Quotes of the day

posted at 10:56 pm on March 7, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Mitt Romney’s campaign gathered the national press corps in their campaign war room this morning to deliver a simple message: It would take an ‘act of God’ for any candidate not named Mitt Romney to win the Republican nomination…

“Looking ahead to a primary calendar where the only remaining true winner-take-all states appear to favor Romney — Delaware, Utah, New Jersey and the District of Columbia (where Rick Santorum is not on the ballot) — the advisers tried to slowly close the door on Santorum and Newt Gingrich, who they said had little to no opportunity left to close the delegate gap…

“Taken together, the campaign hopes math, if not ideology, will help their candidate consolidate a Republican base still resistant to his nomination in some quarters.”

***

“If Romney were to stumble and win only a third of the delegates in the remaining states, Santorum would have to win more than half of all the delegates in order to pull ahead, meaning that Gingrich and Paul together would have to be held below 16 percent. To date, not even counting Romney’s blowout in Massachusetts, Romney has won nearly half of the delegates while Santorum has won about one-fourth. That means the only path to Romney losing requires Santorum to double his past haul, while Romney drops by about 70 percent. That’s not likely.

“Barring some disaster, Romney’s worst-case scenario is that he finishes first, but a bit short of the 1,144-delegate absolute majority, thus needing to pick up a handful of Santorum, Paul or Gingrich delegates. That would not be a pretty way to win, but it would be a win.”

***

“Consider this: if Mitt wins every remaining all-or-nothing state but one, and half of the remaining proportional delegates, he would likely still fall short of the magic nomination number of 1,144—which would force him to rely on unpledged delegates, the Republican version of the infamous Democratic super-delegates in 2008, to claim his party’s mantle…

“[T]he delegate math shows that the earliest this contest could be over is May — and the latest, Utah in late June or even August in Tampa.

“Unless Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul can be prematurely pressured out, this contest will go on. Momentum drives the story line, but math drives the delegate count, and that may be all that matters in this year’s proportional fight for the Republican nomination.”

***

“Mitt Romney’s five-year-long hostile takeover bid for the Republican Party — and the presidency — enters its next grinding phase Wednesday with a spin session for reporters in Boston designed to convince them that his nomination is inevitable…

“If he doesn’t complete the LBO by June, Romney will appeal to what’s left of the party establishment to help him. He can cut deals in lots of directions, a process similar to bringing other investors into a difficult transaction that takes more cash than originally envisioned.

“Consider the calculations for one rival. It’s easier to see Gingrich doing a deal with Romney than with Santorum. What does Santorum have to offer, psychic and philosophical gratification? Mitt can offer Newt stock and a seat on the board.”

***

“‘I don’t see these guys getting out,’ admitted Kerry Healey, Romney’s former lieutenant governor, when asked what the obvious inflection point would be for the race to come to a close.

“‘We will turn slogging into an art form,’ cracked another adviser.

“‘Maybe May?’ ventured a senior Romney official about when the race may end.

“If Super Tuesday had produced a more convincing result, the hope among some in Romney’s orbit was to nail down the nomination by winning the Illinois primary later this month.

“That scenario seems unlikely now.”

***

“Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney ‘clearly’ had a triumphant night on Super Tuesday, but his six wins were ‘maybe not enough’ for someone who wants to win the presidency, GOP Sen. John McCain told ‘Face the Nation’ anchor Bob Schieffer on ‘Face to Face.’

“‘The longer this goes out, the worse our chances are,’ McCain said of the Republican primary. ‘I have to tell you, it makes me very worried about our chances to win in November.’”

***

“‘We’re never going to call on anybody to get out, but what we are calling is on Tea Party supporters and conservatives is to rally behind the only candidate that has demonstrated over and over again that he’s the one who can compete against Mitt Romney,’ [Santorum strategist John] Brabender said.

“‘The real key right now is, can we get an opportunity to get a one-on-one shot with Mitt Romney,’ he said. ‘What we found is, Gingrich did a nice job in his home state, but I don’t even think he had a second place anywhere else … It’s time for conservatives to say ‘Look, we’re going to rally behind one candidate, Rick Santorum.’”

***

“One thing I can tell you for sure, there’s not going to be a brokered convention, where some new person comes in and becomes the nominee. It’s going to be one of the four people that are still running.”


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 3 4 5

So was the Obama college video released? Does it tell us what we know or will it actually affect the election?

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 1:53 AM

Have you been under a rock? Can you not look at threads from earlier tonight? Yes. A video was released. More to come.

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 2:11 AM

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 2:05 AM

You won’t die. Just don’t do a whole lot of smoking and drinking the night before.

Bmore on March 8, 2012 at 2:12 AM

sharrukin on March 8, 2012 at 2:05 AM

Yep…

Gohawgs on March 8, 2012 at 2:17 AM

Have you been under a rock? Can you not look at threads from earlier tonight? Yes. A video was released. More to come.

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 2:11 AM

I thought that was the buzzfeed edited one? If that was unedited, it wont do anything. I hope the other videos are better but dont know. It’s hard to actually make a sitting president lose from something they did before their presidency. Rathergate wasnt going anywhere even before it was exposed

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:17 AM

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:17 AM

No worries Flapjackmaka, 0 is done with or without vids. Stick a fork in him. He’s done. Right it down.

Good night all.

Bmore on March 8, 2012 at 2:20 AM

You won’t die. Just don’t do a whole lot of smoking and drinking the night before.

Bmore on March 8, 2012 at 2:12 AM

Right. I’ll leave that til the actual run itself! ;-D

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM

I thought that was the buzzfeed edited one? If that was unedited, it wont do anything. I hope the other videos are better but dont know. It’s hard to actually make a sitting president lose from something they did before their presidency. Rathergate wasnt going anywhere even before it was exposed

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:17 AM

It was the first of more to come. Brickbat wadn’t stupid. He had much more than that. Remember, he understood popular culture better than any of us.
The next one I think is Moochelle in a racial sit in. If I had to guess, the whole series might be used to show just how racist and anti-whitey both he and Chewy are.
But I’m guessing.

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM

‘Night Bmore, Sharrukin! Good night all!

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM

No worries Flapjackmaka, 0 is done with or without vids. Stick a fork in him. He’s done. Right it down.

Bullsnacks! Tepid Romney is our nominee

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:25 AM

Bullsnacks! Tepid Romney is our nominee

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:25 AM

No, the superpacs like Americans for Prosperity, Rove’s pac and others ain’t gonna trust Romney. They’ll have millions and make the election about the SCOAMF and his ‘record’. We will (unlike McLame) drag Romney over the finish line in spite of himself. Turnout will be nowhere near what it was in ’08.

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 2:28 AM

What you need is a Mennonite Surf Party.

Adjoran on March 8, 2012 at 2:29 AM

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 2:05 AM

I’m pulling an Omaha Conservative, only I was thirsty. Running! You’re so good!

Gohawgs on March 8, 2012 at 1:58 AM

Amen! I don’t believe there is anyone is Washington who really wants to do anything. The mere fact that they write the most convoluted garbage indicates that they work hard at keep the average citizen in the dark.

Goodnight everyone! Sweet dreams.

Cindy Munford on March 8, 2012 at 2:34 AM

“We are seeing it. We are seeing the fabric of this country fall apart, and it’s falling apart because of single moms.”
Rick Santorum

Rusty Allen on March 8, 2012 at 2:34 AM

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 2:28 AM

But we have to make reasons to vote Romney as well. There are democrat pacs too. Anti-Obama isnt going to work. Anti bush didnt work in 2004 and mIttens just gave Obama a soundbite on gas prices. Liberals are getting more and more excited and we have a weak candidate with a lot less money than he came in with. Romney has no geographical base and wont win his homestate in november, not too mention the mdia and Obama havent started.

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:35 AM

In fact, Ron Paul is the best all around candidate; if only he had been president instead of George Bush we would all be better off!

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 12:41 AM

If there were an award for the MSLRPS (Most Staunchly Loyal Ron Paul Supporter), FR, I would bestow it upon you.

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 12:54 AM

I know you mean that facetiously but thanks anyway. Unfortunately it seems like about half of Republicans are trapped in 2004 when it comes to foreign policy. I mean, this is 2012 now, we know the answers to a lot of the old questions about George Bush’s foreign policy and it turns out that Ron Paul was a lot closer to the truth than George Bush! If only we had listened to Ron Paul we could have avoided bankrupting our children and burying their future under a mountain of debt for nothing. What exactly did we accomplish in Iraq, and if the answer is virtually nothing, perhaps worse than nothing, then the next question is, why were we there at all after 9/11, Bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan. We know the answer to that question too, now, this isn’t 2004 anymore.

Republicans need to be a lot more like Ron Paul and Reagan if they want my vote. Neither of them continue to push a failed liberal neocon foreign policy in the face of all it’s failure. Unlike 2004, Islamofascism is spreading across the ME, thanks in part to the help of a lot of the same people that took us into Iraq.

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Republicans need to be a lot more like Ron Paul…if they want my vote.

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Of course, that would make Republicans into Libertarians, and, uh, not Republicans.

CycloneCDB on March 8, 2012 at 2:46 AM

Of course, that would make Republicans into Libertarians, and, uh, not Republicans.

CycloneCDB on March 8, 2012 at 2:46 AM

We’re nominating Romney though. Kind of nulls the point.

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:48 AM

We’re nominating Romney though. Kind of nulls the point.

Flapjackmaka on March 8, 2012 at 2:48 AM

True. Then again, St. Paultard is the one facilitating that…

Politics truly does make strange bedfellows.

CycloneCDB on March 8, 2012 at 2:52 AM

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Hold it. I’m a neocon.

Wait,no, I’m a Rethuglican.

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 3:04 AM

Of course, that would make Republicans into Libertarians, and, uh, not Republicans.

CycloneCDB on March 8, 2012 at 2:46 AM

Reagan’s foreign policy was based on sound principles and worked, Bush’s wasn’t and didn’t. Reagan’s foreign policy was pretty conservative compared to Bush’s very liberal one, and Reagan wasn’t a Libertarian, though he did appeal to them as the core of conservatism, unlike today’s Republican Party.

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 3:14 AM

Rethuglican.

Lanceman on March 8, 2012 at 3:04 AM

You’re the only one here that has used the word Rethuglican.

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 3:17 AM

True. Then again, St. Paultard is the one facilitating that…

Politics truly does make strange bedfellows.

CycloneCDB on March 8, 2012 at 2:52 AM

Not in my case, I wouldn’t vote for any of the other three candidates whether he was in the race or not.

FloatingRock on March 8, 2012 at 3:18 AM

We are seeing it. We are seeing the fabric of this country fall apart, and it’s falling apart because of single moms.”
Rick Santorum

Rusty Allen on March 8, 2012 at 2:34 AM

Oh Goody, we are pulling quotes from 1994. Here I can play too:

A lot, as it turns out. Romney, as you will recall, ran for Senate against Ted Kennedy in 1994, and he said a lot of things back then that he probably now wishes he hadn’t said. Here’s one of them, from an interview Romney gave to The New Republic’s John Judis, published in TNR’s November 7, 1994 issue.

He told me he would have backed Chafee’s health care bill. ”I’m willing to vote for things that I am not wild with,” he said.

It’s really pretty open and shut, isn’t it? Chafee proposed a health care bill in 1993, a key feature of which was that it required everyone to buy insurance. Romney said that he would have voted for it if he’d had the chance. So there you go. (By the way, Romney said in the same interview that he wouldn’t back Newt Gingrich’s then-popular “Contract with America.”

melle1228 on March 8, 2012 at 3:36 AM

We are seeing it. We are seeing the fabric of this country fall apart, and it’s falling apart because of single moms.”
Rick Santorum

Rusty Allen on March 8, 2012 at 2:34 AM

This apparent quote from the retrograde bigot Rick Santorum doesn’t surprise me one bit. Sanctimonius Santorum is a social issues extremist who would guarantee an Obama landslide victory in November.

The more I learn about the unelectable theocrat Rick Santorum, the more I understand why the Obama campaign and the Democrat MSM are cheerleading so heavily for Santorum… they know he would be VERY EASY to defeat in a general election.

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

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 4:25 AM

The longer this Republican primary season goes on, the more it helps Barack Obama.

Sanctimonius Santorum and Newt Gingrich can’t win. It is time to think about what’s really important: defeating Obama.

This e-mail from the Romney campaign makes a lot of good points:

Wins in Ohio, Virginia, Massachusetts, Idaho, Vermont, and Alaska. 1.4 million votes. 205 delegates.

That’s what a great Super Tuesday looks like.

After winning 6 states yesterday, Mitt has now won 11 of the last 15 races. And in the important battle for delegates, Mitt now has more than twice as many as Rick Santorum and four times more than Newt Gingrich.

And looking at the schedule ahead, the delegate math just doesn’t add up for anyone but Mitt. Here are a few reasons why:

There’s only one Super Tuesday. Yesterday was the other candidates’ only real chance to stage any real comeback in the delegate race.

Only four of the remaining 34 state contests award their statewide delegates on a winner-take-all basis. And those four contests are all favorable for Mitt: Utah, New Jersey, Washington D.C., and Delaware.

Before Super Tuesday, nearly half of all contests were caucuses, but only seven of the remaining 34 contests are caucuses. Primaries require a strong national organization that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich simply don’t have.

As the other candidates attempt to ignore the basic principles of math, the only person’s odds of winning they are increasing are Barack Obama’s.

Mitt is on the path to becoming the Republican nominee. And because of your votes and support, yesterday put him that much closer.

P.S. The sooner Mitt reaches 1,144 delegates, the sooner we can focus all of our attention and energy on defeating Barack Obama.

I totally agree with this! It is time for us to unite and put all our focus and energy on going after Obama. We need to stop this useless in-fighting.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 4:28 AM

Put me in the camp of anyone but Obama-we just can’t afford it. We are literally going down the tubes w/ this guy in office. But, I will mention, though, I do not get a warm fuzzy from a candidate that can’t get his act together to be eligible in all states/districts during the primary process. If he can’t get his act together now, why should I expect he’ll have his act together going up against Obuma.

Static21 on March 8, 2012 at 4:33 AM

melle1228 on March 8, 2012 at 3:36 AM

I’m sorry to say, but your attack on Romney was pretty weak.

Santorum’s extreme bigoted quotes, both from years ago and more recently, would be deadly in a general election campaign.

The fact that Romney is more conservative now than he was in the 1990′s would hardly be a damaging characteristic in a general election campaign; in fact, it could be a benefit.

I look forward to the general election campaign, when we won’t have to spend as much time caring about a bunch of bigoted nutballs who don’t think Romney is conservative enough for them. I don’t think much of this small group of Romney-bashing kooks.

Thankfully, we will have a nominee this time who we can be proud of. Romney will defeat Obama. It is time to put this unhelpful primary season behind us.

I’m sick of hearing about unelectable also-ran candidates like Rick Santorum. Enough is enough, already.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 4:55 AM

I’m sick of hearing about unelectable also-ran candidates like romney. Enough is enough, already.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 4:55 AM

renalin on March 8, 2012 at 5:26 AM

It sure would be nice to attribute the quotes to a certain person for the blog post.

mark cantu on March 8, 2012 at 5:35 AM

Good Morning!

OT: i switched over to msdnc last night just to hear what they were saying about the obama video….they were praising dear leader for protesting for such a noble cause….

they will continue to praise him this am I bet on morning joe and mocking the breitbart folks…

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 5:39 AM

with all this hullabaloo going on…will the RNC go back to winner take all for each primary? if so, we need to have 2 or 3 primary days with all states voting on one of those 3 days and be done with it…

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 5:58 AM

these eggheads on morning joe really want a brokered convention it appears…only one ‘gop’ person on the panel but they all think they know what is good for the party…

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 6:14 AM

Have te words Alinsky tactics ever crossed milquetoast mitts lips . I think not. He will be crushed by the Obama machine and the media lap dogs . Thanks a lot establishment tweeners .

rudee on March 8, 2012 at 6:21 AM

hello? is anyone out there?

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 7:01 AM

hello? is anyone out there?

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 7:01 AM

Good Morning! Just got back from the bus stop! I read your posts. Why is it everyone knows exactly how the republicans ought to handle things, but no one ever actually does anything at all? I think we have too many chiefs and not enough indians!

Night Owl on March 8, 2012 at 7:11 AM

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 5:39 AM

I was wondering if they were going to make it a feature but I have to ask why is that the case if it had to be hidden in 2008?

Cindy Munford on March 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM

why “if” that is the case, it had to be hidden in 2008. Can I have the bad server back, please?

Cindy Munford on March 8, 2012 at 7:15 AM

I was wondering if they were going to make it a feature but I have to ask why is that the case if it had to be hidden in 2008?

Cindy Munford on March 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM

I wonder that too. I don’t think anyone who would tend to vote for him would find anything wrong with it, and those who wouldn’t are not a bit suprised.

Night Owl on March 8, 2012 at 7:18 AM

why “if” that is the case, it had to be hidden in 2008. Can I have the bad server back, please?

Cindy Munford on March 8, 2012 at 7:15 AM

LOL- Go back and read it again, you were right the first time, I think!

Night Owl on March 8, 2012 at 7:20 AM

Morning NO and Cindy

Good question Cindy….

Spot on Night owl

cmsinaz on March 8, 2012 at 7:26 AM

Act of God for his competition? Is he working for the other guy -with the red suit and hot horns.

Don L on March 8, 2012 at 7:37 AM

Mitt is in a far better position than is being portrayed. The conventional wisdom of today looks eerily similar to what they were saying about another candidate that couldn’t connect in 2008 … http://bit.ly/qVdDUt

ombdz on March 8, 2012 at 7:38 AM

The longer this Republican primary season goes on, the more it helps Barack Obama.

Sanctimonius Santorum and Newt Gingrich can’t win. It is time to think about what’s really important: defeating Obama.

This e-mail from the Romney campaign makes a lot of good points:

Wins in Ohio, Virginia, Massachusetts, Idaho, Vermont, and Alaska. 1.4 million votes. 205 delegates.

That’s what a great Super Tuesday looks like.

After winning 6 states yesterday, Mitt has now won 11 of the last 15 races. And in the important battle for delegates, Mitt now has more than twice as many as Rick Santorum and four times more than Newt Gingrich.

And looking at the schedule ahead, the delegate math just doesn’t add up for anyone but Mitt. Here are a few reasons why:

There’s only one Super Tuesday. Yesterday was the other candidates’ only real chance to stage any real comeback in the delegate race.

Only four of the remaining 34 state contests award their statewide delegates on a winner-take-all basis. And those four contests are all favorable for Mitt: Utah, New Jersey, Washington D.C., and Delaware.

Before Super Tuesday, nearly half of all contests were caucuses, but only seven of the remaining 34 contests are caucuses. Primaries require a strong national organization that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich simply don’t have.

As the other candidates attempt to ignore the basic principles of math, the only person’s odds of winning they are increasing are Barack Obama’s.

Mitt is on the path to becoming the Republican nominee. And because of your votes and support, yesterday put him that much closer.

P.S. The sooner Mitt reaches 1,144 delegates, the sooner we can focus all of our attention and energy on defeating Barack Obama.

I totally agree with this! It is time for us to unite and put all our focus and energy on going after Obama. We need to stop this useless in-fighting.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 4:28 AM

Well then what are you worried about if ol Romneycare himself, is it, let this man of unwavering principle, solid conservative credentials and impeccable character, steel nerves and armed with a quick–witted tongue, go forth to destroy the inept meek Obama machine?

Don L on March 8, 2012 at 7:44 AM

“‘We’re never going to call on anybody to get out, but what we are calling is on Tea Party supporters and conservatives is to rally behind the only candidate that has demonstrated over and over again that he’s the one who can compete against Mitt Romney,’ [Santorum strategist John] Brabender said.

No, your guy is and always was a joke. The only reason you’re still in the race is because no one ever took your candidate seriously enough to include him in the circular firing squad that took out all the other not-Romneys.

I would have have preferred Perry, and he should have stayed in the race longer. Because even though he might share your so-con tendencies, he was a limited government guy…unlike yours.

At this point, Romney is the best of four bad choices. Just because I don’t like him doesn’t mean I’m willing to flush the WH and both houses of Congress down the toilet by nominating a bonehead in a sweater vest who will let Obama and the MSM keep debates about contraception, abortion, gay marriage, and everything BUT the economy and federal budget bloat alive from now until November.

So…thanks, but no thanks. Why don’t you drop out the race, instead?

DRayRaven on March 8, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Mitt McCain 2012 !

Just when you thought the party wouldn’t be more stupid and nominate another squishy Bush era Progressive……..tah dah……we give the establishment choice to throw the election to Obama.

Thank you MittBots, he hasn’t even gory ten the nomination but he’s already making excuses for Obama.

“Remember, we have nothing to fear from an Obama Presidency”—-the first McCain, 2008.

PappyD61 on March 8, 2012 at 7:50 AM

And Mitt is NOT GOING TO PICK a “flamethrower” for Veep.

That lets out everyone but two people, Rubio or Susana Martinez.

Electorally its a no brainer…….Romney / Rubio.

Progressive Squish and Tea Party Bush favored Squish…..perfect.

The Pale Pastel Party does it again.

PappyD61 on March 8, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Gary Johnson 2012 is my answer. Vote against both liberals!

jjnco73 on March 8, 2012 at 8:00 AM

listen…mittens blows.

he blows far less than Santz, he blows slightly less than Newt the unelectable. Go effin’ Newt btw.

Let’s face it – if we can’t win in this environment, we’re a bunch of losers. The SoCons (our MAJOR constituents) are @ssholes. No one likes them, not even me (I’m a Christian…a real one though – not the judge jury and executioner type).

We have a choice – the Bam Man, or SOMEONE ELSE. I implore you – pick someone else. Anyone else.

DHChron on March 8, 2012 at 8:01 AM

PappyD61 on March 8, 2012 at 7:58 AM

I say Romney/West

but Rubio and Jindal are perfect choices too. Let’s watch Romney pick someone out of right field. He’s good at screwing up

DHChron on March 8, 2012 at 8:04 AM

How long after the nomination will it take Mittens to run to the left passed Obama?

A. Minutes
B. Hours
C. A day
D. Trick question, he’s already there.

jjnco73 on March 8, 2012 at 8:04 AM

“Mitt Romney’s campaign gathered the national press corps in their campaign war room this morning to deliver a simple message: It would take an ‘act of God’ for any candidate not named Mitt Romney to win the Republican nomination…

“One thing I can tell you for sure, there’s not going to be a brokered convention, where some new person comes in and becomes the nominee. It’s going to be one of the four people that are still running.”

So, if Mitt’s prophecy is wrong, and there is a brokered convention which nominates someone other than one of the four people that are currently running, then Mitt Romney would have to admit that was an ‘act of God’, right?

ITguy on March 8, 2012 at 8:08 AM

Romney has received less than 41% of the votes cast so far.

If he can’t even win a majority of Republican primary voters, how does he think he can win a majority of the general eletorate, containing Independents and Democrats?

If Romney goes into a brokered convention with less than 50% of the votes cast, that means that a majority of Republican primary voters DO NOT WANT Romney. And, if that happens, I think that the brokered convention SHOULD nominate someone outside of the 4 people currently running. Someone who has run on a national ticket before, and someone that all four camps (Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul) could get behind and support.

ITguy on March 8, 2012 at 8:24 AM

electorate

ITguy on March 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM

How long after the nomination will it take Mittens to run to the left passed Obama?

A. Minutes
B. Hours
C. A day
D. Trick question, he’s already there.

jjnco73 on March 8, 2012 at 8:04 AM

what are you? a double agent? :)

mittens is the worst thing since gloves were invented.

but he’s not the O machine, and he’s a good transition if he picks the right running mate – sure to be the next prez. if it’s Rubio. I’m a not mittens guy…maybe the most fervent not Romney guy. This isn’t a short term fight. West, Rubio, Jindal, Christie…pick the right running mate and we have a Rupug dynasty to come. I hate mittens, but the myth that he was a lefty gov is bullsh*t. The Movement is what matters. ABO

DHChron on March 8, 2012 at 8:33 AM

someone challenge me!

that last post was grammatical suicide! someone must disagree :)

DHChron on March 8, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Romney has received less than 41% of the votes cast so far.

This is a misleading argument, if your argument is that it it proves that Romney cannot win. Most of the primaries have had at least 4 candidates, and winning a straight majority in a field of more than 2 is difficult for even a popular candidate. Frankly, 41% of the vote is a sizeable plurality. Sure, if you position your argument that Romney is running against all of the non-Romney’s, then 41% loses, but that presumes that each time a non- Romney drops out, one of the others gets 100% of their votes, which has not been happening. It was not that long ago that the ABR crown was pushing the meme that Romney could not get more than 25% of the vote – of course the field was larger at that time – and then 30%, 35% and so forth.

Now, if your argument is that Romney’s campaign has not scored a knockout blow with huge victories in big states….well, then you can legitimately use that 41% as evidence of that. But, as Ann Coulter, noted Mittbot, wrote yesterday, “Mitt Romney won more than twice as many delegates on Super Tuesday as Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum. The Non-Fox Media’s take-away is that Romney suffered a major setback Tuesday night. To explain the widening gulf in delegates won by Romney compared to the others — he now has more delegates than all other candidates combined — the media claim that a vote for any candidate other than Romney is an explicit vote against Romney.”

Spin is spin.

Priscilla on March 8, 2012 at 8:45 AM

I think that the brokered convention SHOULD nominate someone outside of the 4 people currently running. Someone who has run on a national ticket before, and someone that all four camps (Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul) could get behind and support.

ITguy on March 8, 2012 at 8:24 AM

And who would that be?

Syzygy on March 8, 2012 at 8:50 AM

someone challenge me!

DHChron on March 8, 2012 at 8:42 AM

*whap!*

(I don’t know if that was a mitten or a glove with which I slapped you. Sheesh, it’s hard not to end a sentence with a preposition.)

What Movement are you talking about? I challenge you to a duel! Pistols? Swords? Or, a Joust?

Fallon on March 8, 2012 at 8:56 AM

How long after the nomination will it take Mittens to run to the left passed Obama?

A. Minutes
B. Hours
C. A day
D. Trick question, he’s already there.

jjnco73 on March 8, 2012 at 8:04 AM

You mean “I won’t make any statements against the president” Romney? Answer is D

congma on March 8, 2012 at 9:04 AM

‘It will take an act of God’…Mitt better be careful who he’s tempting or he could see an act. McCain is so annoying, but he does know about losing in Nov.

Kissmygrits on March 8, 2012 at 9:28 AM

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 2:05 AM

I’ve walked 11 of them+a marathon.
They’re great….and none are in Lubbock. I might sign up to do one in Austin or something this year. I NEED my 13.1!

annoyinglittletwerp on March 8, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Paul/KookSpinach 2012

ConcealedKerry on March 8, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Bmore on March 8, 2012 at 2:12 AM

Right. I’ll leave that til the actual run itself! ;-D

cynccook on March 8, 2012 at 2:23 AM

St.L. used to hand out beer @ mile 12.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 8, 2012 at 10:20 AM

PappyD61

most likely so

maverick muse on March 8, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Mitt’s Global Corporatism defies Liberty at home and abroad.

Mitt Romney’s international policy endorses the genocide of the indigenous tribes of the Middle East, namely the Eastern Christian Church population being exterminated. What direct communications has Mitt Romney conducted with the various leaders of Syrian or Iranian communities, specifically with the indigenous Christians, before determining to conduct American war on Iran? Certainly less than the SCOAMF Obama — pathetic!

So far as Mitt or neoconservatism is concerned, logical Syrians and Iranians don’t exist and hence have no relevance or matter as any perceived possible future threat “deserves” annihilation now in order to distract Americans from cleansing our own government. Since you missed it, that is the meaning of “Fighting over there so we don’t have to here” (GWB). The “right” to monopolize the world through warfare is NOT the American legacy of our Founding Fathers from any previous American generation, nor the immediate legacy of my parents, nor my legacy to my children.

Where’s the logic attacking Iran and turning every Iranian against Americans? Who really believes that every Iranian is just like Ahmadinahjad, ignoring his political opponents and the Iranian protests against theocracy?

They don’t have nuclear WMD, UN research proves they have made made NO progress towards such, and their theocratic leader maintains that they have never and will never pursue nuclear WMD. The population in Iran is NOT preparing to be attacked, nor to attack. That Iranians and their customers suffer severe hardships during their coldest winter on record because of the UN “humanitarian concerns” prompting the boycott of Iranian products and seizure of the Central Bank of Iran is no matter to neoconservatives, hell bent on blood lust.

To usurp support from his Republican opponent Santorum, Mitt Romney bangs for America to wipe out Iran.

Romney already delegated any personal responsibility to uphold the Constitution to his lawyers who (with Romney) belong to the same set as Obama’s. Given Holder’s decrees and precedence from throughout the current administration in globalist corporatism, Romney will further American compliance within globalism, subservient to the UN. When has Romney ever condemned corruption permeating the UN, the US Judicial Branch, the US Treasury, the Federal Reserve, or the international banking industry?

maverick muse on March 8, 2012 at 11:14 AM

What Movement are you talking about? I challenge you to a duel! Pistols? Swords? Or, a Joust?

Fallon on March 8, 2012 at 8:56 AM

the conservative movement :) and definitely pistols…I don’t do horses or sharp pointy objects.

Wish I wasn’t so drunk I could have answered you sooner.

DHChron on March 8, 2012 at 4:27 PM

I look forward to the general election campaign, when we won’t have to spend as much time caring about a bunch of bigoted nutballs who don’t think Romney is conservative enough for them. I don’t think much of this small group of Romney-bashing kooks.

Yeah good luck getting Romney elected if you “don’t worry about the kooks who don’t think Romney is conservative enough.”

melle1228 on March 8, 2012 at 5:29 PM

I think that the brokered convention SHOULD nominate someone outside of the 4 people currently running. Someone who has run on a national ticket before, and someone that all four camps (Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul) could get behind and support.

ITguy on March 8, 2012 at 8:24 AM

ITGuy, you are the resident birther on HotAir. I have read your posts going on and on and on about Obama’s birth certificate.

Based on the level of sophistication displayed in your embarrassing ranting about Obama’s birth certificate, I can only imagine that you would hope for an incompetent, unelectable, half-term former governor and reality tv show star like Sarah Palin.

I’m surprised you aren’t going for Rick Santorum. Rick Santorum is working overtime to secure the idiot voting bloc. Sadly for Santorum, though, it won’t be enough to get him anywhere close to securing the nomination.

bluegill on March 8, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5