No, seriously: Would Gingrich staying in the race actually help Santorum?

posted at 5:25 pm on March 15, 2012 by Allahpundit

ABC makes the case. The argument’s simple: Romney has a prohibitive lead in delegates and it’s by no means assured that Santorum would pick up all of Gingrich’s voters if Newt dropped out. (According to yesterday’s Fox News poll, Romney leads Santorum head to head 49/44.) Which means, in a two-man race where Mitt wins some states and Rick wins some others, Romney actually has a better chance of ending up with a clear majority of delegates than he would if Newt hung in there and hoarded votes from Mitt. Keep Gingrich around, the thinking goes, and you might be able to hold Romney below 1,144, which means anything can happen at the convention. More from Chris Stirewalt:

[W]ith Romney so far ahead on delegates, Santorum would need to win 66 percent of the remaining delegates to win, a tough task for someone who has won only 27 percent so far. Even if he had won all of the delegates Gingrich had won so far, Santorum would only have 41 percent of the total, still 12 percent behind Romney…

[W]hen asked how they would vote without Gingrich in the race, the former speaker’s supporters don’t all shift to Santorum. Out of Gingrich’s 13 percent, Santorum gets 7 percent, but Romney gets 5 percent. Paul gets a point too.

While Santorum would move up, Romney would be pushed even closer to the finish line. Remember, for Santorum to win, Romney would need to collapse and start winning fewer delegates, not more.

In other words, if you’re dead set against Romney — as Newt clearly is — you’re better off playing a prevent defense to keep him out of the end zone than blitzing. Keep that five percent of Newt’s voters away from him even if it means denying Santorum seven percent and then hope that Team Sweater Vest can start beating Romney even in a three-way race so that there’s some sort of argument against Mitt at a brokered convention.

So there’s the mathematical reasoning for Newt staying in. Makes sense. Or does it?

“If he were out of this race, we wouldn’t just be beating Mitt Romney, we’d be crushing him,” Hogan Gidley, a senior adviser to the Santorum campaign, said Wednesday. “We wouldn’t have won every state that Romney won, but we sure would have won a lot more of them.”…

Under the rules in many states, if the winning candidate in a given Congressional district secures only a plurality of its votes, then he must share the district’s delegates with the second-place finisher. Only by winning more than 50 percent of the vote can a candidate win the entire delegate slate. By Mr. Gingrich’s logic, Mr. Romney would be in a better position to take more delegates in the absence of Mr. Gingrich because he would have more room to secure a majority in a head-to-head race against Mr. Santorum.

But the Republican nominating process is approaching a new phase in which more states will award delegates through a winner-take-all method by Congressional district. After April 1, the only two states that will award delegates proportionally within Congressional districts are North Carolina and Kentucky.

Here’s the bottom line strategically: Is there a scenario in which Romney makes it to the convention with a plurality of the delegates (as will almost certainly happen) but doesn’t end up with the nomination? Newt’s strategy here is to try to hold him to 1,000 delegates or something like that and then let backroom cloak and dagger eliminate Mitt, but I don’t see that happening in a three-way race. Even if Santorum closes the gap somewhat by winning winner-take-all states, Romney will still have more delegates, more votes overall (in all likelihood), probably more regional diversity to his state victories, and would certainly boast the most organized and well funded campaign of the final four candidates. He’d still have the best argument for the nomination. And even if Santorum finishes strong by winning a majority of the remaining primaries, Romney ironically could point to Gingrich’s presence in the race as evidence that we simply don’t know how things would have worked out in a two-man battle. Maybe Mitt would have beaten Santorum. Hard to say. In which case, shouldn’t we just choose the guy who ended up with the most delegates?

On the other hand, if Newt quits and we do get a two-man race, then Santorum at least has a shot at building an argument for the nomination. If he beats Romney head to a head in a majority of the remaining states, not only will he narrow the delegate gap but he can credibly claim that he was the preferred choice of Republican voters once they were asked to decide between him and Romney. And what if the polls are right and Gingrich’s voters end up splitting between Santorum and Romney such that Mitt wins the nomination with a majority of delegates before the convention? Well, that’s okay too. It would give Romney some extra credibility with the base headed into the general election. He could say, honestly, that he took on a consolidated conservative base and won, which makes him a legitimate victor. Better to give Santorum a clean shot and have him lose in a way that strengthens Romney than end up with a weakened, asterisked nominee after a brokered convention. The one hitch in all this is that I do think it’s slightly more likely that we’d see a dark-horse compromise candidate like Daniels or Christie nominated if Newt stays in and forces a three-way outcome than if he drops out and Romney and Santorum go head to head. In the latter case, if neither man ends up with a majority of delegates, there’ll be pressure on them to form a ticket. In the former case, with Gingrich muddying the waters by creating a third option, you could kinda sorta maybe possibly argue that the party is hopelessly split three ways and therefore we need to bring in an outsider. The odds of that are extremely long, but a bit shorter if Newt hangs in than if he drops out.

Via the Daily Caller, here’s Gingrich grumbling about Charles Krauthammer and the establishment. Exit question via Newt himself: Are his rivals and the media simply too small-minded to appreciate his ideas?


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

Meh. Like so many things, it all depends on how you juggle and tilt the conditionals. I’m not a fan of this over-cleverness. Newt can’t win, and while I can see how he might hope to get as many delegates as possible, count on Romney not sealing the requisite delegates to win outright, and try to negotiate his way to the nomination, it’s a long, long stretch with a lot of opponents who would have their own plans.

I think as long as Newt is in the race, people will perceive the conservative vote as split, and figure Romney has the stronger following. Most of the people who have voted for Romney are just hoping to settle on a guy who might win. I think they would be greatly disappointed, because Romney is a very weak candidate.

If the conservative vote consolidates, then Santorum suddenly looks a lot stronger, and would pick up far more votes than just the ones he picks up from Gingrich based on perceived electability.

IOW, if Gingrich drops out, I expect Santorum will get the bigger part of his supporters, and probably peel off a lot of Romney supporters who are just trying to vote for someone “electable,” and are told that Romney is the front-runner. Just imagine if that had happened in Ohio, where Romney came out ahead by eight tenths of one percent.

Gingrich dropping out sets the race on its ear. Gingrich staying in gives us more of the same.

Gingrich is staying in to help himself. If he were only interested in stopping Romney, he’d endorse Santorum and campaign for him.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM

You really have a knack don’t you? My feelings aren’t hurt, I want a competent president. That he convinced you in 2008 is swell, this is 2012, different time and a different set of circumstances. It’s worse. But you should asked to be a paid spokesperson, you are so compelling. /

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM

it doesn’t matter what Gingrich does anymore. If he drops out and endorses either Romney (which is what he would do if Republican unity meant anything) or Santorum (if he were serious about consolidating opposition to Romney), he’s out. If he stays in, he looks delusional, and his support drops down into Ron Paul territory and it’s effectively a two-man race anyway.

Either way, the race simplifies, and Gingrich supporters split (perhaps unequally) between Romney and Santorum; Romney has the better organization, executive qualifications, and economic expertise, and that weighs more heavily over Santorum’s ideology and Holy War on creeping secularism.

A few clear majority victories for Romney in populous states outside the Santorum-friendly territory he’s been in lately, and the momentum Santorum hoped for to let him catch up before the convention dissipates. Romney gets his delegate majority and the last ditch hope of a brokered convention dies.

Confutus on March 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:46 PM

I completely agree. But, he’s in a fight. Just look at the speeches from Santo and Newt after this week’s primaries. Neither candidate had anything to say about what they would do if they were POTUS. They used their mikes to smear Mitt. I’m with you that I think Mitt would do better to focus more on his own plans but I have sympathy for his circumstances.

Mitt has great plans that are unique among the candidates in that it can actually pass a Congress and become law. From his cap gains exemption for those under $200k to a territorial tax and lowered corporate rate to 25%. He has great ideas, along the same lines as Paul Ryan for entitlement and budget reform. These are things that can really happen.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 6:52 PM

This whole analysis is flawed and here is why:

According to the fox news poll 12% would vote for Ron Paul…

In the head to head matchup Romney is beating Santorum 49 to 44…

Romney is picking up all or most of the Ron Paul vote…

Here is the problem, the Ron Paul people will simply stay home and won’t vote for Romney because they are so passionate about Paul and Paul only…

So I would say the poll is more like:

Santorum 44
Romney 39

MGardner on March 15, 2012 at 6:54 PM

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 6:42 PM

I think it is safe to say that anyone running for president has to have a more than healthy ego. I don’t fault Newt for thinking his ideas are good. I fault him, Sen. Santorum and Gov. Romney for not being able to sell their views well enough to build some momentum for them.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Well, coffee break is over , back to work. MJBrutus don’t worry you’re probably right. Just do us non committed folks a favor. Lighten up, stop the derogatory name calling and don’t do what the left likes to do. Don’t break us out into groups. We are all in the same group, just variants of the same goal. Later. I will try to do the same.
Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Good to hear it.

P.S. We could all do a little less name calling. It does wear thin. : ) Oh, and don’t attack me for that. If you want to attack someone go after a troll.
Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 6:38 PM

You think I “hate” you. I don’t. I don’t like your hypocrisy and your tedious use of the word “troll”.

I have concerns about the electability of Gov. Romney’s opponents but would love to see him convince me that he would be the CEO of Bain and not the governor of Massachusetts. I understand that what I am looking for may not be what others are looking for in the way of reassurance. If I were running his campaign, I would have him talking and talking about the economy and how it can be fixed. I wish he would stop attacking his opponents, I can see Obama do that everyday of the week.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Okay, that’s fair.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 6:55 PM

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 6:52 PM

I like Newt’s plans better but Gov. Romney’s may be more doable. As we know, most presidents don’t get free rein.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 6:55 PM

In an attempt to promote future unity I will forgo any snark and just say thanks.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:57 PM

You really have a knack don’t you? My feelings aren’t hurt, I want a competent president. That he convinced you in 2008 is swell, this is 2012, different time and a different set of circumstances. It’s worse.
Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Fine. But the comment I responded to was not about competency. You said:

The whole tenor of the coverage and conversation is that those who are not for Gov. Romney aren’t serious or valid in their reservations. I don’t know if they could be persuaded but I’m sure a strong attempt hasn’t been made.
Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 6:59 PM

crosspatch on March 15, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Maybe so, maybe not. However the same thing was said about Richard Nixon after losing the 1960 election. How did that work out in 1968?

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

As we know, most presidents don’t get free rein.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Hell the one in there now did the opposite and let Congress/Senate have free rein his first two years and then tried to take credit if it looked like that was being handed out or assign blame if that was the flavor of the day.

Betenoire on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:55 PM

When I spoke of Newt’s ego, I was trying to refer to the value he places on a grudge. He carries a chip on his shoulder like it was the Hope diamond.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

I have a really bad attitude about Washington as a whole.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Yes, I do understand how you feel.

I’m the same, except we both know that there’s nothing that can be done about it before November.

It’s like the old saying: “You have to play the hand you’re dealt.” Except, in this context it’s more like, “Dealing from the deck we have.” (Not sure if that makes sense, but…)

The entire system is completely busted, but we have to try to make the best of it.

Oh, and I guess I’m a bit of a RINO, too. I just got your meaning, and understand not being particularly proud to call oneself a republican. (I’m much more fiscally conservative than most of the federal govt. of either side of the aisle.)

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Well hello Buy Danish, thought you weren’t talking to me anymore. I know for you I am simply irresistible. ; ) Lets go one at a time with your list.
1 Red Crow and I have exchanged comments before, I noticed no offense taken on his part, so I am fairly confident he is cool with my statement. Feel free to ask him. He is a good guy and still here.
2 fartface is derogatory for freshface. freshface is no longer with us. Death threats to other commenters is against terms of site. Just ask Ed or Allah. They swung the hammer. I merely assisted. When dealing with troll leftist that offer up death threats, it is sometimes necessary to you they’re methodology. See the Vice dept of any police precinct in urban America.
3 My vote is the exact same as anyones vote. Kinda like the shares we each hold here at HA, remember? I would like him to ask for my vote. Instead he seems quite happy to assume he already can count on it because he see’s us as desperate to rid the country of 0. I find this an odd way to secure votes. The proof is that he cannot close the deal. Had he played this differently straight out of the gate he would already have the nom wrapped up. He chose consistently not to.
Sorry I missed you : ) Let me know if there is anything else you require of me. Bye.

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:02 PM

What do you want? A hug to soothe hurt feelings?

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 6:48 PM

You want people to hug you now? With all that Prune drool. You should wear a Mittbib. It would go well with your childish tantrums.

You can’t even be nice to Cindy.

SparkPlug on March 15, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I completely agree. But, he’s in a fight. Just look at the speeches from Santo and Newt after this week’s primaries. Neither candidate had anything to say about what they would do if they were POTUS. They used their mikes to smear Mitt. I’m with you that I think Mitt would do better to focus more on his own plans but I have sympathy for his circumstances.

Mitt has great plans that are unique among the candidates in that it can actually pass a Congress and become law. From his cap gains exemption for those under $200k to a territorial tax and lowered corporate rate to 25%. He has great ideas, along the same lines as Paul Ryan for entitlement and budget reform. These are things that can really happen.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Well-said. He’s in a very difficult position. He can ignore the petty snipes from Newt and Santorum and focus on Obama, or he can try to eliminate the competition and focus on Obama. I just know I want him in the W.H. as I have tremendous faith in his abilities to fix what ails us – he is more equipped than anyone else to do this.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:04 PM

In an effort to foster unity we should all get behind MJBrutus, the former DKos Kid who was giving Obama advice in 2008.

SparkPlug on March 15, 2012 at 7:05 PM

I’m in a red state, he lost severely in. What makes you think by making overtures to my state would have alienated the non red states?

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 6:29 PM

.
If you live in a Red state, then guess what ? November is not about you. If your Red and you will stay red- You won’t even see much GE campaigning.

Its all about the swing states- as usual. And Mittens is better in swing states than in the God fearing red states

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Mitt has great plans that are unique among the candidates in that it can actually pass a Congress and become law. From his cap gains exemption for those under $200k to a territorial tax and lowered corporate rate to 25%. He has great ideas, along the same lines as Paul Ryan for entitlement and budget reform. These are things that can really happen.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Good points. Mitt needs to sell them better.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Maybe so, maybe not. However the same thing was said about Richard Nixon after losing the 1960 election. How did that work out in 1968?

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

All things being equal? Not incredibly well for conservatives in the long run and particularly poorly for anyone who has crossed paths with the EPA…which is getting close to everyone these days given its monstrous reach.

Betenoire on March 15, 2012 at 7:06 PM

I just know I want him in the W.H. as I have tremendous faith in his abilities to fix what ails us – he is more equipped than anyone else to do this.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:04 PM

He will be a competent administrator but I question whether he can fix what ails us. That will take a Congress and a people willing to take their medicine. Do you honestly think that the 52% that voted for the ‘won’ are ready for that amount of pain? This isn’t snark I want to know why you think he can truly fix what ails us.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Betenoire on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

I think he set that agenda and let them fill in the blanks. Obama is the biggest plus for any Republican candidate. Although I do worry that people may have firmly bought into the nanny state attitude.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Are his rivals and the media simply too small-minded to appreciate his ideas?

Newt is the Eric Von Zipper of the GOP. No one truly appreciates his grandness and his even more grandiose plans.

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Betenoire on March 15, 2012 at 7:06 PM

That is a different issue than I was posting about. I agree that all things being equal he was a terrible President. I had to start developing calluses on my nose with the 1972 election. Voting for him or McGovern. This election will be much the same. ABO which includes a C-Clamp to pinch my nose closed. Lots of calluses from GOP elections.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM

My vote is the exact same as anyones vote. Kinda like the shares we each hold here at HA, remember? I would like him to ask for my vote. Instead he seems quite happy to assume he already can count on it because he see’s us as desperate to rid the country of 0. I find this an odd way to secure votes. The proof is that he cannot close the deal. Had he played this differently straight out of the gate he would already have the nom wrapped up. He chose consistently not to.
Sorry I missed you : ) Let me know if there is anything else you require of me. Bye.

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Once again I reject this silly “share we hold at HA” scenario. All ideas/comments do not carry equal weight. But moving on, didn’t you just say that your state just had a primary? You say he didn’t “ask for your vote”. What did you want him to do? Knock on your door? Promise you something? What? I’m serious about this. Please tell us what you want. The fact that he can’t “close the deal” yet isn’t “proof” of anything other than that the GOP screwed up royally by changing the system and a lot of candidates have been competing for the most important job in the world.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Although I do worry that people may have firmly bought into the nanny state attitude.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:11 PM

That is my fear also. We may need forty years in the wilderness to correct the mentality in our culture.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Betenoire on March 15, 2012 at 7:06 PM

You ever seen a river on fire ? Back in the 70s we had that and worse.

Why the EPA was made a separate entity is a valid point- but it was responsible governance long overdue.

Congress has allowed it to morph into the BS it is today, as it is the fault of complicit career politicians pushing ideology. It needs to be revamped- no doubt.

The failure of congress’ should not ever over shadow the initial need that required it in the first place.

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:17 PM

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Foe me, this will be the first time since Reagan’s midterm that I will be casting a for someone with optimism rather than against someone out of fear.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:17 PM

I love you guys that think that Gov. Romney has been the only recipient of nasty campaigning. Too funny!

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Instead he seems quite happy to assume he already can count on it because he see’s us as desperate to rid the country of 0. I find this an odd way to secure votes. The proof is that he cannot close the deal. Had he played this differently straight out of the gate he would already have the nom wrapped up. He chose consistently not to.
Sorry I missed you : ) Let me know if there is anything else you require of me. Bye.

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:02 PM

I saw Buy Danish’s comment (“Huh?” I believe it was) and figured you’d ignore it, so I did, too. Of course I took no offense.

You point about Romney’s “played” it in this campaign is something I’ve been saying (and I think wrote in several comments about RomneyCare) for a while.

Why (Oh! Why!) didn’t he say, “Yeah, RomneyCare was a mistake, but you shoulda seen what the MA liberals wanted to do.”

I like the guy (voted for him in MI), but it seems to me like he’s either trying (madly) to be someone he’s not, or he’s trying to hide who he really is.

That feeling of mine could be totally wrong. But, that’s what I get out of him.

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 7:18 PM

He will be a competent administrator but I question whether he can fix what ails us. That will take a Congress and a people willing to take their medicine. Do you honestly think that the 52% that voted for the ‘won’ are ready for that amount of pain? This isn’t snark I want to know why you think he can truly fix what ails us.
chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM

It won’t happen overnight, but the ship can be righted and put back on course. His plan is not Palin’s call for “sudden” and “relentless” change. As I said at the outset when she began to use that phrase, Americans are prepared for “relentless” change, but they not prepared for “sudden” change.

PS: Before you Palinistas go crazy, I am criticizing her on policy not nitpicking her choice of words.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM

I don’t think it matters who stays or who goes, unless, of course, it’s Romney who goes. Done deal, it’s over, Romney’s the nominee. He’s going to win most of the winner-take-alls ahead and get proportionals from the others. He will get the delegates. In the off chance that he misses by a small amount, the GOP will convince Rick and Newt to fork over theirs.

Stick a fork in it.

Philly on March 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM

The estimate is about 57% of Gingrich voters would have voted for Santorum had they not voted for Newt. For Santorum to have surpassed Mitt in total votes casted thus far, 80% of Newt voters would have had to have voted for Rick. If 100% of Newt’s delegates went to Santorum, Mitt would still be leading. For these reasons, it’s hard to blame Newt for Rick’s losing to Mitt.

DarkKnight3565 on March 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM

When I spoke of Newt’s ego, I was trying to refer to the value he places on a grudge. He carries a chip on his shoulder like it was the Hope diamond.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Yes, he does. I just saw him on the stump with Callista on FOX, and he literally looked like he was leaning sideways. Such a frumpy, grumpy, man.

BettyRuth on March 15, 2012 at 7:24 PM

He will be a competent administrator but I question whether he can fix what ails us. That will take a Congress and a people willing to take their medicine. Do you honestly think that the 52% that voted for the ‘won’ are ready for that amount of pain? This isn’t snark I want to know why you think he can truly fix what ails us.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Far and away our biggest ailments are our entitlements overhang and our anemic economy. I am confident that Mitt will dramatically improve both.

Our entitlements by moving along the lines of Ryan-Wyden for Medicare (insurance premium support) and increased retirement benefits age along with replacing the SS benefit increase indexing.

For growth, his territorial tax, and lowered corporate rates are just the right medicine along with his personal income tax reductions.

And finally, while many here like to call it class warfare, his capital gains reductions for the middle class will allow working people to recover what we lost over the last 5 years as well as providing more capital to businesses. The middle class are the ones who took it in the shorts with the housing price meltdown and ridiculously high unemployment rates.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:25 PM

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:17 PM

The real question is could some or all of what needed to occur be done without creating an agency that could morph like the EPA did. Given the proclivity of government growing itself I am not convinced that big Agencies are the solution to anything.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:26 PM

I don’t think it matters who stays or who goes, unless, of course, it’s Romney who goes. Done deal, it’s over, Romney’s the nominee. He’s going to win most of the winner-take-alls ahead and get proportionals from the others. He will get the delegates. In the off chance that he misses by a small amount, the GOP will convince Rick and Newt to fork over theirs.

Stick a fork in it.

Philly on March 15, 2012 at 7:22 PM

It’s not over yet. But it is to Romney’s favor if people think it’s all over.

I discount all these, “Romney is inevitable” posts as attempts to manipulate the rest of us. Granted, that’s probably only true of 80% of them….

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:26 PM

love you guys that think that Gov. Romney has been the only recipient of nasty campaigning. Too funny!
Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:18 PM

I challenge you to find a single post-primary speech where Mitt sniped at his opponents. He has been gracious to his competitors, presidential and focused on his ideas and on Obama every time. Contrast and compare to Newt and Santorum…

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:27 PM

BettyRuth on March 15, 2012 at 7:24 PM

I picture him starting his day. He goes over to a mirror, waves his pudgy fist in the air and, in his piping alto voice shouts, “I’ll get you Mitt Romney. I’ll get you or my name’s not Newt!”

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:27 PM

That is a different issue than I was posting about. I agree that all things being equal he was a terrible President. I had to start developing calluses on my nose with the 1972 election. Voting for him or McGovern. This election will be much the same. ABO which includes a C-Clamp to pinch my nose closed. Lots of calluses from GOP elections.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Really….. What candidate did you approve of in the last 40 yrs that you did not “have to pinch your nose” for ??
(you’ll say Reagan, OK)

Anyone else besides him?
Go back 50 years – Goldwater?

The point is, in the last half of a century your presidential choices have been very slim by your high standards. What makes you think that will magically change any time soon? Hopenchange?

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:26 PM

20/20 hindsight is a biatch.

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:30 PM

I’m leaving this thread, there is nothing more detrimental to my attempts to rationalize a Romney presidency than his most ardent supporters.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Cool, maybe you can explain to me why there are about 100 pro Mormon billboards up around here for the last 4 month’s. Those things aren’t cheap ya know. ; )

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

I’m leaving this thread, there is nothing more detrimental to my attempts to rationalize a Romney presidency than his most ardent supporters.
Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Okay fine, but my challenge still remains. Not because I want to win a prize, but it’s true. Newt and Santorum have been most ungracious in victory and defeat.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Buy Danish, as late as last evening here on HA there was a video posted of an interview with Rmoney. Did you watch it?

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

I’m leaving this thread, there is nothing more detrimental to my attempts to rationalize a Romney presidency than his most ardent supporters.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Can’t argue that.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I agree on part of what you put forward regarding the taxation policies. I’d like to see corporate income taxes ended since they are a stealth tax on everyone. But I’ll take what they give.

I am offended by class warfare put forward by any side. What other people earn is their business and they shouldn’t be more highly taxed for being successful. That’s the end of my tirade on class warfare.

Entitlements will take a lot of political will to fix. I haven’t seen the backbone yet in congress to tackle them especially since those that try will be attacked far worse that what we have seen in the last couple of years. Provided the pubs win I hope they will try to finally fix the issue.

chemman on March 15, 2012 at 7:36 PM

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 7:18 PM

As per our previous conversations, you and I share more then that which separates us. ; )

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Back in the day, when there were other candidates who actually had supporters (and not just those anti the other guy), the same could be said of them.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Great Dame, first he and his PACs knock them nearly dead, let their flesh, blood, guts and blood hang out, then he holds ‘gracious’ speeches the night of the wins…I call that true blueblood class, indeed.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Sorry kids, I am being summoned to supper. I’ll check back.

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:39 PM

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Back in the day, when there were other candidates who actually had supporters (and not just those anti the other guy), the same could be said of them.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Not buying the tu quoque. While the other supporters are by no means perfect, I’m seeing a lot of … charming … comments from Romney supporters that seem contemptuous of everyone else. Like claiming no one else has supporters, they just all hate Romney, for example.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

A month and a half ago both candidates were polling in or around single digits. You tell me, are they suddenly the toast of H/A because they’ve changed so much in that time or because they’re the last obstacles to Mitt?

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:43 PM

The argument’s simple: … Which means, in a two-man race where Mitt wins some states and Rick wins some others, Romney actually has a better chance of ending up with a clear majority of delegates than he would if Newt hung in there and hoarded votes from Mitt.

But the situation is not that simple.
I use Alabama as an example:
The popular vote went 34.5-29.5-29 for Santorum-Newt-Romney.
The delegates went 19-12-11.

So, Romney got 11 delegates with 30% of the vote in a 3-man race.

On the other hand, there was a Rasmussen poll that showed Santorum leading Romney in a 2-man race by 50-39.
Under this scenario, it is likely that Santorum would have swept all of the delegates.

So, Romney would probably have gotten 0 delegates with 40% of the vote in a 2-man race.

imasoulman on March 15, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Ah, but what is in a name. You enjoy seeing everyone suffer. ; )

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 6:26 PM

After 2008 everyone deserves to suffer. Looks like they loved it so much that they repeat it, right in front of our eyes.

Those who think that any one person can fix the fix the land is put in, by her own populace, need to be institutionalized.

The whores are the many, the ones at the trough, from the top on down (see ALL in DC), and those who brung them.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM

No he’s spending all that money on sunshine, lollipops and unicorns.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I’m leaving this thread, there is nothing more detrimental to my attempts to rationalize a Romney presidency than his most ardent supporters.
Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 7:32 PM

I suspect it’s pretty normal for people to get miffed when detractors collide with supporters. Happens in every area of life, different takes on any given sport team certainly lead to blows often enough.

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 7:47 PM

there was a video posted of an interview with Rmoney. Did you watch it?

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Lol. If he changes his name to “Rmoney” (maybe we’ll add a hyphen: R-Money) he’ll get 25% of the black vote and 50% of 18-25!

(Hmmm…I wonder if Eminem’s free…)

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 7:47 PM

there was a video posted of an interview with Rmoney. Did you watch it?

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Freudean?

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

A month and a half ago both candidates were polling in or around single digits. You tell me, are they suddenly the toast of H/A because they’ve changed so much in that time or because they’re the last obstacles to Mitt?

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Nobody likes Mitt. Didn’t you get the memo?

Stand Santorum up next to Romney, and suddenly he looks like a conservative hero. Stand Gingrich up next to Romney, and suddenly you start remembering when we had a conservative Congress that actually cut the budget.

So yes, Romney has magical powers of making virtually anyone else look like a conservative.

Just hope those powers don’t apply to Obama…..

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Mitt has had a loyal base of support that never has been below 20% of the GOP. It has grown since, but no other candidate (including Ron Paul) since the race began could boast of such a loyal following.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:59 PM

comments from Romney supporters that seem contemptuous of everyone else. Like claiming no one else has supporters
tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Nobody likes Mitt.
tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

I enjoy a bit of irony now & then.

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 8:02 PM

I wish he would stop attacking his opponents, I can see Obama do that everyday of the week.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2012 at 6:46 PM

I wish they’d all do that. But, I guess that’s how the game’s played.

In all of those debates, I would have said:
1. “Any of my opponents on this stage would be better than Obama.”
2. “What I think about X(whatever stupid, liberal topic asked) is not important compared to how much money Pres. Obama has spent.”

Most of them blew those opportunities. Seemed weak to me.

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Look, this is a failed presidency. And the issue in dealing with the responsibility of commander-in-chief, is the issue of saying, who has the capacity to lead? Who is someone who has demonstrated leadership capacity? Who has character, shown that character over their career? Who has integrity and — and I hope — I — each of these people — I don’t — I don’t want to be critical of the people on this stage. Any one of these people would do a better — a better job in many respects than our president.

Mitt Romney on January 7, 2012 (debate transcript)

Just FYI. There are probably other examples, but this is just the first one that popped up in a search.

HTL on March 15, 2012 at 8:03 PM

The problem is not that Newt is staying longer in the race, it is that the 2 frontrunners have not yet convinced the voters how they will tackle the main issues facing this country as Newt has, they go out and criticize him on what he says and after he gets applauded for it few days later they say the same thing as if they came up with that idea.
Almost everyone agrees that Newt is good in debate and has good ideas but say he can’t win, well what else do we need from a president but good ideas and a way of dealing (debating) with our allies and enemies.

evergreenland on March 15, 2012 at 8:03 PM

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Lol. All of the “camps” in the GOP/conservative/RINO/etc. realms have their practioners of hyperbole.

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Buy Danish, as late as last evening here on HA there was a video posted of an interview with Rmoney. Did you watch it?

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 7:35 PM

I wasn’t here last evening. If you’re referring to Megyn Kelly I saw it live.

Great Dame, first he and his PACs knock them nearly dead, let their flesh, blood, guts and blood hang out, then he holds ‘gracious’ speeches the night of the wins…I call that true blueblood class, indeed.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The PAC ran the “baggage” ad against Newt. B.F.D. Did you see Newt’s PAC’s Bain ad? Hear his robocalls to Holocaust survivors? Hear them talk about “vulture capitalism” and stuff like that?

The point is, there is a time and place for everything. Post primary speeches (like funerals!) are not the place to vent petty grievances. That’s what I expect from populist libs…

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Not buying the tu quoque. While the other supporters are by no means perfect, I’m seeing a lot of … charming … comments from Romney supporters that seem contemptuous of everyone else. Like claiming no one else has supporters, they just all hate Romney, for example.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Who has said that?

Just FYI. There are probably other examples, but this is just the first one that popped up in a search.
HTL on March 15, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Yep. Thanks.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:09 PM

HTL on March 15, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Thanks. That’s good that he said that.
(In case you didn’t know, I have been a (tentative) Romney supporter for most of the primary season. I voted for him in MI.)

What I meant by my comment is that they should all be saying those things at every opportunity. They should all be making it about the Golfer-In-Chief.

And, as I’ve intermittantly (no pun intended) said here at HA for months now, all of our candidates have weaknesses. Same as all the “didn’t-runs” would have. We must pick one who can beat Odumbo–that’s all that matters to me.

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 8:10 PM

comments from Romney supporters that seem contemptuous of everyone else. Like claiming no one else has supporters
tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Nobody likes Mitt.
tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM

I enjoy a bit of irony now & then.

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 8:02 PM

You mean like Romney supporters claiming Santorum isn’t conservative? That’s some pretty good irony.

Or claiming that no one actually supports any other candidate, when the truth is that it’s Mitt who barely has any real support. All during this primary, the moment there was a plausible alternative, the “front-runner” dropped to a distant second.

From what I can see, a lot of the support Romney does have is from people who hate conservatives, and can hardly wait to move the Republican party to the middle. Yet these same people will post over and over again calling Santorum a big-government liberal, while pushing the big-government liberal Romney.

MJBrutus is practically salivating over the fond wish that the Republican party jettison conservatives. If they do, then the Republican party will return to its Rockefeller Republican days, where they keep maybe 30% of Congress and win a presidential election every 4th election or so.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 8:10 PM

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Lol. All of the “camps” in the GOP/conservative/RINO/etc. realms have their practioners of hyperbole.

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 8:04 PM

But it’s advisable not to denounce the hyperbole before you engage in it just minutes later!
:D

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

Who has said that?

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:09 PM

I have and I stand by it. See above for why.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 8:11 PM

MJBrutus is practically salivating over the fond wish that the Republican party jettison conservatives.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 8:10 PM

That depends on how you define “conservatives.”

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Or claiming that no one actually supports any other candidate
tom on March 15, 2012 at 8:10 PM

You missed the irony.

whatcat on March 15, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Really….. What candidate did you approve of in the last 40 yrs that you did not “have to pinch your nose” for ??
(you’ll say Reagan, OK)

Anyone else besides him?
Go back 50 years – Goldwater?

The point is, in the last half of a century your presidential choices have been very slim by your high standards. What makes you think that will magically change any time soon? Hopenchange?

FlaMurph on March 15, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I dunno… actually drafting a conservative to run? Not a wannabe, and not someone only running because he has bags and bags of cash.

Mitt may win the general, but only in a Nixon/McGovern or Nixon/Humphrey scenario – and Obama has enough to be a McGovern or Humphrey. Problem is, if the Dems offer up a Clintonian candidate in 2016 (and they will if they want to remain a relevant party chief presider over our nation’s downfall), Mitt will lose re-election.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Not buying the tu quoque. While the other supporters are by no means perfect, I’m seeing a lot of … charming … comments from Romney supporters that seem contemptuous of everyone else. Like claiming no one else has supporters, they just all hate Romney, for example.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Who has said that?

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:09 PM

That was a comment pointed directly at the person I was responding to, who said

Back in the day, when there were other candidates who actually had supporters (and not just those anti the other guy), the same could be said of them.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Which I quoted in the comment you quoted above. Surprised you missed it. Anyway, his point was that no one really supports Santorum or Gingrich, they’re just opposed to Romney.

Personally, I support the best choice of those remaining. Which is all any of us can do. It’s not some personal vendetta against Mitt Romney that I think he would be a lousy choice for president.

tom on March 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Mitt Romney on January 7, 2012 (debate transcript)

Just FYI. There are probably other examples, but this is just the first one that popped up in a search.

HTL on March 15, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Was that before or after he changed his mind on that issue for the 142nd time over the past 10 years?

Mitt’s words mean nothing. A bit less hot air than Obama, but that’s not an actual achievement.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:45 PM

; )

RedCrow on March 15, 2012 at 7:47 PM

LOL! Eminem may well be available.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

No Freudian, Just a bad reading of a cartoon I saw a few months back. I should do a better job of keeping my spectacles correct. I do however find it completely appropriate. Rmoney is the establishment party guy. No denying it. All who choose to use it aare free to do so. When Rmoney wraps up the nom I will have it as the bumper sticker on my truck. I may or may not leave WORST EVER where the O is 0′s logo on the truck. Just above my “Don’t tread on me. ” flag magnet.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:05 PM

I will assume since the nature of your response was not a denial that you are in agreement with me as to the Rmoney interview. I see you might be busy having MJBrutas explain the Hater comment, I know how you feel about that word.

Well that’s it for me on this thread, if you need anything else, I am sure to be found on one of the several next threads. Later.; )

Bmore on March 15, 2012 at 8:37 PM

Which I quoted in the comment you quoted above. Surprised you missed it. Anyway, his point was that no one really supports Santorum or Gingrich, they’re just opposed to Romney.
tom on March 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Okay. Thanks. I think it’s a bit of both, that Santorum has his social con and populist supporters and Gingrich has people like me (who used to think he was awesome but don’t anymore, but I digress).

As for your assertion that Romney’s support comes from people who “hate conservatives” I say: Nonsense.

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Mitt can’t win. Too many people will stay home just like they did in 2008. I don’t care who is on the bottom of the ticket it won’t bring me to vote for another frat boy who bankrupted his state.

Mitt is George W. Another spoiled brat with a rich father who greased the skids for him. He never had to fight for a thing in his life. He won’t fight against Obama just like George W. took all of left’s abuse. Been there, done that.

Mitt takes socialized medicine off of the table. Even the Independents don’t like socialized medicine. No one believes Mitt that he will get rid of it. He owns it and has lied too much about too much in this campaign.

Mitt is a non started who got left at the gate. Keep being delusional. Just wait until Axelrod starts bringing out the poor, indigent slobs who got laid off and live a life of abject poverty because of Mittwt’s greed. Gordon Gecko will look like an angel by the time Axelrod is done with Mittwit.

But go ahead and live your nice daydream. The rest of us live in “Realville.” A vote for Mitt is a vote for an Obama second term when he is so beatable.

Jayrae on March 15, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Buy Danish on March 15, 2012 at 8:40 PM

When is the last time that anyone who supposedly supports Santo has cited a single proposal of his that they’re in favor of? All you get is eye wash about him being, “the most conservative” or some such. Does anyone ever speak up in favor of his tripling the child tax credit? Tax breaks for just the manufacturers and other pro union ideas? I can’t recall anyone here talking about what he has to offer aside from the vague “conservative” word.

MJBrutus on March 15, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Santorum Has A PENNSYLVANIA PROBLEM:

Interviews with about two dozen Pennsylvania Republicans and a review of the delegate candidates brings Santorum’s challenge into focus.

The ranks of delegate hopefuls are littered with Republican state committee members, elected officials and others with close party ties, who will ultimately be more beholden to a state party leadership that, while officially neutral, is visibly leaning in Romney’s direction and increasingly vocal in its fear that Santorum could hurt the party in a general election — especially after witnessing his 18-point drubbing in 2006.

Romney, Ron Paul and even Newt Gingrich got some of their supporters on the ballot as delegate candidates. But Santorum’s campaign officials, who have struggled with ballot organization issues across the country, privately concede that they just didn’t have the time, nor resources, to organize their own supporters to run as delegates when the paperwork was due earlier this year.

“At this point the delegate candidates are lined up everywhere but with Rick,” said Charlie Gerow, a longtime GOP strategist supporting Gingrich.

The state party has so far not made an endorsement in the race. But Bob Asher, a Republican National Committeeman and one of the most powerful forces in state politics, is backing Romney. So are top party fundraisers and members of Congress from the Philadelphia suburbs who, like many elected and party officials, worry that a Santorum candidacy would send independents fleeing from the GOP and damage their prospects in down-ballot races.

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/03/15/031512-news-web-campaign-santorum/

mountainaires on March 15, 2012 at 8:49 PM

@Mittisms: “Frankly, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich were a big part of the ‘we’ that spent too much, borrowed too much and earmarked too much.” Romney

Evangelicals love people who give lip service to ideology. Sort of like Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart etc. etc. ad infinitum.

BTW have we seen Santorum’s tax return yet?

aloysiusmiller on March 15, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Was that before or after he changed his mind on that issue for the 142nd time over the past 10 years?

Mitt’s words mean nothing. A bit less hot air than Obama, but that’s not an actual achievement.

Myron Falwell on March 15, 2012 at 8:18 PM

FBI. Funny, but inaccurate.

First, Romney has never contradicted this statement. Even this morning, I saw him give an interview where he said that Santorum and Gingrich were “nice guys”, which is consistent with what I have heard him say every time he is asked the same leading question by media people hoping to provoke a fight.

Second, you need to contrast this with Santorum and Gingrich, who constantly make personal and one-sided attacks on Romney (“Liar” and “Bully”) come immediately to mind. What I mean by “one sided” in this context is an attack that castigates someone else for a tactic that you yourself regularly employ. Gingrich and Santorum regularly distort Romney’s record, yet I have never heard Romney complain about that. Which makes it a little hypocritical when they whine about it, doing it regularly themselves. Saw an ad from Gingrich today which did just that, in fact. When Romney is asked about this, he by contrast just says it’s part of the campaigning process (i.e. “politics ain’t beanbag”) and moves on.

Finally, your own attack on Romney is just that, “hot air”. No facts, no substantiation, except perhaps via a gross distortion of his record in MA.

Quote for the day: “If only Romney had run for Governor of Utah, he’d be President tomorrow.”

HTL on March 15, 2012 at 8:53 PM

After SC Newt made the argument that Santorum should drop out. The argument apparently doesn’t apply when Santorum is winning. Romney should remember to say thank you to Newt.

AnotherJones on March 15, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Newt bashes Obama very well. Let him stay in, offer ideas and bash Obama. Newt’s leadership on the energy issue seems to have registered on Obama’s policies or at least how they describe them. The other candidates can ignore Newt and let him play Mac the Knife for them since they do not seem willing to really take Obama on themselves and are reluctant to make transformational policy proposals until Newt shows they are winners.

KW64 on March 15, 2012 at 11:33 PM

After April 1, the only two states that will award delegates proportionally within Congressional districts are North Carolina and Kentucky.

California is not winner take all. Poorly researched tidbits of opinion are not very usefull.

Freddy on March 15, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Rick Santorum is an unelectable loser. Everyone knows it.

Santorum needs to drop out, so we can focus on the real task at hand: defeating Obama.

bluegill on March 16, 2012 at 5:54 AM

I think it will come down to Texas if we can ever get the primary to happen. Texas will go mostly Santorum, then Newt, then Romney. Texas has a TON of electoral votes now. Once Santorum wins Texas, he will win.

Newt is campaigning hard in Texas (or his Super PAC is).

Funny how conservative states consistently grow their population and liberal states consistently shrink their population. I wonder if that says anything about liberal policies….

jeffn21 on March 16, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Baggage?? Baggage?? Don’t care about no stinkin’ baggage!!! Newt deserves to stay in as long as he is able. After all, RINO Romney (aka Obama-Lite) LIED, and LIED, and LIED all over Florida, and Iowa before that about Newt!?!?! (See “What Really Happened to the Gingrich Ethics Case?” by Byron York, Townhall.com, 2/6/12) I get a kick out of Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name) running around with more LIES about Gingrich and Santorum being economic lightweights. Well, if that’s the case, Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name) is an abject imbecile when it comes to herding cats in DC!?! Newt not only balanced the damn budget, but also reformed welfare-to-work!?! What’s RINO Romney got?? RomneyCare, the impetus for ObamaCare!?! Oh, and BTW, since the RepublilcRAT establishment is complicit in Willard’s LIES, they should ALL be replaced!!! That said, Thanks a lot, STUPID Party, you’re just replacing the Jackass LIAR-In-Chief with the (R) version!?! ARE YOU LISTENING, ILLINOIS????

Colatteral Damage on March 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2