A night with no winners

posted at 3:40 pm on March 7, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Even though he’s on temporary assignment to the North Pole to monitor polar ice levels, our host Ed Morrissey still checked in on the Super Tuesday results via his regular column at CNN. In a similar theme with some other underwhelmed observers, Ed saw the results as A Night With No Winners.

Going into the Super Tuesday contests, the goals of each candidate were clear. Mitt Romney needed to beat Rick Santorum in Ohio and Tennessee to knock him out of the race. Santorum needed to win more primaries than Newt Gingrich to knock him out of the race. Gingrich needed to win something, and so did Ron Paul. So did they achieve their goals?

For the most part … no…

Santorum’s surprisingly strong win in Tennessee (and an expectedly strong win in Oklahoma) delayed Romney’s triumph but didn’t necessarily advance his own nomination hopes. He also stunned Ron Paul in North Dakota’s nonbinding caucus, where Paul had pinned his hopes for a game-changing triumph.

However, Santorum has now lost a second Rust Belt, blue-collar state to Romney after leading by double digits in pre-primary polls in Ohio, and even Santorum’s Tennessee win won’t overshadow losing a state that he needed to win to make the claim that he connects better with working-class voters.

But… but.. but… Ed! What about Ron Paul!?!?!?

As for Paul, he only became a factor in Virginia, where a surprisingly strong second-place finish netted him three delegates, as it did in Vermont, where his second-place finish was more disappointing. In North Dakota, Paul trailed Santorum by 12 points and only finished ahead of Romney by 4 despite having personally campaigned in the state during the caucuses themselves. Paul may get headlines, but he’s not winning enough delegates to matter — and fumbling the expectations game will cost him even more media credibility.

Well, that’s rather harsh, isn’t it? No matter… you guys know the drill after long years of doing this. Read the whole thing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Boo hoo, boohoo… First it was the Republican party that didn’t make you feel welcome now it is Hot air. Don’t like it —> that’s the door..

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM

I’ve been a member here since 2007, so you’re the one who can just go take hike, troll.

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I cannot support Romney if he’s the Republican party nominne

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Aye.

He’s a democrat with better business sense.

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Very true Silver but it runs much deeper than that for me… peace

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 7:10 PM

I’ve been a member here since 2007, so you’re the one who can just go take hike, troll.

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Why? I am not the one griping about bloggers(our hosts BTW) having a difference of opinions-you are.. Guess that makes YOU the troll no matter how long you have been a “member.”

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 7:11 PM

A Night with No Winners? Huh?
Majority of states, huge majority of delegates and popular vote… Yes, Romney was such a loser last night…..
Why the reluctance to say what is blatantly obvious… Romney all but sewed up the nomination last night. The math simply isn’t there for either Santorum or Gingrich. It is virtually impossible for them to win from here. They just can’t catch up with Romney. Only an act of god can take the nomination from him now, but the media are so reluctant to acknowledge it…

PSConservative on March 7, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I cannot support Romney if he’s the Republican party nominne

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Thanks for sharing that.

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 4:30 PM

alchemist19 aka the “Charlie Crist” of Hotair

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I cannot support Romney if he’s the Republican party nominne

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 PM

People like you are the reason that Mitt will lose the next couple states that are being held in the deep south. We shouldve let the South secede after all. Bunch of bigots and idiots which is the ONLY reason Mitt cant win in the South.

Jailbreak on March 7, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Shouldn’t you get back to your game of naked twister with “1984 in real life?”

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 7:29 PM

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Once upon a time, this site was considered to be a serious political blog known for its thoughtful and intellectually honest center-right commentary – Now, since the Townhall takeover, it has become nothing more than a place run by teenyboppers and right wing shills blindly propping up a SoCon point of view. Sorry that there are still some us here who remember better, and who aren’t willing to go into that dark night quietly.

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Once upon a time, this site was considered to be a serious political blog known for its thoughtful and intellectually honest center-right commentary

Michelle Malkin owned the site, and she is a self-labeled conservative -not center right, but if that is the narrative you want to tell yourself- Go ahead.

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 7:34 PM

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Amen.

One of the things I’m finding so disturbing is that the way articles are written and the bias that’s being shown, has divided people who’ve been here forever. I’ve always been outspoken at HotAir, but many of the so-called, “voices of reason” have become nasty as hell. Thanks for the new rules RNC!

BettyRuth on March 7, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Romney won last night. Any other interpretation is misguided. Any attempt to portray last night’s results as anything but an overall win for Romney is pure meaningless, wishful-thinking spin.

cicerone on March 7, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Michelle Malkin owned the site, and she is a self-labeled conservative -not center right, but if that is the narrative you want to tell yourself- Go ahead.

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Michelle owned the site, but AP was in control of the content until the Townhall takeover – Go ahead and tell yourself different.

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:53 PM

cannot support Romney if he’s the Republican party nominne

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Aye.

He’s a democrat with better business sense.

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Very true Silver but it runs much deeper than that for me… peace

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 7:10 PM

If we’re going to label Romney a Democrat with better business sense then we should start labeling some other people, too. For starters Mike Huckabee is basically a Democrat with some religious convictions.

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

For starters Mike Huckabee is basically a Democrat with some religious convictions.

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Umm, Well your dead on there.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Michelle owned the site, but AP was in control of the content until the Townhall takeover – Go ahead and tell yourself different.

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:53 PM

You mean the same Allahpundit who has TEN post between top picks and the blog.. that guy? Oh yeah, they have really stifled his voice//

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM

At least nobody can say Hot Air favors Romney anymore…

Romney obviously won Super Tuesday.

6/10 states, with several above 60% wins and delegates from all of them.

scotash on March 7, 2012 at 8:06 PM

I disagree with the title of this piece. As an Ohioan, seeing state embarassment Dennis Kucinich finally ousted from Congress means, really, that we ALL won.

arik1969 on March 7, 2012 at 8:17 PM

You can’t blame them. They’re running a business and more competitive races keep the ratings up. There is a reason Ohio wasn’t called when 99.4% of the vote was in and Mitt had a 12,000 vote lead.

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Breitbart was right, the media is the enemy.

I just hate to see the intellectual dishonesty here make Hot Air “the media” as well.

scotash on March 7, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Romney won. Get over it.

aloysiusmiller on March 7, 2012 at 8:30 PM

The title and narrative of this piece reflects Ed’s hopes rather than the reality of a BIG Romney win and plays directly into the MSM meme that Romney is weak and a poor candidate who cannot bring his own party together.
Mitt has 56% of the delegates so far (approx) DESPITE the new rules that make all the contests to date proportional . After Super Tuesday last time out…BHO had 50% vs. Hillary et. al. and I didn’t notice anyone claiming he couldn’t “seal the deal”. McCain had 60% with a winner take all helping.

The truth of the matter is that Romney had a very good night and won an outright majority of delegates in a 4 way race…
The truth is that there is no longer ANY plausible way for Rick or Newt to get to 1144 delegates.
The truth is that last nite sealed the deal for Mitt…though that won’t be evident for another month.
C’mon Ed…give it up for Mitt! He’ll be a great President, especially if we elect a good CONSERVATIVE House & Senate. He’ll sign anything they pass and give us 2 more Supremes to count on as well.

camaraderie on March 7, 2012 at 8:36 PM

You mean the same Allahpundit who has TEN post between top picks and the blog.. that guy? Oh yeah, they have really stifled his voice//

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM

You’re really just not getting it, are you?

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 8:55 PM

I like Ed Morrissey.

SparkPlug on March 7, 2012 at 9:08 PM

What a biased piece. Romney won and the Santorum bloggers here play it off as no one won.

Mormontheman on March 7, 2012 at 9:08 PM

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 5:20 PM

I would have never thought that I am going to defend Jailbreak, but he replied to a commenter who thinks that the earth is 6000 years old and who wrote in another thread that the US deserves extinction, because we are going to nominate the candidate with the wrong God.

Jailbreak’s reply was over the top as well, though.

Gelsomina on March 7, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Santorum tied Romney yesterday. The popular vote is tied, give or take a million. The delegate count is tied, give or take a couple hundred. Stop bragging.

Rusty Allen on March 7, 2012 at 9:10 PM

I cannot support Romney if he’s the Republican party nominne

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Aye. He’s a democrat with better business sense.

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Very true Silver but it runs much deeper than that for me… peace

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 7:10 PM

If we’re going to label Romney a Democrat with better business sense then we should start labeling some other people, too. For starters Mike Huckabee is basically a Democrat with some religious convictions.

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Umm, Well your dead on there.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 7:58 PM

There’s something mentally wrong with you people.

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 9:18 PM

All you conservative talking heads, Mitt-haters and so-called “non-establishment” conservatives – can’t you see you are playing right into the media’s hands? The media not only wants Obama re-elected, they want this race to go farther and get nastier. As Santorum is showcased as the only one who can beat Romney, the left is using Santorum to scare women and independents. Just why do you think Obama seems to be looking better? It’s because we are looking even worse. Santorum and Newt have no chance to get the nomination and the media knows this, yet they are egging you folks on which is damaging the GOP brand, I fear, beyond repair. And you folks are buying into it, lock, stock and barrel. In the end, Romney will be the nominee but all these conservatives speaking out against him will indeed weaken him. If you call him weak long enough – he will be weak and by your very own hands. Prior to the primary process, Romney beat Obama more often in head to head matchups and had a large majority of independents supporting him. Now, not so much. This is damaging the eventual GOP nominee and you just all seem to not care, you just hate Romney. After all this, I have to admit that I think you all hate Romney more than Obama. Why can’t you get this through your heads – who has the only legitimate path to the nomination? If you think Romney doesn’t have enough support, right now Santorum and Newt have even LESS – get it? LESS

BabysCatz on March 7, 2012 at 9:25 PM

There’s something mentally wrong with you people.

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Something mentally wrong with us? Ha! Just wait until you watch the Youtube video you’re taken to by clicking on your screenname. Whooboy!

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Funny, I consider that callow weaklings who surrender their beliefs and principles for political expediency and limited political power to be the major problem with America… and I consider them to be appeasers and tools to the left… at best… and traitors to this one great nation at worst.

How do you suggest we reconcile these differing opinions?

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 5:34 PM

In another comment you wrote that the “lego house” has to be torn down and that those with “bare-feet” will be hurt. Who are they?

Gelsomina on March 7, 2012 at 9:27 PM

There’s something mentally wrong with you people.

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Something mentally wrong with us? Ha! Just wait until you watch the Youtube video you’re taken to by clicking on your screenname. Whooboy!

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Hate Response Team

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Incidentally, who said Romney needed to win Tennesee? Seriously all I heard during the entire week was that Ohio was must win for Santorum or Romney. Most people didn’t think Tennesee would be competitive because of the demographic advantage Santorum has in the state.

Seems to me that this is a case of moving the goal after the fact.

WolvenOne on March 7, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Romney ‘won’ Ohio by 1 point . . . .he has boo koo $$$$ and that’s the best he could do? Romney is a Democrat and should bow out . . .better yet . . .DUMP MITT!

Pragmatic on March 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Actually, exit poll data showed that just over 10% of those that voted in Ohio were Democrats, who overwhelmingly voted for Santorum. Had only Republicans voted, the data shows that Romney would’ve won by 4%, which is quite remarkable given that he was down 20% two weeks earlier. Clearly, as in Michigan, democrats were crossing over to derail who they thought would be the bigger threat to Obama. If Santorum cannot win with that sort of interference, when he started out with such an immense lead, in a state where he has a slight demographic advantage, then his campaign is truly pathetic.

Additionally, you can complain about Santorum being outspent, but Romney has such a large pool of donors for a good reason. Most candidates spend ample time before a race even begins making contacts with potential donors, assuring that they have a steady source of income even in a competitive campaign. Making these contacts however requires hard work and planning, and the Santorum campaign simply didn’t put any effort into lining up donors before the campaign began. In other words, the Romney campaign has all that money because they worked hard to get it.

Finally, despite your claims, Romney is clearly a center-right candidate, pursuing a center-right strategy. Santorum however has been pursuing, socially speaking, a right-center strategy. Where-as with a center-right strategy to capture moderate and swing voters and carry your core to victory, a right-center strategy relies on firing up your base and capturing the center through either enthusiasm or coincidence.

The problem with right-center strategies, is that its almost impossible to make them work on a national scale. If you look at where the population is, you simply cannot get enough voters to win a national campaign without also taking areas that are culturally moderate. There are years where this is doable, but several things need to come together for it to happen. Your candidate needs to be charming and highly compelling, and the incumbent has to be extraordinarily weak. We do have a somewhat weak incumbent, but Santorum isn’t a compelling enough figure for this strategy to work. His favorables are only barely above water within the Republican party, and as a whole he is deeply unpopular.

What you see as, “being a democrat,” is clearly a center-right candidate running a center-right campaign, which is the only viable strategy we have. This is why Romney is winning the nomination fight.

WolvenOne on March 7, 2012 at 9:30 PM

You’re really just not getting it, are you?

JFS61 on March 7, 2012 at 8:55 PM

I get it completely. You think Allah’s should be the only voice on YOUR website, because he thinks like you. You don’t like that there is actually diversity of opinion including Allah who still has a huge voice here.. It doesn’t matter that whether Allah ran the site when Malkin owned it or not; it was still a conservative site, not center right. People like you get their undies in a bundle because not everyone thinks the way you do. I get it completely. If the site doesn’t parrot you beliefs then the site isn’t “serious” anymore.. I renew my invitation; find another site.

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 9:34 PM

In addition to my prev post – those completely against Romney went thru how many other candidates? You had Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain , Newt and then a slew of folks that weren’t even going to run and now the only one left over (besides Ron Paul) is Rick Santorum. If Rick Santorum was so great, why haven’t you supported him from the very beginning? Most Romney supporters have been with him since the start (why else has he polled as the frontrunner prior to the primaries?)and as he wins more primaries, it’s obvious he is gaining support little by little. Ask this of yourselves – are you willing to give Obama another 4 years just because you hate Romney that much?

BabysCatz on March 7, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Silverdeth, do you call all those who disagree with you cowards, bastards, slime etc?

drballard on March 7, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Only when I am of the opinion that they are cowards, bastards and or slime.

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 9:49 PM

A night with no winners

False. Romney was the clear winner last night. It may not have been a knockout, but it was a solid split decision. And the end of the day, split decisions count as much as knockouts.

ghostwriter on March 7, 2012 at 9:50 PM

All you conservative talking heads, Mitt-haters and so-called “non-establishment” conservatives – can’t you see you are playing right into the media’s hands? The media not only wants Obama re-elected, they want this race to go farther and get nastier. As Santorum is showcased as the only one who can beat Romney, the left is using Santorum to scare women and independents. Just why do you think Obama seems to be looking better? It’s because we are looking even worse. Santorum and Newt have no chance to get the nomination and the media knows this, yet they are egging you folks on which is damaging the GOP brand, I fear, beyond repair. And you folks are buying into it, lock, stock and barrel. In the end, Romney will be the nominee but all these conservatives speaking out against him will indeed weaken him. If you call him weak long enough – he will be weak and by your very own hands. Prior to the primary process, Romney beat Obama more often in head to head matchups and had a large majority of independents supporting him. Now, not so much. This is damaging the eventual GOP nominee and you just all seem to not care, you just hate Romney. After all this, I have to admit that I think you all hate Romney more than Obama. Why can’t you get this through your heads – who has the only legitimate path to the nomination? If you think Romney doesn’t have enough support, right now Santorum and Newt have even LESS – get it? LESS

I do hate Willard Fillmoure Romneycare. I am open and up front about this fact.

In my opinion, he is a democrat in all but name, and I believe he will usher in the destruction of this nation, just as surely as Barry Hussein the wonder turd – just slower.

So, given my feelings on how this liberal judge appointing gun grabber Rombot will rule, why should I bother to care if the “red team” can get their mascot on the field to preside over the collapse of the country?

When the Republicans remove the “conservative” from their job description, I cease to care if they win or not.

When they don’t support my views, why should I support them?

In fact, supporting them would be idiotic – nay, suicidal – as it would merely encourage them to continue to ignore my views – giving them my support time after time, when they do things to piss me off is rewarding bad behavior.

I don’t care that Obama is the worst president since Buchanan, and that he could very easily lead us to the same destination as his historical “twin” did. I don’t care one damn lick. If the RePubics can’t be bothered to stand up for my beliefs, then I can’t be bothered to show up and vote.

I don’t reward bad behavior. Ever. Even if that stand means I have to suffer. Or my kids have to suffer. Or even if I have to die.

Principle > Pragmatism

Every time.

Everybody looses, and everyone dies eventually. However, not all of us are defeated or punch the clock with our dignity and honor intact.

No compromises.

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Super Tuesday Winners and Losers?

Winner:

Mitt Romney, who came from behind by double digits in Ohio a week ago to win the race. Romney is building momentum and getting closer to the nomination.

Losers:

The unelectable bigot Rick Santorum, who still has been unable to win a single major primary that wasn’t merely a beauty contest, was the biggest loser. He had his fifteen minutes of fame, but he couldn’t get any big wins with it. Now, the social issues extremist Rick Santorum is yesterday’s news.

Other losers on Super Tuesday include the labor unions, Obama supporters, Michael Moore and others who have been cheering on and actively supporting Rick “Bedroom Policeman” Santorum, because they know he would be so easy to beat in a general election.

Other Super Tuesday losers include admitted supporters of the unelectable bigot Rick Santorum. HotAir blogger Ed Morrissey, who promotes the unelectable bigot Rick Santorum on this site, is included in this group. Ed Morrissey continues to try to spin the news to argue that there were no winners.

bluegill on March 7, 2012 at 10:03 PM

For a more realistic and honest take on the Super Tuesday results, check out this piece:

Romney Scores Big Win; Press Fails to Notice

Excerpt:

Mitt Romney won a crushing victory Tuesday, winning twice as many states as Rick Santorum and more that two and half times as many delegates, but his triumph is being portrayed in headlines across the nation as sign of weakness and failure.

[...]

Romney scored a huge upset in Ohio, coming from way back to take a politically diverse state that is representative of the type of place he’ll need to win to beat President Obama.

Romney is being widely panned by the press for an “inability to close the deal,” and yet the description seems far more apt for Santorum, who now has blown huge leads in the most critical contests of recent weeks, Ohio and Michigan. If anything, the more voters look at Santorum, the more concerned they become and less likely they are to sign on the dotted line.

[...]

And reporters also tend to be moderate to liberal. Bloodletting among Republicans at some level is agreeable to many of them. I have to believe that if this was Obama instead of Romney, the stories would be about the growing inevitability of Obama’s nomination.

bluegill on March 7, 2012 at 10:07 PM

more from Romney Scores Big Win; Press Fails to Notice

And yet, despite all the evidence Romney largely vanquished his rivals Tuesday night, here are some of the headlines this morning:

Wall Street Journal: Romney Ekes Past Santorum in Ohio

New York Times: With No Knockout Punch, a Bruising Battle Plods On

Los Angeles Times: Battle in Ohio Reinforces GOP Divide; Romney’s Slim Victory Leaves Race Uncertain

USA Today: Romney, Santorum See Momentum

CNN: No Knockout Blow for Romney

Reuters: Romney Narrowly Wins Ohio, Fails to Knock Out Santorum

You get the idea.

There are several reasons for this.

All reporting is now sports reporting. Reporters love a battle and they love to go on TV and rave about how exciting everything is. And editors seek a bracing and never-ending storyline because it draws readers and ultimately pleases their corporate bosses, who want to sell papers and generate pageviews.

bluegill on March 7, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Other Super Tuesday losers include admitted supporters of the unelectable bigot Rick Santorum. HotAir blogger Ed Morrissey, who promotes the unelectable bigot Rick Santorum on this site, is included in this group. Ed Morrissey continues to try to spin the news to argue that there were no winners the American people.

Fixed

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Bluegill;
Gloating is bad sportsmanship. Denouncing the lead bloggers here and calling Santorum a bigot is not going to win anyone to Romney’s cause. You keep preparing a nice sandwich of reasons to support Romney, and then insist on putting a turd in it.

Confutus on March 7, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Hate Response Team

apocalypse on March 7, 2012 at 9:28 PM

LOL!

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Confutus on March 7, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Sorry, but Rick Santorum is an unelectable bigot who, in 2003, supported government bans on private, consensual homosexual activity between adults.

Also, you may choose to kiss up to bloggers at this site or elsewhere, but not all of us feel the need to do so. Ed Morrissey has, in fact, openly endorsed an unelectable bigot Rick Santorum.

Readers can find some relevant and revealing quotes from Rick Santorum below:

“If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.”

-Rick Santorum defending government bans on private, consensual homosexual activity between adults.

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. [Sex] is supposed to be within marriage. It’s supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal…but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special.”

-Rick Santorum

“The state has a right to do that, I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right, the state has the right to pass whatever statutes they have.”

-Anti-birth control Rick Santorum, happily asserting that states can ban birth control

“The idea is that the state doesn’t have rights to limit individuals’ wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire.”

-Rick Santorum

Santorum Quote:

“This idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do,” Santorum complained to NPR in 2006, “that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues … that is not how traditional conservatives view the world.”

bluegill on March 7, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Fixed

SilverDeth on March 7, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Does it really matter though? If America already hit the iceberg like you said a couple hours ago then why concern yourself with it at all. If you truly believe what you’re posting here then you shouldn’t be wasting your time here on the internet, you should be getting to the lifeboats while the rest of us who are too stupid to see it for ourselves come to the same realization and try to bail out, too.

There’s nothing to be gained by going down with the ship, or are you just setting yourself up to say “I told you so!”?

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 10:44 PM

I recall reading just a few days ago that Ohio was a “Must win” for Santorum. Apparently, another moral victory was good enough. Like Michigan, Romney came from behind in the polls to edge out Santorum in the popular vote, with a bigger win in delgates, and like Michigan, the vote would have been even more in Romney’s favor without Democratic crossover votes.

Santorum won in Oklahoma and Tennessee, but they weren’t big wins; Romney took a respectable second, and denied Gingrich a big win in Georgia as well. By most measures, Romney did somewhat better than expected.

Gingrich really should drop out…he is too far behind and it would take a major miracle for him to catch up. All he will accomplish is to yap at Romney’s heels and keep him keep him from unifying the party, on the one hand, or split the not-Romney vote and guarantee him the win, on the other.

Confutus on March 7, 2012 at 10:46 PM

Bluegill;
Gloating is bad sportsmanship. Denouncing the lead bloggers here and calling Santorum a bigot is not going to win anyone to Romney’s cause. You keep preparing a nice sandwich of reasons to support Romney, and then insist on putting a turd in it.

Confutus on March 7, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Most of Romney supporters don’t get that. They think after months of calling his detractors bigots, hicks etc. that people are just going to be so happy and excited to get on board the Romney train. They think that independents and moderates are going to come in droves, so they don’t need the rest of pesky loyal conservaatives. We’ll see how that works out for them come November.

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 10:52 PM

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/03/07/gingrich-cancels-travel-to-kansas-zeros-in-on-alabama-mississippi/

Basically if Newt loses Alabama or Mississippi his campaign says he will not be a credible candidate, aka he will be dropping out…

MGardner on March 7, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Most of Romney supporters don’t get that. They think after months of calling his detractors bigots, hicks etc. that people are just going to be so happy and excited to get on board the Romney train. They think that independents and moderates are going to come in droves, so they don’t need the rest of pesky loyal conservaatives. We’ll see how that works out for them come November.

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Most Romney supporters know that they need loyal conservatives. In fact, most Romney supporters consider themselves to be loyal conservatives. You sell the conservative movement short by thinking otherwise. There is no victory over Obama without unity.

“They try to portray you in the worst possible light… and when I travel around the United States meeting people in the Tea Party who care — black, white, gay, straight — anyone that’s willing to stand next to me to fight the progressive left, I will be in that bunker, and if you’re not in that bunker ’cause you’re not satisfied with this candidate, more than shame on you. You’re on the other side.” ~Breitbart

Priscilla on March 7, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Most Romney supporters know that they need loyal conservatives. In fact, most Romney supporters consider themselves to be loyal conservatives.

I have no doubt that someo of you are..

You sell the conservative movement short by thinking otherwise.

I sell the conservative movement short? Nope, I am just telling you when people like Jailbreak and blue gill call people bigots-then don’t expect those same people to embrace Romney with open arms.

There is no victory over Obama without unity.

Yeah this I agree with. That is why I am holding my nose and voting for whomever is our nominee..

melle1228 on March 7, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Ask this of yourselves – are you willing to give Obama another 4 years just because you hate Romney that much?

BabysCatz on March 7, 2012 at 9:40 PM

We will. WIth Romney as Republican candidate.

Anyone with even half a brain should spend a few hours on Fox News, the past few days and tonight as well. O’Reilly, Hannety, whoever. Ignore all the RINOs, Rove, Morris, and the rest of the morons.

Just pay close attention to who all the LIBERAL talking heads are trying to convince Republicans to elect as their candidate. Its Romney, by a mile. When I hear that entire lot telling us that we HAVE TO get behind Romney it is a clear sign they KNOW Romney cannot win and WANT him as Hussein’s opponent. Why is this so difficult to understand?

Get ready for 4 more years…

riddick on March 8, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Does it really matter though? If America already hit the iceberg like you said a couple hours ago then why concern yourself with it at all. If you truly believe what you’re posting here then you shouldn’t be wasting your time here on the internet, you should be getting to the lifeboats while the rest of us who are too stupid to see it for ourselves come to the same realization and try to bail out, too.


1:
My family and I have lifeboats ready – have for years. but, even that will only delay the inevitable.
2: Just cause we are screwed don’t mean I have to:
A: Like it.
B: Go quietly into the night.

3: I never said you’re or anyone else is too stupid to get where we are going – plenty – I dare say many many of the people on this very board see EXACTLY where we are going.

There’s nothing to be gained by going down with the ship, or are you just setting yourself up to say “I told you so!”?

Inflatable rafts are only so much use when ocean is gonna burn. My lifeboats will buy time – Nothing more. There is no escaping the despotism that the left in this country practices. In a world of tyranny, a secluded Montana ranch still goes down the toilet eventually. It may take longer, but inevitably, me and mine will be destroyed right along with the rest of everyone else. When the whole country goes to hell, there is no place to hide. If you’re lucky, the best you can hope for is to escape the tyrant’s attention for a while as he deals with more immediate “issues.”

But, I will more than happily be right here on these boards to grind a cigarette in your wounds when king Obama (now for life) eats Willard’s RINO lunch in November…

…and the RINOS will shriek at me for “damaging” their feckless democrat candidate, and for refusing to rewards the bad behavior of the Republican establishment with votes, money, and time.

And I will tell them to eat S&^%, kick sand in their face, and remind them that they don’t need conservatives. I know you don’t need conservatives, I’ve been told that more than 15 times in the last 5 months. I’ve been told I am irrelevant.

So no, you boy Willard Fillmoure Romneycare looses – it’s all on his supporters and him.

After all… so many of you RINOS have said the conservatives are unneeded and should be drummed out.

So go win.

And yeah, you better believe I am gonna gloat when you loose.

SilverDeth on March 8, 2012 at 12:56 AM

The winner on Super Tuesday was Mitt Romney.

No matter how people spin that night, it was a great night for Mitt and a bad night for all the other candidates.

Conservative Samizdat on March 8, 2012 at 3:11 AM

But, I will more than happily be right here on these boards to grind a cigarette in your wounds when king Obama (now for life) eats Willard’s RINO lunch in November…

I’m hoping that’s just hyperbole and you know that no matter what, Barack Obama won’t be president on January 21st of 2017.

…and the RINOS will shriek at me for “damaging” their feckless democrat candidate, and for refusing to rewards the bad behavior of the Republican establishment with votes, money, and time.

What you do with your vote, your money and your time is up to you; I will offer criticism to anyone who doesn’t vote for the Republican nominee regardless of their reasons but I promise not to shriek. But it’s not all the Republican establishment picking Romney.

What exactly is the bad behavior of the Republican establishment anyway?

And I will tell them to eat S&^%, kick sand in their face, and remind them that they don’t need conservatives. I know you don’t need conservatives, I’ve been told that more than 15 times in the last 5 months. I’ve been told I am irrelevant.

We need conservatives. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

So no, you boy Willard Fillmoure Romneycare looses – it’s all on his supporters and him.

I’ll vote for Romney in the general but I strongly doubt I’ll vote for him in the primary later this month. If he is nominated and goes on to lose to Obama then I don’t get how it’s all my fault. In fact I think very little of it would be my fault.

After all… so many of you RINOS have said the conservatives are unneeded and should be drummed out.

Again, we need conservatives. I’m not saying you haven’t heard people saying otherwise; I’m sure you have, it’s just that I haven’t seen it. Which doesn’t change the fact whoever said that is an idiot.

So go win.

Working on it.

And yeah, you better believe I am gonna gloat when you loose.

SilverDeth on March 8, 2012 at 12:56 AM

If it comes to it I hope it’s worth it for you.

alchemist19 on March 8, 2012 at 4:38 AM

The American people were the big winners on Super Tuesday.

With Mitt Romney winning big on Tuesday (and winning the last 11 of 15 states), we are a huge step closer to removing Barack Obama from office and truly getting our economy back on track.

Mitt Romney is the guy who can and will defeat Obama.

I am tired about hearing unelectable also-ran candidates like Sanctimonius Rick Santorum. Enough is enough, already!! The longer this Republican in-fighting goes on, the more it helps Obama’s reelection chances.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 5:02 AM

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 5:02 AM

Bravo! Nice perspective. In less than a year from now America will once again be open for business!

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 5:41 AM

alchemist19 on March 8, 2012 at 4:38 AM

As well you should vote your preference in the primary. I’m glad that you are committed to ridding us of PBHO, even if your favored primary candidate is not our nominee. I made the same commitment for myself at the very start of this process and I respect others who do the same.

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 5:44 AM

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 5:02 AM

Why don’t you give the namecalling a rest? Every time I read one of your posts you’re calling Santorum or somebody else some kind of snotty name. If you can’t make your point without calling somebody a name, then maybe you should just accept that you have nothing useful to contribute, STFU. Grow up.

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 5:52 AM

Bravo! Nice perspective. In less than a year from now America will once again be open for business!

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 5:41 AM

Bravo? Nice perspective? Please. I favor Romney for the nomination, but I don’t see the point in insulting his opponents. It’s rude and unproductive. Bravo indeed.

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 5:55 AM

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 5:55 AM

In the post I responded to, he declared that the American people were the big winners on Super Tuesday and that Mitt is the man to beat PBHO. Who does that insult?

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 5:59 AM

In the post I responded to, he declared that the American people were the big winners on Super Tuesday and that Mitt is the man to beat PBHO. Who does that insult?

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 5:59 AM

So, you didn’t see the part in which he called Santorum sanctimonious?

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 6:18 AM

So, you didn’t see the part in which he called Santorum sanctimonious?

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 6:18 AM

He isn’t? And is that your reason to call me out, because I echoed his broader sentiment?

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 6:22 AM

He isn’t? And is that your reason to call me out, because I echoed his broader sentiment?

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 6:22 AM

There’s quite enough namecalling on this site, without having people cheerleading for it. And as for this “broader sentiment” business, you could have qualified your remarks, but you chose not to do so.

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 6:28 AM

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Give me a break. Feel free to play sheriff if you want to. I’ll do my own thing in my own way.

I have no problem talking trash about deserving pols and other public figures or groups. I generally avoid food fights or most other remarks about individual posters. We all play the game by our own rules and try as you may, you’re not going to succeed at imposing your rules on me or vice verse.

Paging Rick Santorum. We found your shoe:

Sanctimonious -

Making a show of being morally superior to other people

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 6:37 AM

Romney wins 6 states, comes in 2nd in 3 states, and third in one state and someone says there were no winners????? Also he garnered the vast majority of the delegates and has a commanding lead. Romney is the clear winner and Gingrich and Santorum staying in the race simply helps the Dems and the media (including Fox) to keep their ratings high while taking down the GOP.

lhuffman34 on March 8, 2012 at 6:42 AM

I do hate Willard Fillmoure Romneycare. I am open and up front about this fact.

Perhaps a shrink would best server your interests.

rubberneck on March 8, 2012 at 7:01 AM

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Give me a break. Feel free to play sheriff if you want to. I’ll do my own thing in my own way.

I have no problem talking trash about deserving pols and other public figures or groups. I generally avoid food fights or most other remarks about individual posters. We all play the game by our own rules and try as you may, you’re not going to succeed at imposing your rules on me or vice verse.

Paging Rick Santorum. We found your shoe:

Sanctimonious -

Making a show of being morally superior to other people

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 6:37 AM

Whatever. In your first response, you were disingenuous in the extreme, affirming bluegill’s remarks, even as you tried to backpedal away from them:

He isn’t? And is that your reason to call me out, because I echoed his broader sentiment?

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 6:22 AM

Now, at least now you’re finally being honest about agreeing with the entirety of bluegill’s remarks.

And if “playing the game by our own rules” entails being disingenuous and resorting to childish name-calling, then good luck to you with that. For my part, I’ll point out that you’re full of it when it suits me, because that’s how I play the game by myrules. Have a nice day.

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 7:06 AM

ghostwriter on March 8, 2012 at 7:06 AM

You’re being ridiculous. I never backpedaled or anything else. In my first post I didn’t even figure out that you objected to the “s” word, it was such an obvious and innocuous thing to say about the dude. Ride on sheriff, nobody cares.

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 7:16 AM

ya know something … I am fast approaching the point were I am not going to vote for Romney no matter what … I see these little mitt bott trolls come on here and all but spit on peoples faith … believe systems etc ….
I mean up until very recently I was ABR in the primary and ABO in the general …
now I am not so sure …..

keep it up mitt botts ….. keep it up …..

conservative tarheel on March 8, 2012 at 7:43 AM

conservative tarheel on March 8, 2012 at 7:43 AM

Yeah, because most rational people base their voting decisions on what some anonymous yahoo types on a web site. Punish us, that’ll fix what’s wrong in this country.

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 7:49 AM

MJBrutus on March 8, 2012 at 7:49 AM

havnt decided yet ….. but considering it …. have a couple of folks at work the same way ….. not quite so brazen …. maybe because we know who they are ….

I want to support the nominee ….. I do … but ya know keep calling folks like me names and spit on us and all and then tell us we gotta vote for your boy …
your smoking crack ….

anyway .. been up for 12 and its time for bed ….

conservative tarheel on March 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM

Cause if there was a winner we could not write posts that generate ad views.

-ed

rubberneck on March 8, 2012 at 9:25 AM

And Denial Isn’t Just a River in Egypt.

Ed cannot see the forest for the trees here: There IS a winner, and it is Mitt Romney.

Ed just doesn’t want to deal with it.

Count the delegates. Do the Math.

Mitt Romney will be the nominee:

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/how-math-virtually-guarantees-romneys-nomination/416016

mountainaires on March 8, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Romney wins 6 states, comes in 2nd in 3 states, and third in one state and someone says there were no winners????? Also he garnered the vast majority of the delegates and has a commanding lead. Romney is the clear winner and Gingrich and Santorum staying in the race simply helps the Dems and the media (including Fox) to keep their ratings high while taking down the GOP.

lhuffman34 on March 8, 2012 at 6:42 AM

Mindboggling how some people can miss this, isn’t it?

mountainaires on March 8, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Scotash, I agree. Romney won. He will be our nominee. I quote Breitbart: “I support whomever is our nominee, and if you don’t, then more than shame on you!” While we are all about trying to decide who is the purest conservative, the other side is busy winning the women’s vote with silly contraceptive dialog!

AnnaS on March 8, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Ugh, so far it appears the race is going to the highest bidder. When all is said and done and if we get stuck with Romney, compared to the other 3, all the republicans will have to offer the general electorate is a democrat masquerading as a republican against a real democrat. The conservatives will rally as always and support this putz and will get blamed again when a Romney candidacy flops as his predecessors did. It’s looking very gloomy, folks. There’s still time to stop the madness.

mozalf on March 8, 2012 at 10:47 AM

A night with no winners

It’s over, but some stubbornly refuse to admit it.

Mitt Romney won a crushing victory Tuesday, winning twice as many states as Rick Santorum and more that two and half times as many delegates, but his triumph is being portrayed in headlines across the nation as sign of weakness and failure.

Romney picked up 211 delegates while taking six states, bringing his total delegate count to 415. Santorum won in three states and added only 84 delegates to bring his total to 176.

Romney scored a huge upset in Ohio, coming from way back to take a politically diverse state that is representative of the type of place he’ll need to win to beat President Obama.

Romney is being widely panned by the press for an “inability to close the deal,” and yet the description seems far more apt for Santorum, who now has blown huge leads in the most critical contests of recent weeks, Ohio and Michigan. If anything, the more voters look at Santorum, the more concerned they become and less likely they are to sign on the dotted line.

Romney has a war chest that will swamp Santorum in the upcoming air wars for closely contested states.

itsnotaboutme on March 8, 2012 at 11:09 AM

While the “Anyone But Romney” GOPers are arguing their points in “comments” sections of political/conservative websites across the blogosphere and those commentators such as Erickson, Kristol, Levin, Limbaugh and other DC talking heads are shouting from the mountaintops that Romney is a weak front runner, everyday GOP voters with a “normal” interest in politics, spread across the 4 corners of this great nation, are consolidating behind Mitt Romney. They have the common sense to see that only Romney has a viable road to the nomination and the only legitimate chance sending Obama packing. They want this fight against Obama to start now. The “ABR” conservatives are playing right into the media and Obama campaign’s hands by extending this bloody and nasty fight to ensure a weakened GOP nominee faces Obama in November. When you call someone a weak frontrunner long enough, he becomes a weak frontrunner.

As Santorum is showcased now as the only one left who can beat Romney, the left is using Santorum to scare women and independents. This is absolutely vital – prior to the start of the GOP primaries, independent voters were squarely on the side of the GOP, now, not so much. The media is reporting that the GOP primaries are all about social issues due to the relevance of Santorum (true or not) and this is damaging the GOP brand, I fear, beyond repair. With the economy being the most obvious strike against Obama, why would we want social issues to muddy the water? The media simply enjoys being able to hold up Santorum as the voice of the Republican party. Just why do you think Obama seems to be looking better now, whether true or not? It’s because we are looking even worse. As each day passes and new issues arise for this country, right-leaning voters want to hear one unified voice against Obama and not four different opinions coming in four different directions. An example would be the media characterizing the GOP primary race as being obsessed with social issues (as in birth control) In reality, only Santorum concentrates on such with Romney, Paul and Gingrich having pretty much laid low . For those of you who would defend Santorum on this, saying that the media is exaggerating, take note of how he stumped in WA state. While his speeches in WA state were advertized as speeches on the economy and even the folks warming up the crowds told them that he would be focusing on the economy, Santorum ended up stumping on social issues. It seems he just can’t help himself.

In prior years, republicans could run a conservative issue-themed campaign and only needed to “cool their jets” during the general. With the plethora of 24/7/365 media, this becomes a trickier task. I consider myself a very social conservative too but when an obvious weakness presents itself (as in Obama’s handling of this economy) the primary campaign would be smart to focus on such a weakness which in the long run will cement independent/moderate support voters which, like it or not, are necessary to win a national race. Yes, it is still all about the economy, stupid.
Consider those “ABR” conservatives who have based their hopes on how many other candidates before settling now on Santorum? Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Newt plus a list of ones not even running, now the only one left (besides Ron Paul) is Rick Santorum. The general voting public (especially the independents) take note of this. What is wrong with the GOP? I have one question to ask – if Rick Santorum is so great, why haven’t you supported him from the very beginning? Romney supporters have been with him from the start and as he wins more states and delegates, more common sense conservatives jump on board. After watching and reading “ABR” conservatives for many months now, I almost believe their dislike (hatred?) for Romney seems almost as palpable as that for Obama. “ABR” voters ask yourself this one thing – are you willing to give Obama another 4 years to satisfy your dislike for Romney?

BabysCatz on March 8, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Romney’s already damaged goods. At least with any of the other 3 especially Rick Santorum, we offer something new, fresh, exciting for everyone. So, yes, unless the RNC offers a viable candidate, we’ll be screwed with Romney.

mozalf on March 8, 2012 at 1:51 PM

If his proposed defense and foreign policies made a little, make that a lot, more sense he’d do a whole lot better. He does not seem to realize there are forces and nations in the world with the means and will to do is great evil if we drop our defenses as he proposes.

He’s mentally in the 18th century, methinks.
{^_^}

herself on March 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

I almost believe their dislike (hatred?) for Romney seems almost as palpable as that for Obama. “ABR” voters ask yourself this one thing – are you willing to give Obama another 4 years to satisfy your dislike for Romney?

I believe Romney is Obama lite … he has no core values that he is not willing to change to make the sale ….. he reminds me of a used car salesman ….
so I am not going to vote for him in the primary … deal with it ….
in the general ….. probably …..

conservative tarheel on March 8, 2012 at 4:02 PM

camaraderie on March 7, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Excellent points.

Ed curiously sez, “no winners.” Really? I say Ed is confusing a clear win with a knockout. Romney didn’t score a complete knockout against all his opponents, and he never said he would.

But he sure was a big winner on Tuesday.

Mitt Romney garnered more delegates on Super Tuesday than every one of his competitors combined.

That alone made him a big winner – not just a winner, but a big winner. After all, this process is about garnering delegates for the nomination, no? The guy who is currently a distant second in that category, likewise finished a distant second on Tuesday. So distant was he, as a matter of fact that, he will reportedly now need to win 64% of the remaining delegates that are up for grabs in order to get the nomination.

How likely is that Ed?

Meanwhile, while having reinforced his position as the clear from-runner, Romney will need well under half of the remainder to secure the nomination. Anyone care to field the same question about likelihood?

Romney also garnered far more votes than any of his opponents on Tuesday. In fact, he got 40% more votes than his closest competitor. Someone please explain how that is not a big win?

By definition, Romney also had far more victories than everyone else combined on Tuesday – he won 6 out of 10 states — including the big prize in Ohio, which was the race that ALL anti-Romney conservatives and ALL anti-Romney Democrats had mutually agreed to pin their hopes on during the run up to the Tuesday showdown; after having ALL previously pinned their hopes on Romney losing his “home” state of Michigan; and after having ALL previously pinned their hopes on Romney losing the big prize in Florida.

Seems like the mutual detestation society made up of the Mitt Romney opposition is running out of places on which to pin their dwindling hopes!

Ed’s CNN piece sadly missed the basic point of the night. The anti-Romneys ALL got in bed together to agree on one very narrow goal . . . and that was that Mitt Romney had to be stopped! Didn’t happen. He came out of it the big winner.

The truth is that the anti-Romneys were the egg-on-their-collective-faces big losers of the night.

Ed subsequently decided to scramble back and file this dispatch from the land of denial.

“Nobody won!!” sez ‘e!

Baloney!

Trochilus on March 8, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Perhaps a shrink would best server your interests.

rubberneck on March 8, 2012 at 7:01 AM

I am a discriminating individual.

In this particular case, I am discriminating against a man I believe is a Democrat in anything but name.

To be honest, I am more scared of what would happen in a Willard Fillmoure Romneycare presidency than an second Obama one – given the useless republican mushes in congress – they have to at least pretend to oppose Obama to save face. They could indulge their statist-light fantasies to their black-little-heart’s content under Romney.

Judges people say?

Well… Romney’s track record on that leave me no room for confidence…

Repealing Obamcare?

I’ll believe that when I see it.

Here is how I see it ACTUALLY going down… in the hypothetical universe where Willard Fillmoure Romneycare somehow managed to be drug kicking and screaming across the presidential finish-line…

He will issue some wavers, which will fail after the first string of equal protection suits are brought against the states.

Then there will be a callow attempt at a repeal bill, which will be abandoned at the first sign of serious media resistance - nothing makes Mitt and other appeasers back down quicker than bad press. In the end, like the squishy moderates they are, the useless congress and Willard will “settle” for trying to “fix” Obamacare.

Like always, the Neville Chamberlains of the moderate right will attempt to compromise, and play the role of the “caretakers” – continually maintaining the liberals “garden” in between election cycles. This way it will be right as the liberals left it, ready for further decent into the Orwellian nightmare the next time they have a significant legislative presence.

Never do they repeal. Never to they strike laws, or kill federal agencies. You will never see them looking to gut useless regulations, which are now stacking up by the tens of thousands.

Never do they backtrack. They don’t have the testicular fortitude. They don’t have the stomach for total war. These RINOS give a meek push, meet the screaming liberal masses, and then, cower down like abused dogs, and consign themselves to upgrade the leftists mindbogglingly stupid legislation from “disaster” to “barely tolerable.”

I don’t know about you, but I am DONE voting for human bookmarks, who serve no purpose other than to act as placeholders in the democrats biography.

I bent over and let the republicans take me over Bush I, Dole, Bush II, and McWeenie. No more. My poor abused backside is no longer open for the moderate republican’s idea of service.

SilverDeth on March 8, 2012 at 4:41 PM

I bent over and let the republicans take me over Bush I, Dole, Bush II, and McWeenie. No more. My poor abused backside is no longer open for the moderate republican’s idea of service.

SilverDeth on March 8, 2012 at 4:41 PM

you are a better man then me … Dole and McVain – I voted Libertarian

conservative tarheel on March 8, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Ed curiously sez, “no winners.” Really? I say Ed is confusing a clear win with a knockout. Romney didn’t score a complete knockout against all his opponents, and he never said he would.

Trochilus on March 8, 2012 at 4:26 PM

It’s not that curious when you consider that Ed Morrissey is just a supporter of the unelectable social issues extremist Rick Santorum. Ed Morrissey has a pattern of doing this kind of thing. He has a right to spin the facts however he chooses, but I wouldn’t go to Ed for honest, objective analysis.

Ed Morrissey is giving the same spin as the other anti-Romney sources.

What’s amazing to me is that Romney continues to win and lead by A LOT, despite the attacks from the liberal media AND the conservative media.

The voters are able to see through all this garbage from the MSM, loudmouth radio talk show hosts interested in ratings and no-name bloggers who spin the news in their candidate’s favor.

Republican voters of all ideological and demographic categories know that Mitt Romney is, by far, the best candidate, and is the guy who ACTUALLY CAN AND WILL DEFEAT OBAMA.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Rick Santorum is doing his best to wrap up the idiot bigot vote. Sadly for Santorum, the idiot bigot and birther vote won’t be enough to get him anywhere close to winning the nomination.

Republicans will nominate someone (Mitt Romney) who is a class act and who actually can defeat Obama.

I’m sick of hearing about the unelectable bigot Rick Santorum. This loser Rick Santorum would guarantee an Obama landslide victory in November.

A Vote for Rick Santorum in the Primary = A Vote for Barack Obama’s Reelection

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 7:02 PM

^ Now that’s how you go about making a coalition.

0_o

_______________________________________________________
A letter I have been kicking around:

Hello My name is ————–

First, I would like to thank you Mr. Levin and staff for your wonderful radio program and website. Your show is supposed to run from 6-9 here, but ——— advertises it, and then preempts it with “progressive talk radio – the ———–” – thankfully, I am able to catch you every night on your website. I would be a sad individual if not for MarkLevinShow.com.

But to the point:

Lately, I have been dealing with a great many bombastic and antagonistic Mitt Romney supporters, particularly on internet sites, and I am to my wits end. I have been told repeatedly that “conservatives need to be drummed out of the republican party,” that “conservative votes are meaningless, moderates are who the Republican party needs to focus on,” and that “conservative views are irrelevant in this day and age and should be abandoned for a more progressive outlook.”

These comments are coming, almost without fail, from the most antagonist supporters of Mitt Romney. And not just one. Or two. This mentality has been, in my opinion and experience, the prevailing mindset of these people – even my neighbors, (who are otherwise lovely individuals), have expressed this attitude when they confronted me about “wasting my vote” on anyone besides Mitt Romney.

These antagonists, who are hell-bent on insulting my belief systems, mocking my conservative values, are completely turning me away from the Republican party.

I don’t feel myself or my family’s values are being represented anymore. I feel that anyone who attempts to represent them is attacked and destroyed – not only by the leftists, but by their own “alleged” political allies. They are abandoned on the field of battle, or outright stabbed in the back – and the people holding the knife, are, more often than not, are the “Moderate” wing of the Republican party.

Look no further than the betrayal of Bork, Palin, Bachman, Cain, and most recently the horrible assaults on Rush – a man that has been a fixture in our household for many years now. How can conservatives survive when they are not only disingenuously assailed by the statists on the left, but then must contend with their own party members garroting them in the moments of greatest need?

Mitt Romney has become, in my eyes, the figurehead of this mentality. He is the uber-example of the backbiting statist republican.

I am a discriminating individual Mr. Levin.

In this particular case, I am discriminating against a man I believe is a Democrat in anything but name, who through his actions, and through his surrogate’s actions, has done more to turn me against the Republican party than Bush I, Dole, Bush II, and even McWeenie combined.

More-so, I feel that Mitt Romney has been so divisive and wicked to his opponents in this primary, that there is the very real potential of seeing the Republican Party utterly destroyed. The manner in which this campaign has been “waged” has more in common with Sherman’s razing of the south, than a “civil, yet competitive sporting event” – unless that sporting event is “Gladiatorial Combat.” And it’s clear to me that one single man is to blame for this.

Willard Fillmoure Romneycare.

I have chosen this moniker to label Mitt with because in my opinion, this “total-war” on the conservative wing of the party by Romney and the moderates has the potential to shred the Republican party – in the same manner of their predecessors.

In the 1850′s, (as you well know), the Whigs, under Millard Fillmoure chose the wrong side of the greatest issue of their era – their base fled them in retribution. Now, more than a century later, it seems that the establishment is hellbent on repeating this debacle. They have underestimated how disastrous Obamacare truly is for this republic, (and their party), and they are throwing all of their weight behind a man who is rooted firmly on the wrong side of the issue.

To be honest Mr. Levin, I am terrified of what would happen in a Romney presidency given the near-useless republican mushes inhabiting the house and the senate. Currently, these feckless wonders are forced to – as a matter of saving face – pretend to oppose Obama’s agenda. Under “Willard Romneycare” the Boehner’s and McConnell’s would enjoy ample cover to indulge statist fantasies to their heart’s content. I can’t help but think of Nixon.

I feel we were betrayed in 2010 by congress, time and time again, and I can’t trust them anymore. Particularly given their abysmal performance, and general spinelessness in standing up to their “alleged” opponent – King Barry Hussein Obama. If these clowns can’t even hold the line against Obama… what can we expect from them when it comes to a member of their own party?

I fear “capitulation” is the word of the day in that case.

But we are not finished yet. The moderates scream – yes – scream – at me about “judicial appointments.” Yes, we may very well be facing multiple supreme court vacancies in the next 4 years. This is a disconcerting thought with Obama in the White House…

Well… Romney’s track record for judicial appointments leaves me no room for confidence either… are we to thank him when he gives us the next Ginsberg, or Kennedy?

Such thoughts is the stuff of nightmares, and is scarcely a comfort as we stand on the edge of the abyss.

Then we come to the big issue – the potential death strike for the entire constitution – Repealing Obamcare. I am not instilled with great confidence that Romney has the stamina, (or the desire), to tear down the very system he, only a few short years ago, championed.

To be blunt – I’ll believe Willard Fillmoure Romneycare wants to dismantle his baby when I see it happen. His case is certainly not helped by his minions calling a repeal of the law “absurd,” or he himself pronouncing it to be “no big deal.”

Here is how I imagine the attempt to repeal HR 3962 goes under a Mitt Romney Presidency… (Naturally, this exists in the hypothetical universe where Willard Fillmoure Romneycare somehow manages to be drug kicking and screaming across the presidential finish-line.)

Romney will issue wavers, in the first few weeks of his presidency, releasing states that wish to be free of the legislation. Wavers that will crumble after the first string of equal protection suits are brought against the states accepting them. By liberal sock-puppets naturally.

Later that year, there will be a callow attempt at a repeal – like it’s predecessors, it will primarily be a face saving measure, rather than a serious, hard nosed push to kill Obamacare. This show vote will be cast aside at the first sign of serious media resistance – as history sadly demonstrates nothing makes Mitt and other moderate appeasers back down quicker than some bad press. In the end, like the squishy moderates they are, the useless congress and Willard will “settle” for trying to “fix” Obamacare.

To me, it appears that the moderate right will always seek compromise, rather than fight for their beliefs – they choose to play the role of the “caretakers” – continually maintaining the liberals “garden” in between election cycles. This way it will be right as they left it, ready for further decent into the Orwellian nightmare the next time they have a significant legislative presence.

Never do they repeal. Never to they strike laws, or dismantle federal agencies. You will never see them looking to gut useless freedom-strangling regulations, which are now stacking up by the tens of thousands, and making life unbearable both in the business world and in your own damn bathroom.

Never do the republicans backtrack when they do manage to grasp the reigns. I have come to the conclusion that the moderates in change don’t have the testicular fortitude or even the desire. They don’t have the stomach for total war – which is a horrible thing, as their opponents suffer no such distaste. These RINOS give a meek push, meet the screaming liberal masses, and then, cower down like abused dogs, consigning themselves to the role of upgrading the leftists mindbogglingly stupid legislation from “disaster” to “barely tolerable.”

But hey, at least we met them in the middle – right?

What’s even MORE infuriating, is that, after the mush’s loose, time, after time, after time, after time, they BLAME THE CONSERVATIVES for it!

“Oh,” they shriek, “You didn’t support us enough!”
“You didn’t give us enough money,” they scream.
“You didn’t go door to door enough,” they howl.

These people set themselves up to at once disenfranchise their base, and then flog the very same people when it is the moderates who fail to perform, over and over!

I am at my witt’s end Mr. Levin. I just don’t know how I can go on voting for human bookmarks, who serve no purpose other than to act as placeholders in the democrat biography. I just can’t see how I am supposed to pull the level anymore for people that mock and hate my beliefs, and who manipulate the system against, (or outright destroy), the people representing my mindset.

I am quickly reaching a place where I want a new party – a conservative party. The logical side of me recoils in horror from this concept, as I know full well – from awful historical lessons no less – how the democrats will take advantage of such an event.

But the more we try to take over the Republican party, the more the establishment maligns us, changes the rules after the fact to exclude, steals elections or delegates, rigs the very power structure against our candidates, attacks us using the media, and deploys all the leverage at their disposal to silence, harm, and intimidate conservatives.

And they arrogantly demand “we tow the line” come November – or WE are the ones responsible for Obama’s second term?

These Republicans are making me feel like an abused wife. I am starting to feel like we are creating a perverse system of incentives, that rewards the establishment’s bad behavior. And they mercilessly play the “lesser of two evil’s card.”

It’s hard enough being a God-fearing conservative in this world when you merely have to defend yourself from the lib-tards. It’s nearly unbearable when your own alleged allies take their turn in blindsiding and disrespecting you.

Thanks for your time Mr. Levin.

SilverDeth on March 8, 2012 at 10:15 PM

. . .
First, I would like to thank you Mr. Levin and staff for your wonderful radio program and website. Your show is supposed to run from 6-9 here, but ——— advertises it, and then preempts it with “progressive talk radio – the ———–” – thankfully, I am able to catch you every night on your website. I would be a sad individual if not for MarkLevinShow.com.
. . .
Lately, I have been dealing with a great many bombastic and antagonistic Mitt Romney supporters, particularly on internet sites, and I am to my wits end.
. . .
Such thoughts is the stuff of nightmares, and is scarcely a comfort as we stand on the edge of the abyss.
. . .
These Republicans are making me feel like an abused wife.
. . .

Thanks for your time Mr. Levin.

SilverDeth on March 8, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Gee, I’m not really sure how you concluded that this post and the accompanying comment thread were an appropriate situs for your strident and unchecked burst of exasperation, all dressed up in dirty pink spurs, and presumptively addressed to Mark Levin!

But just as a friendly reminder, the general topic of discussion here is Jazz Shaw’s posting of Ed Morrissey’s analysis of the Super Tuesday results which Ed prepared as a column for CNN. Some have agreed with Ed, and some have not.

Trochilus on March 9, 2012 at 11:17 AM

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 6:58 PM

To be honest, bluegill, I do agree with Ed far more often than not. I have followed him since he wrote Captain’s Quarters, and I still maintain a link to that archive on my site — it was that good.

This latest column of his is the only one I can ever recall responding to in the way that I did here, and on the CNN site as well. I think that this time Ed just missed the import of the results of Super Tuesday.

Perhaps it does have something to do with who he is currently supporting . . . and maybe my view has something to do with the candidate who I am supporting, though I tried to stick to the facts.

Of one thing, however, I am certain. In the future fully expect to continue looking to Ed for excellent insight and solid analysis.

And, I do agree with you that Mitt Romney is by far the best candidate to take on Barack Obama in the fall.

Trochilus on March 9, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3