“This is the saddest, most pathetic victory party I’ve ever seen”
But Romney aides were on the job Saturday night. In Green Bay, a Romney spokesman, Ryan Williams, showed up at the bar where Santorum was holding his election-night event, to make a few disparaging comments and put the Romney campaign’s spin on events. “This is the saddest, most pathetic victory party I’ve ever seen,” an AP reporter quoted Williams saying. “Where are all the supporters?”
Not long after, Santorum campaign manager Mike Biundo asked Williams to leave, which Williams did. “I didn’t think it was appropriate,” Biundo said later. “They keep wanting to write this race off and say that it’s done, yet they keep sending surrogates to our events to spin the press. They’ve been following us around for a while. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a coincidence that we were in the same bar.”…
In terms of delegates awarded, Romney left the 2008 race after primaries and caucuses accounting for 1,313 delegates had been held. Today, counting Louisiana, the primaries and caucuses held so far account for 1,187 delegates. After Wisconsin, Maryland, and Washington DC hold contests on April 4, the total will be 1,285 — still fewer delegates than had been awarded when Romney pulled out back in 2008. Only after the April 24 primaries, after which 1,516 delegates will have been awarded (including in Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania), will Santorum have stayed in the race beyond the delegate point Romney left in 2008.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Absolutely.
conservative pilgrim on March 25, 2012 at 3:24 PM
False dichotomy, as if being charismatic AND stopping the descent from the cliff are mutually exclusive. With Romney supporters, it’s a daily Logical Fallacy Festival.
ddrintn on March 25, 2012 at 3:26 PM
And that’s my cue to start my drinkin’ for the day.
I don’t think they forgot. They’re expecting us to.
Left Coast Right Mind on March 25, 2012 at 3:27 PM
He has no chance of winning or getting a Cabinet post.
Drop out and go home Rick.
WisCon on March 25, 2012 at 3:27 PM
I guess the 46.7% in Illinois and 50.1% in Nevada kind of destroys any hope of logic in your talking points….Right?
rich801 on March 25, 2012 at 3:28 PM
O-bot.
Rational Thought on March 25, 2012 at 3:28 PM
Quaint. Out here in Western Washington, Romney setup his event with about a week notice (and had to be persuaded to come out here at all), and had far, far, far more interest generated than he was expecting. They had what, 2,000 RSPV’s to the event notification within an hour?
People were lining up to get in to the Center over an hour before the event started, and there were so many people they didn’t all fit.
As to the Stadium, it’s a cute little bit of spin, but the intention of that venue wasn’t to fill up every single seat. It was to use the field, the grass, and that is what they set up for.
But yes, feel free to insist that the doors aren’t being knocked down to get into his events.
kirazy on March 25, 2012 at 3:30 PM
News by omission. Obama does the same thing. Not good company.
conservative pilgrim on March 25, 2012 at 3:30 PM
there is nothing wrong with people wanting a LEADER to LEAD the nation. Leaders inspire, leaders have charisma, Leaders put forward bold ideas. I want a Leader not a generic “adult” I’m adult enough. I don’t need nor want a Daddy. Nor do I want to love the guy. I do however require the leader of our country to be a you know a leader. Not a plastic formless blob that will say and do anything he thinks he needs to do to get elected. Which sadly is what we have in Obama and Mitt. Neither are leaders and neither can nor will change the course of the ship of state. You want to replace Obama all fine and good but at this late stage you need to start asking yourself replace him with what? More of the same but with an R next to his name instead of a D?
no thanks.
unseen on March 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM
oh, ok.
joey24007 on March 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM
Uhhhhhhhh…….yeah.
You might want to consider changing your username. You’re giving rationality a bad rep.
ddrintn on March 25, 2012 at 3:36 PM
Absolutely. Well said.
changer1701 on March 25, 2012 at 3:36 PM
Santorum is done. I don’t believe he will take another primary from here on out.
It’s over. He was expected by everyone to win Louisiana, this is no great “comeback” or even a surprise. The only surprise would have been if he had won by less than 10 points or lost it.
Congratulations, Rick. Now go home.
crosspatch on March 25, 2012 at 3:37 PM
Haven’t you guys been saying that sincce Iowa? LOL
ddrintn on March 25, 2012 at 3:39 PM
Yeah, “Romney’s boring. So….boring is good!!!! It’s what we need!!! I don’t need no stinkin’ excitement!…”
ddrintn on March 25, 2012 at 3:40 PM
O-bot.
You want to replace Obama all fine and good but at this late stage you need to start asking yourself replace him with what? More of the same but with an R next to his name instead of a D?
no thanks.
unseen on March 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM
Romney and Barack are not the same ideologically. Not even close. And your idiotic insistence that they are is boring.
Rational Thought on March 25, 2012 at 3:41 PM
I guess since “boring is good” you mean that as a compliment? LOL
ddrintn on March 25, 2012 at 3:42 PM
All you Romney haters like Schadenfreak keep screaming that Romney has no “core beliefs.”
Meaning he’s not a light-your-hair-on-fire far-right extremist. Like smarmy little Ricky.
And that’s a bad thing?
Not to us independents.
I see a man who gave away his inheritance and became massively successful through his own intelligence and hard work. Who turned around the Olympics out of a spirit of public service, and served as governor of MA for an annual salary of $1. He’s a religious man who doesn’t bring his personal beliefs into his governance, who has been married to the same woman for 43 years, has a large and loving family who clearly come first in his life. He didn’t use his public service to lobby for Freddie Mac–like Gingrich–or a healthcare corporation, like Santorum. Ricky, of course, as a result has a $2 million estate in one of the toniest sections of VA but, because he’s the grandson of a coal minor or something, really, REALLY indentifies with the common schlub. Santorum is such a phony.
I honestly don’t care about negative ads. You all deride Romney as “robotic.” No one can disagree with that. But he doesn’t impress me personally nasty, petty and (at this point) vengeful, as both Gingrich and Santorum do.
And Romney is, above all else, competent and presidential.
So, really, TC’s, take your hysterics about “core beliefs” and stuff ‘em up your impossible-to-please, sanctimonious arses.
BTW, there is a word for politicians who don’t understand that you have to “reset” your campaign when you go from a primary to a general election campaign.
And that word is “loser.”
Meredith on March 25, 2012 at 3:43 PM
ROFL….you guys crack me up.
ddrintn on March 25, 2012 at 3:45 PM
QUICKLY DUMP SKETCHY MITTENS NOW!
Pragmatic on March 25, 2012 at 3:45 PM
MITTENS=OBAMA
OBAMACARE=ROMNEYCARE
THE TRUTH HURTS A LOT!
Pragmatic on March 25, 2012 at 3:46 PM
O-bot.
Rational Thought on March 25, 2012 at 3:47 PM
Regardless of what the “intentions” were (as if intentions are all that matter), the photos from that event are pretty darned amusing.
Left Coast Right Mind on March 25, 2012 at 3:49 PM
And by late April, Santorum may no longer be in the race. So Louisiana wasn’t really all that significant of a victory considering Santorum was already expected to win it easily.
crosspatch on March 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM
It seems some who work for the Romney campaign are as immature as some of the Romney fans here.
McDuck on March 25, 2012 at 3:58 PM
The more I see of Romney, his campaign, and his supporters, the more I despise the whole thing. I am a fiscal conservative and social moderate who has backed Romney since Huntsman got out, but I am disgusted by the arrogance. He will get my vote over Obama, but only because his views are closer to mine. He won’t get a dime from me and I won’t lift a finger to help on the ground. I know that he will lose to Obama. I also know that the US will still be here in four years, so there is still hope for a better future.
McDuck on March 25, 2012 at 4:06 PM
Ryan Williams knew perfectly well why there weren’t any fans at Santorum HQ. They were all at the Obama HQ earning their paychecks.
Zaggs on March 25, 2012 at 4:11 PM
Romney campaign did not pick the venue. It was the Detroit Economic Club. They ran out of rooms to accommodate the 1200 club members who wanted to attend Romney’ s speech and the event had to be moved. The speech was supposed to be in an auditorium in the Ford Stadium, but that was vetoed by the Secret Service. The Detroit Economic Club then moved the speech onto the field , which was a stupid move and made a bad optic, but it would look a lot worse if the club put Santorum speech in the same venues when he attracted 400 people to attend a week earlier.
galtani on March 25, 2012 at 4:15 PM
Meh, you have to do better.
Schadenfreude on March 25, 2012 at 4:24 PM
Rational Thought on March 25, 2012 at 3:21 PM
Rational is indignant.
Schadenfreude on March 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM
Santorum will win some more primaries, but great majority of those will award the delegates proportionately. He is likely to win PA, KY, IN, AR, WV, SD, NE and maybe MT and NC.
But if Romney wins NY and CT by 50% he will get all 125 of the delegates from those two states. There are 7 more winner-take-all primaries that Romney is projected to win. (DC, MD, WT, DE, CA, NJ and UT). Those races has 375 delegates , although some super-delegates there had already endorsed Romney. so let’s just say 365. If by the time TX is voting ( that is before CA and UT) , and the math is lopsided (if Romney wins WI and win by 50% in NY and CT), that will change the dynamics of the votes in TX. Romney will get 1144, but let’s not see that Santorum will not win another primary.
galtani on March 25, 2012 at 4:32 PM
+1
With over 10 Million votes cast so far,
Romney has received 40%.
Which means that 60% of Republican Primary voters DON’T want Romney.
I’m not in favor of asking any candidate to quit. Even the 3rd and 4th place candidates. Let them stay in, and give people the option of voting for the candidate for whom they want to vote.
In proportional states, the not-Romney voters can vote for the not-Romney of their choice. In winner-takes-all states, if Romney is polling #1 before the primary, then the supporters of the #3 and #4 candidates would be wise to vote for the #2 candidate in order to deny Romney the delegates.
And I’ve had enough of the estalishment pushing their propaganda about how it’s “close to mathematically impossible” for candidate #2 to win a majority of the delegates. That’s meaningless, and it’s the same exact thing that they did in 2008 to get Romney to break his promise (the promise he made on February 5, 2008 to battle “all the way to the convention”) and quit. How did that work out?
There’s nothing wrong with candidates #2, #3, and #4 actually doing what Romney promised to do (but didn’t) in 2008… to fight all the way to the convention.
Romney broke his promise, quit, lied about his reasons for quitting (terrorism had NOTHING to do with it!), and a week after quitting he “released” his delegates to McCain…
… So Romney should not complain if Newt Gingrich follows Romney’s lead and returns the favor by “releasing” his delegates to Rick Santorum.
Tel me, Romney supporters, how would you feel about Gingrich “releasing” his delegates to Santorum?
If that would bother you now, then why were you OK with Romney releasing his delegates to McCain? (…in an effort to force Mike Huckabee out of the race.)
ITguy on March 25, 2012 at 4:38 PM
Math is still an exact science.
Much else, not so much.
I would not buy lottery tickets based on anything we know today.
Schadenfreude on March 25, 2012 at 4:38 PM
You bet I am. How else is one supposed to be having to read “Obama and Romney are the same” over and over from the same idiotic O-bots. Yes, it makes one indignant. This site, overall, makes me indignant these days. The only regular posters left are liberals and other O-bots. And liberals and O-bots have always been boring. So, yes. Indignant.
Rational Thought on March 25, 2012 at 4:39 PM
Obama and Romney are NOT the same.
While Romney has said that his “views are progressive”,
Obama has never called himself “severely conservative”.
ITguy on March 25, 2012 at 4:41 PM
Add one more reason I won’t EVER vote for Willard …
His people are GOONS.
EFF ‘Em.
They don’t seem to understand that fighting a primary out is one thing – but disparaging your opposition in this fashion is counterproductive because, eventually – you want their supporters to vote for the eventual nominee.
But Willard doesn’t care – he figures he has our votes in the bag because we hate Obama worse than we hate him.
Uhm no – I hate Willard more than Obama.
OBAMA 2012.
HondaV65 on March 25, 2012 at 4:53 PM
I am going to have to drag my sorry butt to the polls to vote for our vanilla canidate!
lisa fox on March 25, 2012 at 4:54 PM
You’re right – they are different.
Obama speaks the truth occasionally … or at least what’s in his heart.
Willard? His heart is an etch-a-sketch.
HondaV65 on March 25, 2012 at 4:54 PM
Why? Because you think Willard can save this nation?
LOL … they really have you fooled.
“President Willard” means you get Willard, Mitch, and John in charge of things. In case you haven’t noticed – Mitch and John (mcconnell and boehner) – suck badly.
And so will Willard.
They care more for preserving their own power than in saving this nation.
An etch-a-sketch will not save this nation – but an etch-a-sketch can destroy Conservatism.
If this is the guy that Conservatives want to represent them – then you truely deserve the generation of wilderness you’ll be sentenced to when these guys fail. And … fail they will.
HondaV65 on March 25, 2012 at 4:57 PM
So.
Pulled off of RCP:
Romney: 4,127,915
Santorum: 2,850,541
Gingrich: 2,212,001
Paul: 1,079,751
Total votes? 10,270,208.
Romney has 40.19% of the vote. So that’s 59.81% who didn’t vote for Romney. By your logic, he’s doomed.
Santorum has 27.75% of the vote. So that’s 72.25% who didn’t vote for Romney. By your logic, he must be REALLY doomed.
It is not a rational argument to say that people who voted for someone else instead of Romney will absolutely, positively, not vote for him if or when he is the nominee.
kirazy on March 25, 2012 at 5:04 PM
That second vote for Romney should be vote for Santorum. Why is there no edit feature? :C
kirazy on March 25, 2012 at 5:05 PM
HondaV65- No I do not think Willard can “save” this Nation, Only alot of Prayer. Maybe you’re right, Maybe we have to let this Nation be torn down to build it back up.
lisa fox on March 25, 2012 at 5:06 PM
Well, get ready for a lot more of “Obama and Romney are the same” once Romney wins the nomination and the media start hammering away at Romneycare — how do you suppose the independents and moderates who are oh so critical to victory are going to see Romney then? Do you really think the media will be all hush-hush about Romney’s governorship? Do you really think all those independents and moderates are going to look at Romney’s past career and go, “My God, what a refreshing change he’ll be”?
Aitch748 on March 25, 2012 at 5:09 PM
The whole ABO rationale starts to lose its power to motivate once your loathing of the ABO candidate begins to gain ground on your loathing of Obama.
Aitch748 on March 25, 2012 at 5:12 PM
Aitch748 on March 25, 2012 at 5:09 PM
Sure, if they actually LOOK at the Governership, what he did, what he was prevented from doing by the most incredibly Democrat legislature in the country.
But by all means, continue to attribute that body’s acheivments to Romney. When you veto 800 items, and are overturned 600 times, and then you have a complacent media, conservative media as well, credit you personally for all 600 of those items…
What’s a man to do?
kirazy on March 25, 2012 at 5:18 PM
Rational Thought on March 25, 2012 at 4:39 PM
Meant the adjective, not you.
Schadenfreude on March 25, 2012 at 5:21 PM
It’s quite the toughie, isn’t it?
Either let it crash and burn, which means to walk away and let Obama have his second term. Have the Dems own the crash and hope in that time that conservatives get their crap together enough to be able to have something viable ready to go in four years to clean it up.
Or to have the inevitable Romney presidency where probably the status quo will be preserved and hope to heck that the conservatives get their crap together to have a viable plan to get rid of both parties (which by this time will be different in name only).
Guess it depends on whether one is playing the long game.
kim roy on March 25, 2012 at 5:28 PM
I didn’t use the term “doomed”. I was comparing support to NON-support. And neither Romney not Santorum has, to this point, generated enough support to win the nomination. But either could. Or neither could.
While I like Santorum, he’s not my first choice at a brokered convention.
If we reach a brokered convention, I think that the level of animosity between (Paul Santorum Romney Gingrich) could be so high that none of those 4 would be able to put together a majority of delegates. Perhaps a Santorum/Gingrich coalition could, or perhaps a Romney/Paul coalition could. But if not, I could see the convention looking to two candidates who ran in 2008 but did not run in 2012. I could see a Huckabee/Palin ticket kicking Democratic butt… regardless of if that is an Obama/Biden Democratic ticket or a Clinton/? Democratic ticket.
I never said that.
ITguy on March 25, 2012 at 5:35 PM
Sketchy IS like Obama in this respect. They like to win elections by their opponent withdrawing from the race.
If the race is over why doesn’t Sketchy just win the delegates?
Ted Torgerson on March 25, 2012 at 5:38 PM
Keep your eyes on Hillary Clinton.
I think that she still has her eyes on the Presidency, and not just in 2016, but in 2012.
I think she is seriously prepping to be the Democratic nominee in 2012. How in the world can I say that? Keep two things in mind:
If Barry is found ineligible and/or guilty of forgery, fraud, obstruction of justice, etc, OR if the Clintons introduce him to Vince Foster and blame it on the Tea Party, who would the Democrats nominate? Joe Biden? No way. It would HAVE to be Hillary. And when you listen to what she’s said, both in 2008 and recently, she’s trying to pave the way for the first woman Democratic Presidential nominee and first woman President.
Listen to the 20 seconds from 1:36 to 1:56 in this recent video of Hillary Clinton
So, is America “coming of age” and ready for its first female president?
Hillary wants you to see her as “increasingly confident, ready to lead in a quite uncertain and dangerous world.”
And oh, by the way, that whole manufactured “Republican War on Women” thing would play right into Hillary’s hands if she were to become the Democrats’ nominee…
Now, if Hillary Clinton ends up being the Democratic Nominee, wouldn’t you want Palin on our ticket, at least as the VP?
ITguy on March 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »