Two man race?

posted at 8:40 am on March 14, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

That’s the question coming from the media today after Rick Santorum unexpectedly won both Southern primaries last night.  Santorum won Alabama by six points over Gingrich, who barely edged past Romney for second place by 1,318 votes, and surprised everyone by winning Mississippi by two points over Gingrich.  Romney’s third-place finish in both gave a black eye to Romney, who had appeared to be winning in Mississippi in the last few days, although Romney went on to win the caucuses in Hawaii by 20 points, and in American Samoa as well.

While Gingrich reiterated that he won’t quit, Matt Lewis says it’s time for him to get out:

At least twice during this GOP primary season, former Speaker Newt Gingrich’s campaign was left for dead. He impressively battled back — against the odds — each time. For demonstrating toughness — and for always injecting energy and new ideas into the GOP debate — Gingrich has earned our respect.

But there won’t be another comeback. Not this year, at least. Having lost two southern states tonight — ostensibly the geographic bloc that should be his base — the time has come for Gingrich to exit the race. …

Newt Gingrich surprised us all by taking a shoestring campaign all the way into March of 2012. He won South Carolina, and his home state of Georgia. He should be proud of the campaign he has run. But if he wants to remain proud of his efforts, it’s important to go out in a classy manner.

The rest of the media isn’t waiting for a concession speech.  The Washington Post has already declared it a two-man race, “symbolically”:

Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum’s twin wins in Alabama and Mississippi Tuesday night are almost certain to give him what he has long wanted: A one-on-one race with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

The victories by Santorum came in the political backyard of Newt Gingrich and are likely to symbolically — if not literally — end the former speaker’s hopes in the race.

CBS believes that last night sent the Matt Lewis message to both Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul, and predicts a groundswell among conservatives to rally around Santorum:

Before Newt Gingrich emerged Tuesday night in Birmingham to address supporters following his losses in Mississippi and Alabama, his wife Callista introduced him as “the next president of the United States.”

At this point, you have to wonder if even she still believes it.

Gingrich has won just two states in this primary process, and on Tuesday night he lost the two contests that he needed to win to have any chance to rejuvenate his campaign. Rick Santorum has now unambiguously claimed the mantle of consensus conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, and the race has now been transformed into a two-man battle for delegates, with Gingrich and Ron Paul on the outside looking in.

That’s not how Gingrich says he sees it, of course. In his remarks Tuesday, he dismissed the “elite media” for the coming calls to drop out and vowed to stay in the race until the nominating convention. However, it’s worth noting that the most important calls for Gingrich to exit will likely come not from the media, but the conservative establishment, which will now rally unambiguously behind Santorum.

National Journal thinks it’s a two-man race as well, but that Santorum is still in trouble:

Alabama and Mississippi threw former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum a lifeline Tuesday, knocking Newt Gingrich on his heels and the Republican presidential nomination at least temporarily out of Mitt Romney’s reach.

The twin Southern victories will help Santorum frame the contest going forward as a two-man race against Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who has won more states and delegates than any other candidate.

Gingrich, who tried to position himself as the South’s prodigal son after winning South Carolina and his home state of Georgia, will face mounting pressure to exit the race. The former House speaker spent more time in Alabama and Mississippi than any of his rivals. But Santorum has stolen Gingrich’s base out from under him, having also defeated him last week in Oklahoma and Tennessee.

“No question, Santorum has emerged as the conservative challenger to Romney, while Romney remains a weak front-runner no matter how you play the expectations,” said Greg Mueller, a conservative Republican strategist. “He is having trouble energizing conservatives when choices like Santorum and Gingrich are in the race.”

Will this be a two-man race?  I don’t see Gingrich departing before Louisiana on the 24th.  After that, there is a ten-day stretch in which Gingrich will have time to reconsider his chances in the race and think about how much cash he has left.  Santorum already had a small polling lead in Louisiana, and the results from Mississippi and Alabama are likely to enhance his standing in the state, and Romney will almost certainly spend a lot of money in his last chance to win a Deep South state for another two months.  Gingrich might not even place second in Louisiana.

Nevertheless, for all intents and purposes this has become a two-man race, regardless of how many others stick around.  Gingrich’s only chance left was to win the South and then argue that Republicans couldn’t win in November with a nominee who couldn’t win in Dixie.  Now that Santorum has won three states in the South (he won Tennessee last week) to Gingrich’s two, Santorum prevails even on Ginrich’s best argument.  I’d expect to hear that Gingrich will suspend his campaign sometime in the final week of March.


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 4 5

Feel free to vote for Obama.

MeatHeadinCA on March 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Again, that’s hysterical since it’s the anti-Romney paranoids who have been making that kind of threat all along. Even now Newty and his supporters are pledging themselves to sabotaging the GOP in order to “punish” Romney.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Funny how no one mentions 2/3 of Mitt’s delegates are not bound.

katy the mean old lady on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

I`ll take a brokered Cuda-vention, the field as it is, is quite lackluster.

NY Conservative on March 14, 2012 at 8:51 AM

You know who runs the conventions, right? The only chance “those people” (as some like to refer to them) are likely to throw Sarah out is if they think they can put a stake through her career once and for all.

And before you think it couldn’t happen, just think of what a short season with less time to raise money and talk of lots and lots of acrimony raised from the people who voted for any of the, what 4 dozen, candidates who were running at one time or another.

Could she win in such a scenario…maybe given who she is up against but if she fails she likely is done as a candidate for good. Stepping up as a potential “savior” and then failing to complete maybe something her devoted supporters may accept and excuse but beyond that she is likely to become exactly as irrelevant to the national conversation as Fred Thompson is.

If she were somehow to be thrown out there and were to fail (Yes I know, never happen because she is the most driving force in politics since ever) she then will be easy for everyone to ignore even when she makes sense or has legitimate issues. Losers are easily back-benched by parties and the media and discounted and a loss would take away not just this election but also her voice going forward as a loss at that level would put her in the ranks of the Al Gores and John Kerrys.

Betenoire on March 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Mocking Republican voters is a sure win for Romney. You guys might want to read Dale Carnegie’s book.

Fallon on March 14, 2012 at 9:14 AM

I’m not worried as they aren’t voting Romney in the primary anyways. If they don’t even know the president’s religion then why would I care what they think “conservative” means?

If he loses, will you put aside your acrimony toward Santorum if he becomes the nominee, wholeheartedly and vocally support and vote for him in the general election?

Rixon on March 14, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Romney yes, Gingrich yes, Paul yes (but I’ll still make fun of his incompetent followers), Santorum maybe, ill have to sleep on that one.

RINO on March 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Prediction: Ticket will be Romney/Santorum.

MrLynn on March 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Not a bad prediction but that assumes that Santorum doesn’t crash and burn in April and May. It’s a long road through some of the larger delegate-rich states.

rhombus on March 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Feel free to vote for Obama.
MeatHeadinCA on March 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM
You mean like some of the anti-Mitt crowd have been promising to do?
changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Yep. You guys can finally unite on something.

MeatHeadinCA on March 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Rose1376 on March 14, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Well said. That’s my concern.

jan3 on March 14, 2012 at 9:29 AM

MeatHeadinCA on March 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM

You mean like some of the anti-Mitt crowd have been promising to do?

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Mitt Romney supporters are saying the same thing. All of you individual candidate shills, are saying the same thing and there isn’t one of you better than another.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Sorry but the federal budget and overspending is an issue. I guess that is why Romney is not much of a Tea Party fan.

txmomof6 on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Sorry but that’s not what you referred to in your original post. Now you’re shifting. The money Romney is spending is his money to spend. That’s why this is not related to the fiscal policy of the government. Try again.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Mitt Romney supporters are saying the same thing. All of you individual candidate shills, are saying the same thing and there isn’t one of you better than another.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:29 AM

That’s BS and you know it.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:30 AM

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:23 AM

You mittbot hacks crack me up. Romneycare has NEVER recieved more than 49% in a general election ever. Further, that 49% was against a no name democrat in the 2002 governor race named shannon o’brian. Who! If it wasn’t for the green party candidate, romneycare would have lost that race to. True to form he outspent the dem 10 to 1 to pull in that 49%.

The most electable is santorium, of the current candidates running. If he wins his home state of Pa. he’s president. Latest polling of pa. has obama/santorium in a deadheat while romneycare is losing by 7 points.

Your romneycare electablity arguement is pure crap. He has never proven a good candidate. My view, romneycare is a sure loser.

Danielvito on March 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

BS?

If he loses, will you put aside your acrimony toward Santorum if he becomes the nominee, wholeheartedly and vocally support and vote for him in the general election?

Rixon on March 14, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Romney yes, Gingrich yes, Paul yes (but I’ll still make fun of his incompetent followers), Santorum maybe, ill have to sleep on that one.

RINO on March 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Again, that’s hysterical since it’s the anti-Romney paranoids who have been making that kind of threat all along. Even now Newty and his supporters are pledging themselves to sabotaging the GOP in order to “punish” Romney.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

No kidding. It’s the so-called true cons who want to cut off their nose to spite their face.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Santorum is ahead by double digits in all the polls in PA…

Romney won’t waste his time campaigning there he has no shot…

MGardner on March 14, 2012 at 9:32 AM

That took 3 seconds. I can find a ton of pledges in the MS and AL primary thread with Mitt supporters saying they’ll sit it out.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:33 AM

while making four grammatical errors in an eighteen-word sentence.

Actually, I counted five.

Right Mover on March 14, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Funny how no one mentions 2/3 of Mitt’s delegates are not bound.

katy the mean old lady on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Funny how people who keep mentioning this desperate hope don’t realize the same situation exists for the other candidates as well.

rhombus on March 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM

All the prognostication is pretty comical.

Last time around, Romney received zero delegates from Alabama and Mississippi. They all went to McCain or in Alabama- Huckabee. Northerners typically don’t do very well in either of those states.

The General? Those states went almost 60% for McCain.

I would be real careful before this was used as some type of “game changer” or “barometer” regarding Romney.

Marcus Traianus on March 14, 2012 at 8:53 AM

It is, however, interesting to note that had Gingrich not been in the mix last night, Santorum would have received ALL of the delegates from Alabama and I think Mississippi, too. Apparently, the only reason why the delegates were proportioned is because no one candidate got 50%. Had Gingrich not been in the mix, I feel confident that Santorum would have gotten the 50% and thus all of the delegates. At least that is my understanding of how it works in Alabama and Mississippi.

KickandSwimMom on March 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Mitt Romney supporters are saying the same thing. All of you individual candidate shills, are saying the same thing and there isn’t one of you better than another.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:29 AM

That’s simply not true. Most of those saying they won’t vote at all or will vote for Obama if their guy doesn’t win are from the ABR crowd. angryed and alwaysfiredup are two of the most recent examples, just from last night. I’ve said repeatedly I’ll vote for whomever the nominee is.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Your romneycare electablity arguement is pure crap. He has never proven a good candidate. My view, romneycare is a sure loser.

Danielvito on March 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

That’s just the anti-Romney paranoia talking. It’s still treatable so there’s hope for you yet.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM

I can’t decide on Gingrich if the hubris and his only last chance while he is young enough to run for president, will push him to spoil Santorum’s chances, I thought he would win something last night. So, will he stay in and be the spoiler?

The problem plaguing voters is, Newts wit and experience vs. Santorum’s wholesomeness on social conservatism. Rick doesn’t have any executive experience. He has been a Whip.

When it’s two guys and no spoiler what happens, is it Rick’s big chance, or is it then the Guy with Experience in Business and as a Governor, vs. the guy who supports Unions AND Right to Work.

We can vote on the kind of health care we want, Santorum’s only issue with Romney, but it seems we can’t vote away the unions, their corruption and their toll they take on our economy. And Rick flatter’s easily, while Mitt doesn’t have that flaw. You see, it’s not about Mitt, but it is All about Rick and All about Newt. Egos.

Yesterday Newt started tempting the electorate by hitching himself to Rick Perry, probably thinking a Texas strategy to ruin Santorum. I wonder what Perry thinks about that?

Fleuries on March 14, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Gingrich is my preferred candidate, but I am beginning to agree with Ed’s analysis. I just do not see a path to victory for him.

Doomberg on March 14, 2012 at 9:14 AM

I agree with the logic also, but it’s not so much Newt actually winning that I feel is why he should stay in this. It’s the ideas and what his candidacy brings to the table sorely lacking in the other two. He really has his pulse on the mood of the electorate as it is now, he just can’t get traction for a variety of reasons I won’t get into, but I suspect the entire establishment media hollering day and night about his dropping out and the futility of his campaign may have a thing or two to do with it.

We all know the media molds minds like clay, and it’s worked with their Newt obsession because he’s the only one who’s taken them on and put them on notice. When you take big media head expect a backlash aka Palin and Brietbart. Barrels of ink.

Newt may drop out but that will depend on his funding. I don’t see him doing it because his media nemesis is demanding he do so. He knows the game they’re playing.

RepubChica on March 14, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Funny how people who keep mentioning this desperate hope don’t realize the same situation exists for the other candidates as well.

rhombus on March 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Not a desperate hope, dear. Just a fact. Untwist yer knickers.

katy the mean old lady on March 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Romney yes, Gingrich yes, Paul yes (but I’ll still make fun of his incompetent followers), Santorum maybe, ill have to sleep on that one.

RINO on March 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Did he say he wouldn’t vote for Santorum? Did he say he would stay home? Did he say he would vote for ObaMao because “there’s really no difference?” Those are the kinds of stupid things that anti-Romney paranoids have been saying all along. You can waste your time delving for a random quote here and there but you know as well as I do which side has been making threats. I have always said that I will support the nominee, period. It’s unfortunate there haven’t been very many anti-Romney haters willing to say the same thing.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

You know, I was finally starting to warm up to Romney. He was supposed to be the steady guy who had no gaffes. But the last month — what? between the “I have friends who are owners of…”, “Ya’ll”, “Grits”, “cheesy grits”, etc. He’s completely lost the one thing he had going for him — the perception that he’s a stable candidate who won’t say something stupid.

(btw…I have no problem with his being friends with owners of NASCAR or football franchises, but the guy doesn’t know when to shut up and he tries overcompensating too much).

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

It’s wonderful having Santorum to vote for and feeling passion and enthusiasm for a candidate! Even if it’s only primaries, but God help us if it turns out to be Romney in the general. It will be like campaigning for and trying to drag a dead fish across the finish line. McCain was bad enough, but this possibility?!

mozalf on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Not a desperate hope, dear. Just a fact. Untwist yer knickers.

katy the mean old lady on March 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Yeah, sorry. It’s pretty desperate.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Funny how no one mentions 2/3 of Mitt’s delegates are not bound.

katy the mean old lady

Uh, no. not to mention all candidates would be similiar. Even if you take out the caucus results Mitt still has 3 times the delegates Santorum does.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Again, that’s hysterical since it’s the anti-Romney paranoids who have been making that kind of threat all along. Even now Newty and his supporters are pledging themselves to sabotaging the GOP in order to “punish” Romney.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Nice how MittBotts use the same kind of rhetoric to paint their Conservative friends who just happen to believe that Mitt Romney is a complete phony.

Guess in YOUR party – ALL people think alike and ALL people love Mitt Romney.

Go start your own party knuckle-head – but while you stay in this one realize YOU DON’T CONTROL WHAT HAPPENS IN IT.

HERE – you deal with people who don’t agree with you.

And there are A LOT who don’t agree with Willard, pal – sorry.

HondaV65 on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Funny how you mittbot don’t address the fact romneycare has never recieved more than 49% in a general election.

Danielvito on March 14, 2012 at 9:39 AM

For all of you who are supporting Romney because of his supposed fiscal conservatism, I have one word for you: Romneycare. What is fiscally conservative about that? The fact that he won’t admit it was a mistake should be your first clue that he doesn’t get it and that’s what you are seeing in the vote results. Santorum was part of the Republican congress that overspent, but he owns up to that and admits his mistakes. Who do you think really gets it in light of those facts? Also, Romney says he won’t say anything outrageous about Obama. That’s McCain 2.0 and we see how well that strategy worked out. Santorum has no problem attacking Obama.

If Romney is the nominee, it’s my belief that the Obama machine will successfully paint him as part of the 1%, out-of-touch, whatever. Plus, if all this war on women crap were resonating with Americans, then why are Obama’s numbers going down on that issue, and with women no less? This is not the winner for Obama that the media wants you to believe and it is not a credible argument against Santorum.

GeorgiaBuckeye on March 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Ya’ll”, “Grits”, “cheesy grits”, etc. He’s completely lost the one thing he had going for him — the perception that he’s a stable candidate who won’t say something stupid.

(btw…I have no problem with his being friends with owners of NASCAR or football franchises, but the guy doesn’t know when to shut up and he tries overcompensating too much).

shannon76

I love when people start off a lie with “I really liked him….” and then spew some BS. If you read the quotes about the grits he was mocking himself in that he had no southern culture.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

You know, I was finally starting to warm up to Romney. He was supposed to be the steady guy who had no gaffes. But the last month — what? between the “I have friends who are owners of…”, “Ya’ll”, “Grits”, “cheesy grits”, etc. He’s completely lost the one thing he had going for him — the perception that he’s a stable candidate who won’t say something stupid.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Except that those weren’t “gaffes” but Romney having a laugh at his own expense. If you truly don’t understand that then I have to doubt the sincerity of your claim about “warming up” to Romney.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Can Santorum win?

Sure. If Romney drops out.

Otherwise, he’s just doing Obama’s dirty work by bloodying the guy who’s going to be the nominee.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:41 AM

Uh, no. not to mention all candidates would be similiar. Even if you take out the caucus results Mitt still has 3 times the delegates Santorum does.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Your boy’s getting his ass handed to him – regardless of the delegate count – he can’t win in the South and the the South is the center of the GOP universe.

Deal with it dude.

If he doesn’t prove he can carry the south – even by winning 30 percent – dude is toast.

HondaV65 on March 14, 2012 at 9:41 AM

That took 3 seconds. I can find a ton of pledges in the MS and AL primary thread with Mitt supporters saying they’ll sit it out.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:33 AM

I didn’t pledge to anything, that was more of a “I don’t know and I’m not going to put much thought into it because Santorum won’t have the delegates anyways”.

RINO on March 14, 2012 at 9:41 AM

For all those who claim that fiscal conservatism is why Romney should win, what do you say about his profligate spending ways in campaigning for votes.

txmomof6 on March 14, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Romney is not a fiscal conservative. A lot of his supporters are trying to claim the mantle of “fiscally but not socially conservative,” but that tactic isn’t going to work. Of th

WTH?

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Remember these are the guys who will tell you, in the very next breath, that their only concern is with beating Obama.

Doomberg on March 14, 2012 at 9:41 AM

The Alabama and Mississippi primaries did show Gingrich’s weakness on what was supposedly his home turf. If Gingrich can’t win two Deep South states against Santorum, what will happen in Rust Belt states where Santorum’s blue-collar message is more popular? Gingrich has no chance of winning the nomination, and should drop out soon.

It’s a shame, because Gingrich does have some great ideas, such as when he mentioned drilling for 24 billion barrels of oil under North Dakota. This would be good for ND and the nation as a whole, but why did Gingrich mention this in Alabama, where people would be more interested in drilling in the Gulf? Gingrich seems to have trouble adapting his message to the states where he is campaigning, even in the South.

Even though Santorum “won” AL and MS, the margins were small enough so that the delegates awarded are essentially a three-way tie between Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney. Santorum demonstrated strength, and Gingrich demonstrated weakness in the South, but not much really changed overall.

Early in the campaign, Gingrich said in a debate that all the Republican candidates were a “team” to defeat Barack Obama. Now is the time to show his “teamwork” by realizing that he can’t possibly win the nomination, and drop out and be an “ideas man” for the eventual nominee, possibly in exchange for a Cabinet position if the Republican nominee is elected.

Santorum will be a much tougher opponent for Romney if Gingrich drops out, although he would be a weaker opponent than Romney against Obama. If this became a two-man race between Romney and Santorum, Romney would probably have to shift his positions to the right to win the nomination over Santorum, and would become a much stronger candidate in the general election.

Steve Z on March 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

You mittbot hacks crack me up. Romneycare has NEVER recieved more than 49% in a general election ever. Further, that 49% was against a no name democrat in the 2002 governor race named shannon o’brian. Who! If it wasn’t for the green party candidate, romneycare would have lost that race to. True to form he outspent the dem 10 to 1 to pull in that 49%.

The most electable is santorium, of the current candidates running. If he wins his home state of Pa. he’s president. Latest polling of pa. has obama/santorium in a deadheat while romneycare is losing by 7 points.

Your romneycare electablity arguement is pure crap. He has never proven a good candidate. My view, romneycare is a sure loser.

Danielvito on March 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Look, Santy lost his last race in PA by almost 20 points. In a general, I’m not sure he can really count on some sort of favorite son status. Republicans haven’t won PA in a long time.

As far as believing that he’s more electable? You’re welcome to your opinion, but I think you’re dead wrong. A lot of the stuff he has said that paints him as a hard-right evangelical culture warrior aren’t going to play well with moderates and independents, and you can bet they will be a focus of the Obama campaign against him. Add to that the fact he’s weak organizationally, failing to make the VA and DC ballot, as well as those in some Ohio districts, and I doubt it’s really even competitive.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Not a desperate hope, dear. Just a fact. Untwist yer knickers.

katy the mean old lady on March 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Yup, and I’m sure the candidate with the MOST delegates will have a hard time not losing all those delegates to candidates who only managed to win the LEAST delegates but you keep hope alive, anyway. Oh yes, and no offense but…Knickers? How old are you? Untwist your panties, that’s what’s making you mean.

rhombus on March 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

The money Romney is spending is his money to spend. That’s why this is not related to the fiscal policy of the government. Try again.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:30 AM

True, but for all of Romney’s money he’s getting a terrible rate of return, and Santorum is doing surprisingly well on a shoestring. I’m not a Santorum fan, but you got to give him credit for that. It suggests that Santorum is much better at being thrifty than Romney is.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Oh, OK

Nobody cares what AL and MS does, cause most of the republican electorate think their backward @ss rednecks. Which they are.

rubberneck on March 14, 2012 at 9:04 AM

So one parish over the line does not for a redmeck make?
I thought you were from NY or Mass, not right in the big easy, (the nastiest American town I never want to see again.)
Get a grip man, we all hang together, or …

Now, I got more important things to take care of.

OkieDoc on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Uh, no. not to mention all candidates would be similiar. Even if you take out the caucus results Mitt still has 3 times the delegates Santorum does.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Math a problem for ya?

katy the mean old lady on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:30 AM
Actually I addressed my original question to those who support Romney based on fiscal conservatism. No need for you to try again, as that is apparently not your reason for supporting him.

txmomof6 on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

For all of you who are supporting Romney because of his supposed fiscal conservatism, I have one word for you: Romneycare. What is fiscally conservative about that?

It’s more conservative than a single-payer system. That was the option in Massachusetts.

Also, Romney says he won’t say anything outrageous about Obama. That’s McCain 2.0 and we see how well that strategy worked out. Santorum has no problem attacking Obama.

GeorgiaBuckeye on March 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

The fact that Romney is smart enough to avoid the traps of calling ObaMao a “Muslim” or getting sidetracked with the Birther issue (which is the kind of thing Romney was referring to) is part of what makes him the most electable GOP candidate. Romney has no problem attacking ObaMao on the issues.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Actually, I counted five.

Right Mover on March 14, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Forget the grammar. Are the site moderators gonna stand back and allow such nasty, blatant bigotry such as this stand on this site? If this were said about a black or latino the commenter would immediately be rebuked. HA sanctions racism and hate against Conservative whites from the South. Looks like the Left and big media and Hollywood have made it acceptable and commonplace. Well done.

Dissing and insulting whites daily is acceptable on HA, just don’t refer to Michelle Obama as that creature from Star Wars. BTW, FLOTUS is looking great–looks like she’s laid off the carbs and is starting to do as she preaches.

RepubChica on March 14, 2012 at 9:45 AM

David Axelrod would destroy Rick Santorum in 72 hours, and then move in for the down-ballot kill, putting Pelosi back in charge of the House.

Santorum has no money, no organization, no ground game, no infrastructure, no executive experience, no crossover appeal, and is downright scary to the middle 20% of the electorate who will decide the election.

ANY vote for Santorum is a vote for Obama.

Moreoever, whenever the GOP nominates a senator (Goldwater, Dole, McCain), they LOSE. Conversely, when the GOP nominates a governor (Reagan, Bush 43) or vp (Nixon, Bush 41), they WIN. Why? Because these GOP senators have the baggage of a congressional voting record that gets distorted and dissected by the Dems and the MSM.

The last senator nominated by the GOP to win the presidency was Warren Harding in 1920.

People in Missouri, Illinois, Louisiana, and Wisconsin had better wake up. Santorum is a sure disaster in November.

matthew8787 on March 14, 2012 at 9:45 AM

I believe this link says it all.

http://harndenblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/03/delusional-newt-outlines-his-strategy-to-stop-mitt-romney-sabotage-at-tampa.html

OK Newt nuts, tell me how this serves or saves the Republican Party?

Snake307 on March 14, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Look, Santy lost his last race in PA by almost 20 points. In a general, I’m not sure he can really count on some sort of favorite son status. Republicans haven’t won PA in a long time.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Except that Santorum lives in Virginia.

You know, right inside that Beltway thingy.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:45 AM

No no no and no!

No, it’s not over yet.

No I’m not voting for Romney.

No Romneycare isn’t “conservative.”

No a brokered convention ISN’T the end of the world.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:46 AM

He’s completely lost the one thing he had going for him — the perception that he’s a stable candidate who won’t say something stupid.

The ability to connect and seem like a natural communicator cannot be learned, and it can’t be taught by craven political consultants. Whatever other abilities Romney may have, that ability to connect on a convincing and genuine level with his audience is not going to suddenly materialize now.

Right Mover on March 14, 2012 at 9:46 AM

matthew8787 on March 14, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Why do you hate America?

/s

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:47 AM

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

You’re honestly going to say you didn’t see any of the Romney pledges over the course of the primaries? You honestly think your supporters are any better than the other candidates at name-calling and using ridiculous hyperbole.

I’ll tell you the one thing that is turning a ton of voters off here. That the incessant characterization of anyone not voting for Romney as a redneck and a stupid hick Christian Bible Thumper.

You’re no better. In many ways, you’re worse because a good chunk of your supporters are looking at this as the final banishment of Evangelicals from the process.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:47 AM

No a brokered convention ISN’T the end of the world.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Please explain how waiting for 60 days before Election Day to have a candidate to face down a billion-dollar incumbent’s campaign qualifies as a good idea.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Can Santorum win?

Sure. If Romney drops out.

Otherwise, he’s just doing Obama’s dirty work by bloodying the guy who’s going to be the nominee.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:41 AM

But that’s all they want at this point. Let’s remember, Newt and Santy were polling asterisks just this past fall. They were running jokes throughout the campaign. This isn’t about Santy being the most qualified for the job, or an expectation that he’d make a good president. He’s simply survived the war of attrition and remains the Last Best Hope to beat Mitt. All else-including beating Obama- is secondary.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Not at all. Romney got the most delegates yesterday. The only thing “hard” about the spin cycle today is that certain people insist on downplaying that REALITY.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Reality? You mean like two more no-confidence votes for Romney?
That too is reality.

I’m prepared to support any Republican except Ron Paul but you mindless Romney supporters really have to wake up to the idea that your guy has a problem with the GOP base. Not an insurmountable one but things like who the running mate is will make a difference.

Happy Nomad on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Except that those weren’t “gaffes” but Romney having a laugh at his own expense. If you truly don’t understand that then I have to doubt the sincerity of your claim about “warming up” to Romney.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

What do you mean they weren’t gaffes? You REALLY believe he was laughing at himself??? What is wrong with you? Was he being ironic? Was he being meta? You’re delusional if you really believe he was saying “grits” and “ya’ll” to make fun of his own wealthy upbringing.

But more to the point, he’s giving the MSM and Obama material that can be easily misinterpreted against the GOP candidate. He doesn’t have common sense of what he should say and what he shouldn’t say. The foot in mouth disease thing is a problem.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

Actually I addressed my original question to those who support Romney based on fiscal conservatism. No need for you to try again, as that is apparently not your reason for supporting him.

txmomof6 on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

And I’m saying that campaign spending is not the same thing as government fiscal policy. The idea that a candidate should show “fiscal retraint” by not spending money on his campaign is absurd. As I pointed out (and you ignored) it’s Romney’s money to spend. Fiscal policy deals with taxpayer money. Do you see the difference?

And I support him because he’s the most competent, the most mature and the most electable candidate. And I don’t have a problem with his Mormonism, unlike the voters of Alabama and Mississippi. But I have no doubt that they’ll do the right thing and vote for Romney against ObaMao in November.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

You’re honestly going to say you didn’t see any of the Romney pledges over the course of the primaries? You honestly think your supporters are any better than the other candidates at name-calling and using ridiculous hyperbole.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Promising to sit-out the election: OK for Santorum supporters if Romney is the nominee, not OK for Romney supporters if Santorum is the nominee.

Is this what I’m gathering?

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:49 AM

He’s simply survived the war of attrition and remains the Last Best Hope to beat Mitt. All else-including beating Obama- is secondary.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

I do believe you’ve put your finger on the problem.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Any truth to the rumor that Santorum received congratulatory phone calls from both David Axelrod and Markos Moulitsas? If not, then I’m sure they were thrilled nevertheless.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 8:53 AM

Yep, because they’re scared shitless of the one candidate who has zero credibility on the single most important issue of this election season. You know, the guy who almost certainly possesses the all-time worst votes to dollars spent ratio?

RS is far from the ideal candidate, but it never ceases to amaze how blind so many in the GOP can be.

lawya on March 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Please explain how waiting for 60 days before Election Day to have a candidate to face down a billion-dollar incumbent’s campaign qualifies as a good idea.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

It may or may not take that long, Red. I said a brokered convention isn’t the end of the world. I didn’t say it’s necessarily a good idea. The Rombots’ hyperbolic hyperventilation over the merest possibility tells me that they know that Mitt doesn’t really have the nomination wrapped up yet.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Your boy’s getting his ass handed to him – regardless of the delegate count – he can’t win in the South and the the South is the center of the GOP universe.

Deal with it dude.

If he doesn’t prove he can carry the south – even by winning 30 percent – dude is toast.

HondaV65

Last night Romney extended his lead in the delegate count by 6. How does winning a night equate to “getting his ass handed to him”?

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:51 AM

What do you mean they weren’t gaffes? You REALLY believe he was laughing at himself??? What is wrong with you? Was he being ironic? Was he being meta? You’re delusional if you really believe he was saying “grits” and “ya’ll” to make fun of his own wealthy upbringing.

That’s exactly what he was doing. “Delusional” would be an appropriate description of your claim, assuming you really believe it and aren’t just saying it in furtherance of your anti-Romney bias.

But more to the point, he’s giving the MSM and Obama material that can be easily misinterpreted against the GOP candidate. He doesn’t have common sense of what he should say and what he shouldn’t say. The foot in mouth disease thing is a problem.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

You’re the one dancing at the end of the Left’s strings when you fall for the class warfare argument. It’s not “foot in mouth” disease but anti-Romney paranoia that is the problem here.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

I’m willing to have a discussion with you, but if you want to insult me by using a pejorative to refer to supporters of a different candidate than you… I’d rather not.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Last night Romney extended his lead in the delegate count by 6. How does winning a night equate to “getting his ass handed to him”?

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:51 AM

That’s if you count unpledged delegates. When Santorum was winning unpledged delegates earlier in the process, I was told that didn’t matter.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Romney has won MI, OH, FL, NV, AZ, WA and other states with the entire Conservative Media “establishment” wanting for his demise. You think these primary voters listen to Katie Couric or Rush? Yet, Mitt’s still leading, by far. The very same people calling other “Mittbots” and conflating Evangelicals voting for the Religious Candidate in Deep Red Southern States are the very same stooges who were on this blog months ago saying Herman Cain could win. You have NO credibility. I like Santorum and I want to see if he can win this straight up against Romney. It should be about that and not cutting down the two remaining viable candidates.

AYNBLAND on March 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Promising to sit-out the election: OK for Santorum supporters if Romney is the nominee, not OK for Romney supporters if Santorum is the nominee.

Is this what I’m gathering?

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:49 AM

If you think I said anything like that, you gather poorly. Everyone should pledge to vote for whoever the GOP nominates.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

The ability to connect and seem like a natural communicator cannot be learned, and it can’t be taught by craven political consultants. Whatever other abilities Romney may have, that ability to connect on a convincing and genuine level with his audience is not going to suddenly materialize now.

Right Mover on March 14, 2012 at 9:46 AM

I agree. And, in terms of the inability to connect, I see many similarities between Romney and Al Gore, John Kerry, Michael Dukakis, and Hillary Clinton. If that’s the road we’re headed down with Romney, then it’s a problem.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

I’ll tell you the one thing that is turning a ton of voters off here. That the incessant characterization of anyone not voting for Romney as a redneck and a stupid hick Christian Bible Thumper.

+Infinity

Right Mover on March 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

I’m willing to have a discussion with you, but if you want to insult me by using a pejorative to refer to supporters of a different candidate than you… I’d rather not.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

“Rombots” is no more pejorative than “Palinista,” pal. When I’m using a pejorative, you’ll know it.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Yep, because they’re scared shitless of the one candidate who has zero credibility on the single most important issue of this election season. You know, the guy who almost certainly possesses the all-time worst votes to dollars spent ratio?

RS is far from the ideal candidate, but it never ceases to amaze how blind so many in the GOP can be.

lawya on March 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

If your point is that Santorum is more electable and is more troubling to the Left than Romney then I feel that I should go easy on you. It’s not your fault that this is all going completely over your head. Nobody was cheering louder last night than ObaMao and his crew.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Actually I addressed my original question to those who support Romney based on fiscal conservatism. No need for you to try again, as that is apparently not your reason for supporting him.

txmomof6 on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

What relationship does campaign spending have with fiscal policy? He’s trying to win an election…he’s raised more, and spent more.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

That took 3 seconds. I can find a ton of pledges in the MS and AL primary thread with Mitt supporters saying they’ll sit it out.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:33 AM

…true!…Even with the people here, snarky with the Ron Paul comments… do I rarely read his follower’s, saying anymore that they will sit this one out. I think Romney would conduct himself center-right if elected…but right now he has a record, no evidence of a core believe so he flip-flops on most issues… it concerns people…and then he has idiots in here going overboard, turning off those who would even consider him.

KOOLAID2 on March 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

This proves it. The Republican party is finished. So I guess I better donate to the Democrats so after the election I am spared during the sweep of the enemies.

Snake307 on March 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

If you think I said anything like that, you gather poorly. Everyone should pledge to vote for whoever the GOP nominates.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

OK, then. So if we agree that there are dopes on both sides of the argument, would we then be able to move on?

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:44 AM

For argument’s sake, I’m assuming you have more intimate knowledge of the choices available in MA, so if MA had only those two choices between bad and really bad, it does not make the bad choice fiscally conservative. The fact is that Romney doesn’t admit Romneycare is a fiscal disaster.

I don’t care in what context Romney was responding. And for the record, I don’t wan’t any candidate calling Obama “ObaMao” or a “Muslim” either. But I want our candidate to tell us he understands that Obama is purposely destroying our country as it was founded and not that he is simply in over his head. Romney will not take it to Obama in that fashion like Santorum and Gingrich have shown they can and will do.

GeorgiaBuckeye on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Status Quo Candidate A is only millimeters apart from Status Quo Candidate B

Dante on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

What do you mean they weren’t gaffes? You REALLY believe he was laughing at himself??? What is wrong with you?

shannon76

A better question might be whats wrong with you, or your comprehension of the English language. He said in regards to a southern aide “He’s now turning me into an, I don’t know, an unofficial Southerner,” Romney said in front of several giant oil-drilling rig platforms sitting at the port. “I’m learning to say ‘y’all.’ I like grits. Things are, strange things, are happening to me.”. Somewhere else it was ““The governor said I had to say it right: Mornin’ y’all. Good to be with you,”
You don’t say someone is turning you into a southerner if you’re trying to be sincere about being a southerner. You also don’t qualify eating grits and saying y’all as “strange things” if you’re trying to come across as an actual southerner. You don’t say someone has coached you on how to say something either.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

“Rombots” is no more pejorative than “Palinista,” pal. When I’m using a pejorative, you’ll know it.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Don’t call me pal, friend.

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

That’s a mighty big leap in logic you’re taking there. I’ll vote for whomever the nominee is, but knowing full well Santorum or Gingrich mean the end of America as we’ve known it. May as well climb aboard the gravy train before all the seats are full.

jan3 on March 14, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Two conservatives, one less so than the other, mean the end of America as we’ve known it? And SCOAMF Obama isn’t and you prefer him?

I think you’ve been sniffing a bit too much model airplane dope, pal. But if by the end of America as we’ve known it means the end of big government, I’m in total agreement.

Rixon on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

True, but for all of Romney’s money he’s getting a terrible rate of return, and Santorum is doing surprisingly well on a shoestring. I’m not a Santorum fan, but you got to give him credit for that. It suggests that Santorum is much better at being thrifty than Romney is.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:43 AM

I’ll step up and deliver a defense of Romney here (sort of). Romney is such a weak candidate that he has to use massive amounts of money to cover it. He IS succeeding in buying the nomination, so I would say he is getting a reasonable return on his investment. If he wasn’t so bad, he wouldn’t have to spend like he is.

It’s much easier to say he’s not a fiscal conservative if you look at his record as governor of Massachusetts. His laundry list of “sins” there is a mile long. Romneycare is #1 among them but there’s a host of stuff there to pick apart.

David Axelrod would destroy Rick Santorum in 72 hours, and then move in for the down-ballot kill, putting Pelosi back in charge of the House.

As opposed to Mitt Romney, who will also be easily destroyed in 72 hours?

ANY vote for Santorum is a vote for Obama.

matthew8787 on March 14, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Utter BS. Any vote for Romney is a vote for continuation of Obama’s policies. Romney will do nothing to push a reduction in taxes, a reduction in spending, he won’t do anything about debt control, he will not cut any regulations, and he will certainly not advocate for a repeal of Obamacare.

Better to gamble on someone who might at least deal with Obamacare than someone we know who won’t.

I’m also not inclined to take lessons from a segment of the GOP that had at least some votes for Obama in 2008.

Doomberg on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

What relationship does campaign spending have with fiscal policy? He’s trying to win an election…he’s raised more, and spent more.

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

I have to agree that the comparison is rather shaky, but it does lead me to wonder if many voters feel the same way I do, and that it’s Romney’s record that is his biggest problem? His supporters try to gloss it over, and I just don’t think it’s working. I know it’s not working on me.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM

That’s if you count unpledged delegates. When Santorum was winning unpledged delegates earlier in the process, I was told that didn’t matter.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Who has the most delegates so far? The answer to that question is all you need to know about where this race is headed.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM

And I support him because he’s the most competent, the most mature and the most electable candidate.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:48 AM

What in all of hell about Romney’s electoral track-record suggests he’s the “most electable”?

lawya on March 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM

changer1701 on March 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

We disagree! Romneycare only win in three general election runs was against a no name democrat that was the state treasurer at the time Shannon O’Brian. She was such a bad candidate her career in politics was done after that race. With that romneycare barely got 49% of the vote.

Santorium did lose by 17points in pa. in his re-election run in 2008. However, he won two previous statewide races in that important state. Also, won many times in congressional races. Current polling shows obama and santorium in a deadheat in pa..

Romneycare, by any objective meter is not a good candidate. He doesn’t connect w/average people. His recent comments about grits, I have nascar owners as friends, my wife drives two cadilacs show how out of touch he is.

I’m sure to appease his followers they could find a job for him in a santorium or dark horse candidates administration (my choice palin).

With all the built in advantages romneycare has this cycle, to be coming in third place in two important primaries this late should be eye opening to even you.

Danielvito on March 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM

That’s exactly what he was doing. “Delusional” would be an appropriate description of your claim, assuming you really believe it and aren’t just saying it in furtherance of your anti-Romney bias.

Well, respectfully, you and I looked at that video of Romney completely differently. He looked to be a guy who was pandering too much.

You’re the one dancing at the end of the Left’s strings when you fall for the class warfare argument. It’s not “foot in mouth” disease but anti-Romney paranoia that is the problem here.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

As I wrote earlier, I personally don’t have a problem with what Romney said about being friends with NFL or NASCAR owners. More power to him. But you need to appreciate, no matter who the GOP candidate is, the MSM is going to work against him, and they will exaggerate his chief weakness (e.g. Santorum as a religious wacko, Romney as out-of-touch panderer). And they won’t be picking on Obama. As I said, the one positive about Romney was that I trusted he wouldn’t be one of those foot in mouth guys. And now I see that’s not the case.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Who has the most delegates so far? The answer to that question is all you need to know about where this race is headed.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Who has 1144 delegates? That’s the niggling question no Rombots seem to want to address.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Two conservatives, one less so than the other, mean the end of America as we’ve known it? And SCOAMF Obama isn’t and you prefer him?

Rixon on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Neither are conservative.

Dante on March 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

But I want our candidate to tell us he understands that Obama is purposely destroying our country as it was founded and not that he is simply in over his head. Romney will not take it to Obama in that fashion like Santorum and Gingrich have shown they can and will do.

GeorgiaBuckeye on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

And how is their delegate count looking right now? If what they’re doing can’t even put them in the lead in the GOP primaries what on earth makes you think that their schtick will work in the general?

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

You also don’t qualify eating grits and saying y’all as “strange things” if you’re trying to come across as an actual southerner. You don’t say someone has coached you on how to say something either.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Would you agree that it would have been better if he hadn’t gone down this road at all?

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Who has 1144 delegates? That’s the niggling question no Rombots seem to want to address.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Nobody. But one candidate is a heck of a lot closer than the others. Answered.

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

That’s the question coming from the media today after Rick Santorum unexpectedly won both Southern primaries last night

Isn’t all news “unexpected” to the media?

Bitter Clinger on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

That’s if you count unpledged delegates. When Santorum was winning unpledged delegates earlier in the process, I was told that didn’t matter.

gryphon202

Santorum doesn’t lead in either category. Going by CBS the actual unpledged count is very low. National Journal has the count when you take out the caucus results before last night at 336 to 96 in favor of Romney.
The “pledged, unpledged” is meaningless (which is why I never bothered) unless its a photo finish or someone drops out.
But even then, count to count Romney came out ahead last night/this morning.

Zaggs on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Romney connects OK. The problem is that he alone among the GOP candidates is being held to a nearly impossible standard, mostly due to Obama Derangement Syndrome.

I cannot recall anytime in the last 50 years where an unholy alliance between the Left and the hardcore right has successfully prevented the nomination of the most attractive general election candidate since Reagan – in two consecutive cycles.

If hard core conservatives would shut up and think for 60 seconds, they will get EVERYTHING they want from a Romney presidency. But we have to WIN the election first and not alienate the critical middle of the electorate in the process. The 20% in the middle will decide the election.

This is EXACTLY what Clinton had to tell the far left in 1992, and it worked. And the Left got essentially everything it wanted from Clinton.

Nominating Santo is not worth a pitcher of spit if he cannot win in November. And he won’t.

matthew8787 on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

And how is their delegate count looking right now? If what they’re doing can’t even put them in the lead in the GOP primaries what on earth makes you think that their schtick will work in the general?

cicerone on March 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

If you are really secure in Romney’s ability to hit that magic number of 1144, then the question is moot anyway. The fear among his supporters that he may not do that does not speak well for Romney’s electoral abilities.

gryphon202 on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

OK, then. So if we agree that there are dopes on both sides of the argument, would we then be able to move on?

Red Cloud on March 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

I’ve never claimed there weren’t over the top supporters of any of the candidates. I just find it hard to pass comments where one or the other is trying to take some moral high ground in the language they’re using by giving the excuse the other side does worse.

hawkdriver on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I agree. And, in terms of the inability to connect, I see many similarities between Romney and Al Gore, John Kerry, Michael Dukakis, and Hillary Clinton. If that’s the road we’re headed down with Romney, then it’s a problem.

shannon76 on March 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

It’s the one quality that George W. Bush had in spades over his patrician father. Disregarding the ravings of the hysterical left, W. at least came across as somewhat genuine and likeable on the stump.

Right Mover on March 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5