someone who enters the race with tons of funding and connections. He can pull in a few delegates even in places he loses. And I don’t think it results in a stronger candidate who overcame these hurdles.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:12 pm108. There is no chance for anyone but Romney but a first ballot victory cannot be won until June. None of these guys are dropping.
So it will be up to the RNC ladies and gents and they know it already.
They’ll be damned either way.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:13 pm“Did you read Erickson’s first person account of signature checking in the 2008 election?”
For some reason Erickson did not mention this account last Fall and let people like Moe Lane and others perpetuate the myth on Red State that signatures had never been checked in Virginia primaries before. That rank dishonesty firmly cemented my opinion of Erickson as a hack.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:15 pmI think (and hope) that this isn’t an accurate synopsis. Romney wants to win a hell of a lot more than Mccain did. Romney has often attempted to pose as above the fray in insincere ways, and I think we can expect him to attack Obama aggressively while posing as above the fray and focused on the economy.
Mccain’s problem wasn’t that he offered respect to Obama… it was that his entire campaign didn’t fight. If there’s one thing I give Romney’s campaign credit for, it’s that they will fight like their life depends on it.
However, Mccain was not quite as vulnerable to attacks as Romney is, and Obama’s campaign loves to fight too. I think they hope to see a very, very ugly election that polarizes and rallies their turnout.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:19 pmI know WI and MN pretty well. The base in each state is outnumbered but quite resolute. Do not expect them to turnout for Romney tho beaten with in an inch of there lives with the ABO stick.
That story is likely to be repeated through the Mid-West and Deep South.
ABO isn’t enough to win the general here.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:20 pmNone of these guys are dropping.
— Nor Luap will stay in. Santorum and Gingrich may soon face some fundraising challenges.
Icy (a4ce3e) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:25 pm116. Remembering Lincoln’s first replacement of McClellan, who would not fight, he chose Burnside, who butchered the Army of the Potomac.
We constantly laud the Israelis for their ‘fight’ but with their generals and Kissinger only God and individual tank commanders got them through the ’73 war.
The fight in FL lost McBain 20 pts with Indies.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:38 pmPeople vote their bottom line.
More than 47% pay no Federal income tax. Local, State and Federal workers are paid better than that 47%.
Just what incentive is Rummy giving them with “the economy isn’t Jugear’s fault but he cannot take credit for the fact that it’s improving”?
Foreign policy is the only target he’s hitting and they aren’t lethal shots at that.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 12:51 pmI’m not moaning about the candidates, daleyrocks. I’ve consistently said I think it’s a good field. Frankly, Romney’s the weak link in the field because he has enough money, experience, good character, and organization to be a great candidate … yet he’s having a hard time breaking out from the field.
I also worry that he’s not a reliable conservative but that’s not my concern for the election. That’s my concern in the event he wins the Presidency and decides to govern as something other than a conservative.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:01 pm==More than 47% pay no Federal income tax==
True. But they do still have to buy gas and are definitely noticing grocery and other inflation as well. Many would like to work more than they do. Not all that 47% are gonna vote to retain Obama.
elissa (097996) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:09 pm122. Agreed, that’s why the anointed is such an abysmal candidate. He’s totally out of touch with the electorate’s realities.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:43 pm“I’m not moaning about the candidates, daleyrocks.”
DRJ – I know you haven’t and I wasn’t pointing at you, but a lot of folks spend considerable time complaining about the current field, who dropped out, who’s not running, as if it made a d*mn difference.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:32 pmbut a lot of folks spend considerable time complaining about the current field, who dropped out, who’s not running, as if it made a d*mn difference.
Comment by daleyrocks
and not to name names
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:38 pmbut one guy like coyote
b*tch in full estrus
They voted for that rocket scientist Lisa Murkowski, who regretted she had voted for Blunt/Rubio, because of the lies that the left
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:41 pmhad put forward, naturally she is Mitt’s point
person, a fan of Obamacare and carbon capture
systems,
Well, there’s not much to gain fighting about it anymore. We had out candidate and he didn’t win, and I think that’s probably a reflection of the values of our party. Baby boomers (enough of them, anyway) do not like the idea of reform. Both parties like to point the finger, but when someone starts rolling up their sleeves for reform, all hell breaks loose.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:51 pmThe MSM and much of the blogosphere have a keen and abiding interest in keeping the primary race alive and in prolonging the distraction. The longer this goes on, the longer it will take before Republicans can focus our full, undivided, steadfast, relentless attention on spotlighting Barack Obama’s record of malfeasance, crony capitalism, malignant incompetence and economic destruction.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:20 pmI hope this is a Republican year and the GOP wins the Presidency, the House and the Senate. In November, I’m voting a GOP straight-ticket and that’s something I’ve only done once in 38 years.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:23 pmI hope the GOP wins the Senate back and the WH too. I was also hoping this to be a pivotal year that was a mandate for a balanced budget, but it’s not and that’s just the way things work sometimes.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:28 pmI’ve never strayed from a straight GOP ticket in 40, but I’ve been told you have a different breed of Democrat in Texas, DRJ.
I was schooled and raised behind the Orange Curtain.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:29 pmTrue, but as Dustin knows well, you can get an interesting variety of Republican sometimes, exhibit A, Clayton Williams, and then on the other hand, there are the surprisingly splungey types like David Dewhurst, a former Company man in Bolivia, among other things,
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:35 pmNow, there are better ways to say this;
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/07/mitt-romney-its-not-like-the-president-can-precisely-set-the-price-at-the-pump/
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:38 pm“We had out candidate and he didn’t win, and I think that’s probably a reflection of the values of our party. Baby boomers (enough of them, anyway) do not like the idea of reform.”
Dustin – That is certainly one opinion.
Others may view prospects of reform as more realistic through different candidates or the prospects of election differently.
That doesn’t mean the other people are horrible and should be kicked out of the tent as traitors to the cause.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:39 pmYeah, let’s hope David is not the Senate Candidate. It would be a rehash of KBH, and Texas should be at the forefront of conservative representation in the Senate.
Still shocked that Romney got more than ten votes nationwide after it was revealed that his claims he never supported a federal mandate were shown to be untrue. Blows my mind.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:39 pmInteresting post from Paul Mirengoff, by way of Scott Johnson…
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/03/one-less-thing-for-romney-to-worry-about.php
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:39 pm“Now, there are better ways to say this;”
narciso – He said it just fine if you listen to something other than a truncated clip.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:41 pmwe pig overlords
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:42 pmas described by Big Zero
should dig deep for Cause
I mean, Romney is basically the father of Obamacare. It’s his fault.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:42 pmshallow research, backward thinking.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:43 pmAnd Romney’s competitors… they are an embarrassment. Every one of them. What a glorious comeback it would have been if Perry had responded to Romney’s sneering bet gaffe by pulling out a yellowed copy of USA today and reading what Romney asked Obama to do.
But alas, no.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:44 pm$10,000 is what many conservatives in MA had to pay when they lost their bet and were forced into an economic arrangement by the government. Still bugs me that Perry didn’t reply to this (or anything) very effectively. He also often did not come across as authentic, which is interesting to me as Santorum will often annoy be but I know he’s pretty much on the level.
Perry’s record and policies, Santorum’s frankness, Romney’s presentation… I think these are somewhat impossible to combine without Obama level distortions.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:47 pmRomney doesn’t make the connection between Obama’s
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:57 pmat best indeference about $5.00 a gallon oil, (I keep pangs even writing this) and his deleting the Arctic Survey, the war on fracking, carried out by
one of his detailees from the Weld/Cellucci era, MC arthy the over subsidization of new untried energy retreaval techniques like Algae,(seriously is this on,) what’s next unobtanium,
“Now, there are better ways to say this;”
narciso – He said it just fine if you listen to something other than a truncated clip.
If that answer was just fine, then we are well and truly f@cked
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:06 pmColonel,
There is typically at least one Libertarian on the ballot that I like in every election, especially in local races. But I don’t vote a straight-ticket because I won’t vote for a RINO, especially in state and local races. Even if the general election race is uncontested — and it often is in some Texas counties where the real race is in the primary — I won’t vote for a faux conservative who talks the talk but won’t walk the walk.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:20 pmhttp://www.nationalreview.com/corner/292198/supporting-romneycare-opposing-obamacare-david-french
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:20 pmnarciso and Dustin,
I, too, hope Dewhurst doesn’t win the primary. I’m supporting Ted Cruz for the Texas Senate seat.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:23 pmDid you vote twice for the election of George W. Bush as POTUS, DRJ?
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:31 pmNow, that’s a ‘look squirrel’ from someone who should know better, granted he was banboozled by
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:32 pmthe Massachussetts legislature, but why did he propose the same mechanism in 2009,
Yes, in 2000 and 2004. That’s what you meant, right? I’m not into voter fraud.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:43 pmI was a Bush voter because of national security, not values or fiscal restraint. I thought he was a strong war President then and I still think that.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:44 pmBy the way, Haiku, my comment that “I won’t vote for a faux conservative who talks the talk but won’t walk the walk” wasn’t a backhanded jab at Romney. There are a number of Texas politicians who fit that bill, too, including my current Congressman. I’ve never voted for him and he’s been in office for years … but I have that luxury because West Texas RINOs are still conservative.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:46 pm“Romney doesn’t make the connection between Obama’s
at best indeference about $5.00 a gallon oil, (I keep pangs even writing this) and his deleting the Arctic Survey, the war on fracking, carried out by
one of his detailees from the Weld/Cellucci era, MC arthy the over subsidization of new untried energy retreaval techniques like Algae,(seriously is this on,) what’s next unobtanium,”
narciso and JD – What Romney said was 100% true. Do you disagree with his facts? What is your beef?
He went on to explain all the different types of energy he wants to open up to further development in the U.S. that Obama has restricted. Do you have a beef with that part of Romney’s explanation?
If you listened to Romney’s speech last night, he goes directly after Obama on high energy prices.
Here’s a scenario, if Saudia Arabia starts increasing production and prices come down, is Obama off the hook? No, because he has strangled U.S. exploration and development. Romney doesn’t give him any rhetorical cover for that.
Wake up and take your anti-Romney blinders off.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:54 pmMore on #153 – narciso – Sounds like you did not even listen to the freaking clip from CCBN.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:57 pmOne more anti-Romney commenter’s credibility down the drain.
Tell me about that rrgi again narciso.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:58 pmToo abstract, he needs to put it concretely, this is exactly what he wants to do and why, the Dems did not hesitate to lie about oil prices back then,
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:10 pmthe least we can do is tell the truth, also QE #
is also inflating the money supply making it more expensive.
Yep, that’s what I meant, DRJ. I voted for him both times, as well and for the same reasons and more. But I definitely believe he was nowhere near “conservative”.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:19 pm“Too abstract, he needs to put it concretely”
narciso – Your comment saying stuff like Romney doesn’t mention the war on fracking indicates to me you did not even watch the clip so I call bulldookey on your too abstract claim.
Try again.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:23 pmDaley – he goes after his fellow severe conservatives harder than he does Barcky.
JD (d246fe) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:25 pmRomney is just one of those people you would like to see get kicked in the nuts on tv
But he’ll be a fine president.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:35 pmDaley – he goes after his fellow severe conservatives harder than he does Barcky.
Comment by JD
More typical horsesh*t. Listen to last night’s speeches and then tell us who is focused on Obama.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:05 pm“Daley – he goes after his fellow severe conservatives harder than he does Barcky.”
JD – Complete BS. What was wrong with what he said? Address the point or did you skip the video as well?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:35 pmGET OUT THE FAINTING COUCHES ONCE MORE, ROMNEY MAKES TRUE STATEMENT, ANGERS PURE CONSERVATIVES!!!!!!!!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:38 pmWell, my message is I’m not going to say outrageous things about the president or about my opponents. It gets headlines and a lot of excitement, and it gets you, by the way, a number of days in the polls to get a nice little bump. But I’m going to talk about the real issues Americans face and talk with respect about people who have differing views. I’m not going to attack them personally. I mean, I know that’s fun, but it’s just not productive. And we need, as a nation, to come together to recognize that even though we have differing views about the country and about where we should go, we all love the country.
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:44 pmI don’t see a thing wrong with narcisco’s link. Pointing to a different speech does not really defend what Romney said. Add that to his comments about arousing the base by setting his hair on fire and his words above …
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:51 pmI guess since it is inevitable, I should just sit back and take it. It sucks when leftists piss on your leg and try to convince you it is raining. It is even worse when your own team tries to do the same thing.
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:58 pm“I don’t see a thing wrong with narcisco’s link.”
JD – Neither did I, so I don’t understand why you’re complaining. Please explain.
“Daley – he goes after his fellow severe conservatives harder than he does Barcky.”
Start with Mitt speech from last night around 4:00 minutes in. You just havwe not been paying attention.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:06 pmJD – “Add that to his comments about arousing the base by setting his hair on fire and his words above …” and #164, are you Pointing to a different speech
does not really defendto criticize what Romney said?Really?
Why not focus on what he actually said that you claimed meant we were “well and truly f@cked”?
I want you to back up that ignorant comment, with all due respect.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:10 pmNot gonna miss it. Not for a moment. Nope.
I Got Bupkis, Fomenter of The Easy Solution... (8e2a3d) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:04 amWell how about he just excises that part of his remarks, which always seem at diminishing any real concerns those of us, who have chronicling the manifold injuries that this administration has been
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:55 amweighing upon us. Would Reagan, much less Nixon
have taken this tack.
The best news out of Super Tuesday comes in twos:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73733.html
Nor Luap may not help McBain enough to throw the VP to Rand.
And McBain’s style is being crimped:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/fundraising-gap-between-romney-and-santorum-narrows-dramatically_633307.html
Super PACs are doing fine, it’s the $2500 ceiling thats hurting spendthrift candidates who obey laws.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:02 amYou can’t mean what you say unless you pound the podium like Adolf Hitler or smack the table with your Buster Browns like Nikita.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:20 amDon’t worry Baggers, Willard will recant all the Dimmi talk and fight Ogabe tooth and nail just as soon as the H8er’s drop and fall into line.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:06 amWhen you’ve lost George Will and the Krautscheisster, you’ve lost the GOP MSM.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:10 amPrediction: Gary G. will be proven wrong again, thus continuing his string of inaccurate opining. I gots 100 bucks what says no brokered convention and a new president will be elected in November 2012.
Are you game, Gary?
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:15 amKnowing of one poster’s penchant to focus on the important issues facing the nation, here’s a public service that should hold interest…
http://t.co/hjXySAU6
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:29 am175. No brokered convention is a safe bet, a new president looks to be 50:50. 1.0 times 0.5 is a coin flip.
Sorry, I haven’t earned $100 in over a year.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:01 amWell Will’s preemptive surrender, makes no sense,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:03 ambut he’s been far from relevant for a long time now.
It is very amusing seeing what is totally Romney’s fault: a bad blood campaign full of lies has left fans of his vanquished foes pretty irritated. Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Iowa… blanketed with negative ads.
But as that happened, Romney would often complain about negativity. He would pretend they had gone negative first and forced him into it. He would strike a comity pose.
That is his plan with Obama, too. His pose of civility to Obama, his polite comments towards Obama, those are meant to distance Romney from Romney’s campaign. It’s not like John Mccain’s campaign, which will actually hold back most of their ammo. Romney wants to win. He’s going to pose in the Mccain way on TV while his campaign attacks Obama. That’s my hunch, anyway.
Those who were actually happy with Rick Perry’s comment on social security or opposition to the ind mandate… those who actually respected that Newt was exonerated of what Romney obnoxiously called “disgrace” 1000 times… they might be sore that Romney is winning, but most of these folks are much more sore with Obama.
If Romney really means to play nice to Obama, though, then it’s going to really irritate all those conservatives who were trashed and saw their values and candidates trashed. I can’t tell you how many times I saw a Republican suggest MA and TX aren’t really different… which is equal to saying conservative policies aren’t relevant.
If that actually turns out to be sincere… well, Romney won’t win.
I think there’s a mystery in politics that some don’t grasp: Republicans don’t win the center by being centrist. They just look weak.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:13 am“That is his plan with Obama, too. His pose of civility to Obama, his polite comments towards Obama, those are meant to distance Romney from Romney’s campaign.”
Dustin – You’re not paying attention either, but then again, why would you, you hate the man.
It is much easier to faint over an extracted pull quote and snarky headline from Tina Korbe.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:44 am“I can’t tell you how many times I saw a Republican suggest MA and TX aren’t really different… which is equal to saying conservative policies aren’t relevant.”
Dustin – I can’t tell you how many times I saw comments serially misinterpreted that way to say that Texas government data should be compared straight up to Massachusetts state data because the comparisons came out looking so good in the favor of Texas, while making adjustments for the differences in the way the two states are structures and operated to put the comparisons on a more apples to apples basis eliminates a lot of the unfavorability. I can’t get over the number of times I had to explain comparing apples to oranges was not valid.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:50 am