Tuesday, January 08, 2008
|
|
On To Michigan (and South Carolina, Nevada and Florida and 2/5)
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
9:54 PM
|
Mitt Romney appeared on the program tonight after his second-place showing in New Hampshire. The transcript is here, and his analysis of how the race was compelling:
HH: Now Governor, this is not unfolding the way any pundit called it, certainly not the way you had hoped it would unfold, but also not the way your opponents hoped it would unfold. John McCain’s down from 60% eight years ago. You’ve dealt with a lot of situations where tactics and strategy has to evolve. How are you doing that? Have you arrived on a central message for the next eight weeks?
MR: Well, there’s no question but that our message continues to be the same message, and it’s a powerful and connecting message. What’s happened that’s quite different is that we were anticipating that we had to win the first two primaries to go up against Rudy Giuliani, who was way ahead in the national polls, and who would have a commanding lead in Florida. Well, now Rudy Giuliani’s no longer in the lead in the national polls, and it looks like he’s number four or number three in Florida. So the whole world is different than we thought, and it’s much more of an open process than we’d expected with at least three and maybe more Republicans all vying for votes. And I think it’s anybody’s guess as to exactly how this is going to turn out. Romney's argument blows past the chattering classes working on old models: When Romney had to beat a dominant Rudy Giuliani, he had to win one or both of Iowa and New Hampshire. The fall of Rudy leaves a wide open field, and Romney's two second palace showings in Iowa and New Hampshire along with a win in Wyoming means he's in the thick of race. Romney confidently asserted to me that he has all the resources and organization he needs to go as long as it takes, and if you look at the fact that his base in new Hampshire did not crumble after Iowa, you see that he has a bedrock vote that won't be leaving him anytime soon. Call it the Club for Growth vote plus the win-in-November plus the illegal immigration activist vote.
Romney also leads in total votes received in the combined Iowa and New Hampshire votes, and of course the delegate hunt. He still has to be considered the front-runner by anyone who will let go of the old "momentum" model leading to a quickly concluded nomination. Pundits told ourselves that a front-loaded campaign meant a quick decision. In fact it means chaos, and chaos favors the candidate with resources and a bedrock of support.
Michael Medved and I had three spirited discussions tonight, and many more will follow as he is a McCain guy and I am a Romney guy. Michael thinks --rightly I suspect-- that many independents who were going to vote for Obama yesterday got to the polls today and, thinking it was in the bag for their guy, decided to vote strategically for McCain. Some of those votes were probably out of respect, some from love, and some from indies wanting the GOP to nominate other than Romney, whom they considered the strongest GOP nominee in the fall. But they talked themselves out of an Obama vote and into an enormous upset for Hillary, no matter what the final total is.
Michael is very wrong about one thing: He thinks that independent votes in primaries ought to count as much as Republican votes in the eyes of analysts. They don't. Republican voters are eventually going to decide the Republican nominee, and that is Romney's still not fully revealed advantage in the next two months: He's the conservative candidate that holds together the Reagan-Bush coalition.
Romney could have put the race away twice, but he hasn't. But neither has he lost it. That means it will indeed be the long campaign.
Reporters ought ot be pressing the McCain and Huckabee campaigns on public financing. If either campaign takes it in order to stay competitive in the marathon ahead, they are dooming the GOP in the fall. It is the poisoned chalice, and if either drinks from it, they ought to immediately be shunned by GOP voters who want to win in the fall.
As for Michigan, Romney rightly declared tonight that the biggest issue in the Wolverine State is the economy, which is in a single state recession there. John McCain and Mike Huckabee are both suspect when it comes to economic revival and turnaround strategies embraced by most GOP voters, meaning deep, across-the-board tax cuts. Romney's got an appeal as a native with a fine name. Huck's got the evangelicals in the western portion of the state. And McCain has the bounce from Iowa.
Should be fun.
|
|
Cotteneyed,
Thanks for your words and encouragement. I was born and raised in Dallas, moved to Ohio in high school, Arizona for college and now live in Virginia and work in DC.
BTW, it was obvious that the truth got under the vile neo-fascist’s skin and I do consider his attacks as a badge of honor. Did you notice that because I have a moniker denoting my pride in being both Irish and Texan (am actually related to Sam Houston) that I am somehow a defender of Dixie? I guess that in that seditious fascist’s warped mind, anyone from the South must be pro-slavery. I guess he forgot that slavery was the domain of his beloved party and that it was our political forefathers that demanded and even died for its abolishment. I guess that he forgot that the first black members of Congress were all Republicans. I guess that he forgot that the Ku Klux Klan were all democrats. I guess that he forgot that even today he and his party continue to argue that blacks are intellectually inferior to whites, thus in need of affirmative action. I guess that he forgot that he and his party still rejects equality and supports a government that treats people differently depending upon their class, skin color and gender.
To the neo-fascist traitor, yes you are a vile seditious Marxist who deserves the constitutional remedy for your treasonous words and behavior. You have chosen to aid and comfort al Qaeda during our time of war and for that God will have a special place for you.
|
|
|
Not true at all. I'm a big fan of his letters and the GA. The one does not preclude the other. The man wrote and spoke political poetry.. |
|
Lincoln's 3-hour debate orations over his 7-minute Gettysburg Address or wonderful BRIEF letters to all kinds of folks as Prez.
Clarity & Cotton: Lads, the energy expended on the ALLEGED Republican, Brobette, is mind boggling. Please consider strangling him and be done with it. NO jury compiled around here will convict you. Promise. |
|
Remember the Kink's song: "20th Century Man"? It's off the "Muswell Hillbillies" CD. That's me--a 19th century man stuck in the 21st century.
I have a typographic mind and yearn for the days when people would stand around and listen to the likes of Lincoln or Douglas for two, four, six hours at a stretch. As a result, I tend to be a little windy for this sound-bite generation, although pretty concise relative to my cohort.
As for my own era, I sometimes get lazy. Remember what Chuchill said after writing a six page letter: "sorry about it's length. I didn't have time to make it one page." |
|
|
Are you guys dizzy yet? turning a mitt loss into a win each time - how does that figure? spin, spin, spin! |
|
|
|
What?! I'm supposed to just let some second-rater accuse me of being an enemy of our country? Am I supposed to defend myself and protest that I am in fact a friend of our country? Sorry, neither of the above. I'll respond to such insults, if I feel like it, in the manner they deserve.
And yes, I am a man of civility and reasonable discourse. Damn straight. If you guys had a modicum of decency, you'd rally to my defense against this idiot, rather than lecture me. |
|
Spare me. The insults flowed from him. I responded in kind. You just expect liberals to turn the other cheek. Well, sometimes I do and sometimes I don't.
|
|
Gord Tulk...
I don't know why when I am on this computer it logs me in as the illustrious/brilliant/successful Hugh Hewitt. If anyone reading this can explain how I rectify this, please let me know. |
|
|
OB is so much raw meat to a savvy moderate GOP candidate. The bloom will soon be of the black rose that is obama - his record (and lack of it)and his naive positions on issues and in some cases radical-left issues (check out his position re: abortion). |
|
|
his translation for you, I might read him more! Hell, I'm astonished to agree with the gist of his translation. Could this be? I may have too much jet lag. |
|
Patriotic Liberal wrote;
-----------
"Oh sure, Mr. Red State, Mr. Son of Dixie...you've inherited the mantle of Old Abe. Sheesh. Go smoke some more crack, you idiot.."
-----------
Patriotic Liberal, why is your default position to always degenerate into a litany of name-calling ?
Do you actually feel better after doing that ?
The irony is that on many occasions you've identified yourself as a man of civility & reasonable discourse. |
|
by the "unpatriotic liberal" as a badge of honor. Your post at 1:21am was right on and those kind of facts interrupt his twisted world view. If you care to go back and check some of his past postings, starting about last Oct. 07', you will soon see that he should not be taken seriously. Especially, read the comments concerning "Scott Beauchamp". They reveal someone who is incapable of honest commentary. But they are just the beginning, pick any day, any subject, you will see this pattern, hidden behind "five dollar" words. Meant to look intellectual but under close examination reveal the opposite.
It is his supposition, that the conservative movement was much more viable and on mark back in the 1970's. Today, we are in decline, and no longer viable. This is the intellectual power of one "patriotic liberal".
Liberals liked conservatives when they held 130 seats in the house and maybe 30 Senators had "R" next to their name. Old Bob Michel, that bulldog of a minority leader, was just the right kind of conservative, wasn't he! Those were the high water days for conservatives according to PL. As long as they were the minority, well, they were good conservatives, weren't they PL.
Also, McTex, once PL starts calling you names or corrects a word, know one thing, you've touched a nerve, and he has no substantive response.
Am i correct in assuming that you are in Texas or from Texas? I grew up in Dallas. Any way, hope to hear more from you because facts confuse these liberals, so keep em' coming. |
|
Oh sure, Mr. Red State, Mr. Son of Dixie...you've inherited the mantle of Old Abe. Sheesh. Go smoke some more crack, you idiot..
|
|
|
It is not a matter of meaning well. It’s a matter of rationality. If you would stay home on Election Day and allow someone as vile and evil as Hillary Clinton win the White House then it is clear that you are ultimately too stupid and immoral to actually be a Republican. And, in truth, our Party doesn’t need or require people of such limited character. The Dems, on the other hand, will welcome you with open arms. |
|
Now the era of democrat dominance is over – Reagan put a nail in it and Bush has hammered it in. You guys are done. You will lose the House and Senate within the next 4-6 years. You will lose the White House again for the 3rd election in a row. And you will lose in 08 by landslide margins. You are losing the control over the populace via your media outlets and you are have lost all credibility in academia. Within 20 years your liberal media will be completely lost.
If you bothered to listen to Olmert’s praise of our President today you will realize how the history books will record the Bush presidency. Your neo-fascist Goebel’s like smear campaign against a truly great man will eventually backfire. You will be forced to defend you sedition and loyalty to tyranny. You will have to explain why you side with al Qaeda and the Hussein family over the liberation of 50 million terrorized Muslims.
The President has done an awful job of defending himself, I fully admit. He believes it petty and beneath the great dignity of his office to get down in the gutter with you and your Party’s leaders. But the record speaks for itself and once he has departed the vile and sedition that permeates through every ounce of your soulless flesh will be exposed.
You and your ilk are without clothes. You will have no where to hide because truth has never been your ally. You can only resort to more lies and more sedition. You and large number in your Party are now like rabid dogs backed in a corner and I fear that you will react like your cousins in 1930’s Germany did. Just know this – the children of the Founding Fathers, the descendants of Abraham Lincoln will fight you until our last dying breath. And you will be defeated!
|
|
To the neo-fascist liberal patriot – oh you got me… it was way past my bed time and I made a spelling mistake. LBJ, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton did not win the popular vote. Al Gore of course could not win the popular vote because he was not eligible for it after losing the Electoral College.
And the Dems were not the minority party in the 20th century. They controlled the Congress for 70 years. The controlled the purse and all of the power that comes with it. On top of that they controlled the media and universities – still do. With all that power and strength they were so incompetent that only 4 democrat men could win the White House with the support of a majority of the electorate.
|
|
375marlin
You comment concerning "ripping companies apart with little regard for the human toll in communities doesn't sound real moral when you think it was only for his company's bottom-line" betrays your ignorance of economics.
"Ripping companies apart" doesn't increase their business value, it destroys their business value. If Romney was destroying businesses their destruction would not add to "his company's bottom-line".
Anyone who has common sense or understands business knows that increasing the value of a business is all about growing the business. Growing businesses HIRE people. The fact is that Romney's business has CREATED 1,000's of jobs in our economy.
No one with even a little bit of common sense would believe your nonsense. |
|
"Exit polls show that Romney's supporters tend to be urbanites earning over $72,000 a year. Well, there just aren't enough Republican yuppies to win an election; and the GOP base is composed of the opposite, rural voters making less than $72,000 a year."
Point of fact: accourding to liberals, $88k (and some of them say up to $120k) is the poverty line.
|
|
TIMAJ- Please
"There is a huge difference between him and any other person in the Republican field:" -
I agree with you on this point. The other republicans have a track record which is consistent. Mitt does not, and try to buy his way to having such a record of consistency.
You point to his "in his business experience" - ok, he did well in business. but does this mean more than military service? maybe, maybe not. pointing to this is like saying McCain should be our nominee because refused early return by the north Vietnamese, or didn't do any propaganda for them.
he "lived out moral values" -
moral values? hmm, ripping companies apart with little regard for the human toll in communities doesn't sound real moral when you think it was only for his company's bottom-line
he has "work ethic"-
they all do (with the exception of Fred), that’s why they are running for the white house
you say he has the "ability to bring people together" - other than Wyoming there hasn't been much evidence of that lately
and to be a true leader -
really lead his forces to victory last night
Romney is a fraud |
|
The point of the post concerning delegates was that Huckabee, McCain, and Romney have each won a state.
It was McCain that won the state with the least number of delegates and has the least number of delegates.
If Wyoming has 3 times more delegates than New Hampshire, why wasn't Wyoming highlighted as a bigger win than New Hampshire?
McCain carried New Hampshire in 2000 with a 19% margin of victory and got smashed for the nomination. |
|
As a moral voter - Romney has absolutely earned the right to become president. It is time we ask him to come to the head of the table. There is a huge difference between him and any other person in the Republican field: in his business experience, lived out moral values, work ethic, ability to bring people together, and to be a true leader. |
|
Romney 30 delegates
1st Wyoming (more delegates than NH!)
2nd Iowa
2nd New Hampshire
Hickabee 21 delegates
1st Iowa
3rd New Hampshire
No placing Wyoming
McCain 10 delegates
1st New Hampshire
4th Iowa
4th Wyoming |
|
Huckabee has morals?
Why did he make the list of one of the 10 most corrupt politicians of 2007 by Judicial Watch? Why wasn't he able to give a straight answer during the last debate when confronted on his claim to have cut taxes in Arkansas? (Huckabee actually increased taxes by over 65% while governor netting a $ 500 million increase in taxes and a 20% increase in government employees) Why did he steal $ 70,000 worth of furniture from the Arkansas Governors Mansion?
Huckabee is country bumpkin fraud. Take off the Evangelical rose colored glasses and see the man for what he is. |
|
|
moral voters wouldn't vote for someone with no morals. lets just be honest about it. |
|
Stop with the links. Boring and tired of them. I do get tired of defending my faith. I have no qualms with McCain. I just like Thompson and Romney better. I don't like nor trust Huckabee. He even did a major flipper yesterday, and it's not big deal, becuase he's not 'Mitt'. My dream team now?
Romney POTUS
Thompson Veep - if that ship won't sail...
Hunter Veep
|
|
The McCain endorsements and the votes he received in New Hampshire are very telling. He received endorsements from nearly all of the liberal newspapers AND a democrat. The voters that made the difference between Romney and McCain were liberal leaning independent voters.
The only role that Huckabee played in the voting was that of spoiler. He attracted votes that would have probably gone to Romney if Huckabee were not in the race. |
|
Polls wrong - some of the TV pundits were speculating voters feel guilty and say they will vote for a Black candidate, but do not when the are in the privacy of the booth. I don't know if I buy that or not.
Or maybe Hillary's tear's made voters feel sorry or empathetic for her; is so God help us, that we would vote on one' ability to tear up.
Why didn't Mitt's tears get him any traction?
As for me, I start bawling when I see what a train wreck the Hugh Hewitt show has become. |
|
neither of these two can win a general election against anyone by Dennis "I speak with UFOs." You can't win the White House with Republicans only. There are simply not enough of us to do it. both of these two have negatives rivaling HRC. If the Jorge years taught us anything about the mood of the American people, it is this. the majority of American voters (not hardcore party supporters, but the remainder of voters) will vote for someone who the disagree with, even seriously, before they will support someone who the don’t hold in a positive light. if you get either Rudy or Willard, it will be a bloodbath.
|
|
Thank you for your service. And since you are Queenmumof7 not only for service in the Navy! I am sorry you have to defend your faith. You should not have to.
But one point of correction--McCain won last night with GOP voters in NH. He did slightly better with GOP voters than independents. Mainly because more GOP voters in NH put national security above other issues (like immigration) and McCain prevails over Romney on that.
McCain Wins Registered Republicans... [Rich Lowry]
...according to CNN: 38-31. His margin was a little smaller among independents: 36-30.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDA5OGVjM2RiM2FhZT BmNGY5Mjc2MzUyMGQ5NTM2MDE=
I am pulling for Mac (even if that means Pasadena Phil votes virtually for Hillary-Obama). But if I had to put together a GOP dream team it would be Mac as POTUS and CIC, Fred as Veep (in charge of reminding everyone of conservative values), Rudy as AG, and Mitt as SecofTreasury. |
|
HC's win and more significantly her magnificent (from a polical junkie's perspective) retooling of message and visuals in NH have stuck the fork in BO. He was THE biggest loser last night.
And most moderates on the Dems side are mightily relieved. Had he won in NH he likely would have had the field to himself but by the time he reached the convention and NOV he would have suffered more damage than a B-17 over a german ball-bearing plant - easy pickings for a mainstream GOP candidate. |
|
Patriotic Liberal writes: "That's an interesting take. Maybe you're right. I just think the base would come out for Rudy, albeit reluctantly, and that he would bring in more independents. But you make a good case as well."
Well, at least you two guys do agree on one point, that Romney would be a weak candidate against the Democrats.
And I agree on that.
Exit polls show that Romney's supporters tend to be urbanites earning over $72,000 a year. Well, there just aren't enough Republican yuppies to win an election; and the GOP base is composed of the opposite, rural voters making less than $72,000 a year.
Most upscale urbanites tend to vote for moderate Democrats like Bill Clinton anyway.
|
|
|
Who won the presidential nom in 2000? Bush. Enough said on that one. |
|
is Rudi.
He probably scored very heavily in the absentee ballot in FL.
If, as many above have commented, MR doesn't win or at least finish a close second in mich. it will be a cause for deep concern, if not panic, amoung GOP members who know the most important thing is to win in NOV. And that a huck or JM will be easily defeated because they won't have the funds and in the case of Huck his policies are massively unpopular with the mainstream voter.
That is why neither is raising any money right now - the GOP establishment is sitting its chequebook until a clearer picture develops on who will be the conservative front-runner - the party man - not the rogue elephant (pardon the pun) or the marginalized identity pol.
At the start it was a choice btwn MR, RG and FT. FT looks to be fading badly, hoping for a miracle in SC. We know what has happened to MR strategy and RG has yet to leave the stable as it were. What no one is looking at is when this group of three gets winnowed down to one that person easily wins every primary. Provided that the winnowing happens well before FL.
RG needs to get the message to MR that he needs to pull out after Mich if he does poorly, otherwise the moderate vote will be split too much come FLA and Feb5.
Hugh, you have had the courage to come out early in support of MR. You have also said you have almost as much confidence in RG for prez. And above all you have professed deep belief in the party.
Should MR stumble yet again in Mich., please do what's right for the party and publically state that it is time for MR to get out and throw his (and your) support behind RG. |
|
|
McCain did as well among republicans as independents. there was not some huge rush to McCain. nice try to push it that way, but it didn’t happen as strongly as you suppose. if you look at the elections numbers provided by NH state elections board, you will see that McCain got little more than the number of republican leaning independents that the party normally gets. so it wasn’t some big mistake the Barry won. what carried HRC was the fact that dems realize Barry doesn't have much a record, and what he does have isn't good. |
|
.. with all the haters?
Do you people post on these boards in support of your candidate or against someone elses? Most of the comments here are garbage.
Nothing has been decided other than Hunter and Tancredo are out. The Huckster, Romney and McCain all have an early edge over Thompson and Guiliani. As we work south and west across the country, expect the landscape to change drastrically. End of discussion.
Jewels -
Both my wife and I have independantly changed our opinions on abortion as we grew mentally, emotionally and spiritually. Does that make us liars? You make a totally bogus case against Romney. |
|
richard_223 asks: "richard_223 writes: "Anybody have ideas why the polls were pretty accurate for the GOP in NH, but so far off for the Dems?"
A second theory raised by pundits is that Hillary managed to win back female voters at the very last moment by getting tears in her eyes at that rally and speaking of the difficulties in raising a family these days. She finally showed a human, vulnerable side of herself. Exit polls showed that Hillary won back the female vote, which she had lost in Iowa.
Still, it's hard to believe the female vote just swung so much (over 20 points) in one day, based only on one episode of getting teary-eyed--how many people other than political junkies pay attention to that stuff?
The pundits and pollsters will be arguing over this one for a long time.
|
|
Yani, I totally resent being called a cultist. I am not. I came to my religious faith the same way you might have - through thought and prayer. Yes, I'm a Romney supporter - but switched to him after Fred Thompson went sailing down the swanee.
As far as Mitt not serving in the military. Neither did your favorite pay for prayer preacher. Tell you what. I served in the Navy, and did not go on a mission. Mitt and I are now even. I traded my military experience for his mission experience. |
|
When we get to MI, maybe Mitt can show reporters the spot, the very spot I tell you, where he saw his dad march with Martin Luther King.
There should be a historical marker there, in my opinion. |
|
So, each of the 'front runners' have won one primary each. However, Romney has 30 delegates, and the closest to him is the huckayuck with 21. McCain drags. So, the polls were wrong. Not the first time, won't be the last. Here's the popular theory:
Obama's people (independents) felt he had such a huge lead (reading polls), they felt comfortable in voting for the guy who Obama can beat. It backfired, the Queen got the votes to beat him, McCain picked up a few delegates, Romney fished 2 - for the second time - and picked up more delegates. So stop the 'stick a fork in him' junk, look at reality and enjoy the ride. I'll vote for any GOP, except Huckabee. If Huckabee is anywhere on the ticket, I'll be sitting out, and knowing that whatever we get is only for 4. |
|
richard_223 writes: "Anybody have ideas why the polls were pretty accurate for the GOP in NH, but so far off for the Dems?"
In the exit polls, a lot of folks said they made up their minds whom to vote for right at the polling booth, not before. So many thousands of people changed their minds at the very last minute, right when they entered the polling booth.
One theory from pundits, and it's disturbing, is that racial concerns may indeed have played a factor. New Hampshire is one of the whitest states in the nation. And you can't escape the feeling that at that very last moment, some white folks just couldn't bear to make that vote for an African-American president.
The Hillary camp may have inadvertently (???) contributed to this the day before the primary, when Hillary compared Obama to Martin Luther King Jr. and reminded folks that King was assassinated (touching off black riots across the country). It might have reminded white folks of the turmoil of the civil rights and black power movements.
One thing you have to say about the feminist movement: Unlike the black movement, they never rioted and torched neighborhoods.
|
|
Look, I know all you Willard fans know MI is a "sure" thing. But you overlook a few things. First, the economy is bad, yes. However, the advocates of a free market fix have left the state. The out migration suffered by MI has been significant. Most people left up there are either union members, or middle of the road types, maybe a few economic populists. Mitt's by 'em up and break apart past will not play too well with these folks. Second, hunters and vets make up a huge portion of whats left of the republican base. Hunters don't trust machine-gun mitt to protect the 2nd amendment, and the vets will have too much respect for McCain. moral of the story - Willard loses MI.
the palmetto state republicans are comprised of 60% evangelicals. Willard will not do well there with his past record of support for abortion rights.
oh, would all you Willard fans quit with the winter Olympic thing. no one really cares other than Hugh. i mean really is wasn't that big an accomplishment. getting Americans, both citizens and corporate sponsors to support the event when its held in the states is little more of an accomplishment than trying to convince Rosie O’Donnell to keep eating |
|
|
It is awesome when the likes of Mitt claims to be the real Republican in the race. No wonder the other guys are contemptuous of him.. |
|
again exhibits itself. The LDS church condones abortion in extreme circumstances (incest, rape, danger of death to mother, etc.) Once again you are spouting bigotry from a real lack of knowledge. Don't pretend to know what a Mormon thinks. Romney is the most honorable and honest man in American politics in generations.
Mormons are encouraged to think for themselves and prayerfully vote their own consciences.Narrow minded bigotry is not appreciated by most people. Get on with discussing issues and policy and get over the flip-flopper talking points. It’s old news!
|
|
For a cranky old man, you really are a product of the Teevee Era, aren't you? Let me breakdown my post to a soundbite:
I was disappointed that BHO lost, but that disappointment is trumped in the end by my satisfaction that Democrats are forced to "endure" democracy for a few weeks longer. Not only does it yield the practical benefit of vetting the candidates a bit longer--specifically, seeing how well BHO wears--but it brings more CITIZENS (i.e. voters) into the process of DETERMINING OUR NEXT GOVERNMENT. I, for one, think that's good.
By the way, looking forward to that P A S T R A M I at Solly's. Actually, that bet is wide open at this point.. |
|
Out of states controlled by liberal/independant voters and media. Of course the liberal media will be present in every state spewing their manipulative sputum. However, I am interested to see what the voters say in states where repubs vote for repubs.
Another thing, I am wondering when Wyoming was ejected from the United States? The MSM and the drive-by media are pretending that Romney didn't win one of the 50 states. Matt the liberal Lauer and all the drive by media seem to be declaring with excitement the status of the "TWO" races. Wyoming had more influence on the delegate count than NH. The delegate count which is led by Mitt by the way. Onward and forward Mitt!
|
|
|
|
A tough, tough night for Mitt Romney. He has to win Michigan now. If he pulls that off in a big upset, he may recover and do fine in the Saturday, January 19, Nevada caucuses. Don't forget Nevada's large LDS population.
But the McCain media bounce from winning New Hampshire will be very strong and McCain has history in Michigan, having won there in 2000. Certainly the media will brutally flog Romney for losing two of his most-targeted states. They don't believe in the silver medal. Internal strife is also growing inside the Romney campaign. But Mitt, like Hillary in New Hampshire, has seven days either to win the right to fight on, or face the bitter end.
The question for McCain is whether he can expand his essentially one-state operation and start to run the table. Money should start pouring in now. If he can do this and win Michigan, he will be the new frontrunner heading into South Carolina and Florida, where Huckabee is planning his next big move.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblogs/CampaignStandard/defa ult.asp#3901 |
|
all the polls showed Obama had it won easily.
That was the one thing that was really worrying me before the vote. If Obama and Hillary were close in the polls, I knew Indie would go heavily for Obama, but since they had him winning by double-digits, they went McCain.
Still Romney only lost by 5 points and he blew McCain away amongst conservatives.
It really is weird how we allow two such liberal states as Iowa and NH have so much to say in who our nominee is.
But, I do feel that Romney MUST win Michigan, a "winner-take-all" state. |
|
...when people said he couldn't turn it around. The Olympics are a prime example of him working, working, working until he and his team found a way to turn it around. It's because he had the right vision of what the Olympics could be and what would get them there.
The right vision and how to get to that vision is the key to success in business or politics. That's why he was about to turn around the Olympics and many, many businesses.
Mitt has the right vision for America and what will get us there. He doesn't let what happens in the short term or what people say sway him from doing the things that will help bring about that vision.
So, why are people saying he's finished? He's been here so many times before. He's just getting started!
His base of support understands that. We will not waver because Mitt is the right candidate for our country!
Go Mitt! |
|
Stats from MSNBC MCCain Vs Romney
A large number of voters for Mccain want increased taxes and open borders according to return polls
Change to less conservative policies MCCains voters said yes 56% Vs Romneys 17%
these are not Fiscal Conservative just liberal
Border Control
Offered a chance to apply for citizenship 54% Vs 15% Deported to the country they came from 24% Vs 40%
Huckabee is dependent on the number of Evangelicals who will vote on religion only.if this is all he has then his time is done.
The two Faces of huckabee he said he's not a religious biget but he is by far not a Fiscal conservative.
Immediately upon taking office, Governor Huckabee signed a sales tax hike in 1996 to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98).
He supported an internet sales tax in 2001 (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07).
He publicly opposed the repeal of a sales tax on groceries and medicine in 2002 (Arkansas News Bureau 08/30/02).
He signed bills raising taxes on gasoline (1999), cigarettes (2003) (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07), and a $5.25 per day bed-tax on private nursing home patients in 2001 (Arkansas New Bureau 03/01/01).
He proposed another sales take hike in 2002 to fund education improvements (Arkansas News Bureau 12/05/02).
He opposed a congressional measure to ban internet taxes in 2003 (Arkansas News Bureau 11/21/03).
In 2004, he allowed a 17% sales tax increase to become law (The Gurdon Times 03/02/04).
When push comes to shove look at the fact. you need money to win in the end and MITT does not need Gov Money.. PS MITT does not need to pay Hugh Hewitt for air time. |
|
I dont understand why people thing Huckabee and Mccain are true Fiscal Conservative Republican, this is Romney is the only choice.
Phil - McCain Wins Registered Republican
Phil,
You mistakenly wrote that McCain needs Independents to win. Does this change your opinion at all? More registered Republicans voted for him than Romney.
McCain Wins Registered Republicans... [Rich Lowry]
...according to CNN: 38-31. His margin was a little smaller among independents: 36-30. trusting CNN is not the best source for info. 56% Liberal voted for MCCain
|
|
I can't understand why people that is suppose to have a degree of inteligence, either believe Romney or they just don't care that he is lying to them. His grin looks as if he knows his lies are insulting some peoples inteligence and getting by with his lies with others.It's a sneaky grin, if I ever seen one.
When he gave his so called "Faith Speech"
He said,he would never leave his church or the faith of his fathers, now Mormons have never believed in abortion, but Romney was pro-choice when he wanted to be govenor (he left the faith/belief of his church and father) for his polictical agenda. Then when he wanted to run for president, he decided to turn pro-life.
He tried to use the excuse he had a change of heart. and he grins because some people have believed that.His change of heart is when it is for his political ambitions. He tried to worm out of his play on words, when he said, he saw his father march with Martin Luther King and also that he marched with King. That the NRA endorsed him and they came out and said they didn't. If he lies about seemly minor things, he will lie about bigger issues that could affect this Country.Plus he thinks he can buy the office of president, as far as I'm concerned that is the only way he could get it.
Wake up Romney supporters,if you have any sense at all, ask yourself why are you supporting someone that would bone face lir like that. This is the most important position a person can hold and it puts all our safety at stake.
When I watched him on the FoxNews table debate, he look more like a man in a board meeting, than presidental material. |
|
I'm Pro-Romney and also Pro-Honesty.
Incase my last post read as something other than that. If people want to condemn me as a crazy mormon, I'm Asatru. |
|
The Mormon issue only appears twice by you and once by another in this post, with over a hundred comments. Just so you know.
|
|
RobC...Thank you for the post and Your Service.
Well, politics just got interestinger. _223 tells us that McCain won NH & MI in 2000, and therefore, what...? Could have sworn that a guy named Bush won the Nomination. Man, it looks like more of an open horse race. That's cool. BG, you've stated pretty much my impressions, as well. Wouldn't it be something to see an arm rassling match in Minnesota this summer? W O W!!
LaborLawyer: Will you please tell us--in 2 or 3 sentences--what the heck PL+LP said at 3:05am? Oh, never mind. |
|
Mitt claimed that Rudy was in 4th down in Florida.
He happens to be up by 5 in the latest polls and the RCP averages.
Was it a Mitt psych job or a blatant lie? |
|
Romney can lose MI and still get more delegates than any other candidate in MI. MI is winner take all at the CD level with 2 at large delegates (proportional). If McCain wins liberal districts by large margins and Huck wins Evangelical districts by large margins but Romney wins a large number of districts by small margins, Romney could get most of the delegates.
SC is winner take all at the CD level and has 16 at large delegates that are winner take all.
All of the candidates will stay in as long as they have the money to stay in. That favors Romney and to some extent Rudy. Romney will continue to build his delegate count as we move forward. He will pick and choose his CDs and states.
NV and LA are caucuses with complex local rules.
FL is winner take all at the district level for 75 delegates and winner take all at the state level for about 36 delegates. Romney will get the CDs that favor him. |
|
On the one hand, it is too bad Barack couldn't put it away, but on the other, HRC's win is a win for democracy. If you think our Presidential selection process is badly malformed, that it has just mutated into something that scarcely resembles democracy, then anything that brings the process out of the hands of the big donors and the beltway pundits and the corporate MSM types and, oh yes, the voters in IA and NH, has got to be for the best.
What comes first in our democratic faith is government that governs with the consent of the governed. That precedes even a government that governs the way we want it to. A lot of the Reeps around here don't see it that way, which speaks to their character and moral development. For my part, I am more disturbed by the bum's rush this generation of Americans have given democracy than elated by the prospect of Barack in the White House. And while the Clintons were perfectly willing to play the "aura of inevitability" game, and while it almost backfired on them in perfect poetic justice, the bigger picture is that the democratic process has been hijacked.
In this case, with Barack, it was going to be hijacked for the better, but hijacked nonetheless. And since we, at least, are not lawless souls, I think we can be happy that democracy prevailed, even if our candidate hasn't...yet! Moreover, when Barack does win, he'll be more fully vetted and there will be less of a likelihood of buyer's remorse.. |
|
haha I want to ask this one question honestly, as I am watching the results from Iraq over here, I keep hearing all the pundits say "Oh, Romney is done or seriously damaged" etc etc. Why? Because the MSM doesn't want him in there. You may say well neither do the other voters. I would believe that if he was running in a republican state. Look at the setup for NH. This is not a conservative state. You have many independents here (obviously we saw that) that vote here. He still placed well in second and didn't lose his core REPUBLICANS. Iowa is another example. Look at their senators, governors, house, etc it is a mixed state. Wyoming-where we love conservatism-Romney won and hardly a peep out of the MSM. Now he moves on to Michigan. True he SHOULD do well there but you know why he wont do as well as expected? Because another scenario where they allow others to vote outside of the party!!?? So the Dems can't vote for their candidate guess what they are going to do on primary day? Skew our vote. This is jacked up but I want to make sure that true conservatives-yes, there are some amongst the Huckabee, McCain, and Giuliani crowd-i know Fred has them- that true conservatives don't get down because these first several primaries aren't a republicans can only vote states!! Look overall Romney leads in delegates and consistency. Romney's won so why does he have to be the one that "is losing it"? Romney has really shown me that HE is the conservative candidate that WE really want for our president. I saw this coming on about a week ago so this isn't just now that I am spinning-seriously.
Military for MITT!!!
GO NAVY!!! |
|
The race is very open. McCain can not win in states that do not have an open primary and also in states where Rudy is also competing seriously.
Both McCain and Huckabee will need to spend a lot to win in MI. Romney can put them into a bidding war. They can only stay in as long as they can raise funds. After MI comes SC and FL. Fred is in the mix by SC and Rudy is in the mix in FL. McCain will have to raise money and also beat Rudy in FL.
Even Dick Morris said Romney would stay into all of the way to the convention because he could stay in.
Rudy is a lot weaker than the press admits. He was kicked out of both IA and NH after trying. He wisely decided to concentrate on his most favorable states and allow Romney to were down the other candidates. It is 5 days to MI. Is Huck or McCain going to get a bundle of cash in the next 5 days. Not likely.
Huck got 11 percent in NH and under performed. He got no delegates. He is touting 3rd but he is with a couple of points of Rudy and Ron Paul.
Romney will stay in all of the way to the convention. He will force McCain and Huck to spend. It will eventually come down to a 2 or 3 person race and Romney is going to be one of those candidates.
Romney and all of his spoke persons need to send a very clear message that Romney is staying in all of the way to the convention.
I watched a Romney spokes person on Fox. When the Huck Rep indicated that Romney should drop she should have said that Huck got 11 % in NH, that Romney out polled him 3 to 1, got no delegates and that Huck was a better candidate for dropping out.
The old rules and formulas for winning the nomination do not apply this year. Each candidate will win the states that are best suited to them. Huckabee is dependent on the number of Evangelicals who will vote on religion only. In many states he will lose and as the field narrows he will lose more often. McCain will be broken in FL if not before.
|
|
I find it interesting in reading through these posts how Romney supporters, without fail, equate dislike for Romney as anti-mormonism. Is this the only card you folks know how to play? Do you really think you can garner votes from conservatives by playing the demonization card? People who play this card demonstrate
1) An intellectual cowardice. You just can't face the fact that some people do not believe Romney is the right guy for the job. Instead of stepping back to examine what people do not like you blindly assert a convenient fiction that relieves your conscience from having to face uncomfortable facts.
2) A victim/persecution mentality. Instead of facing the fact that Romney has done a poor job of communicating -- "connecting" with people -- you blame his detractors for committing a crime where, in most cases, no evidence exists. The only evidence, in most cases, is that they don't support Romney.
3) Just like liberals you demonize, you cast as evil anyone whose judgment differs from your own. This is a consistent behavior in liberals. So why are so many Romney supporters on this site behaving this way?
Some of the same folks railing against anti-Mormonism rail against "the pastor" with various misrepresentations of his record. Grow up kiddies. There is life beyond having your political savior sent to Washington.
|
|
|
My personal favorite was when he said that Romney was fighting a two front war and winning in both contests, then cited cherry-picked polls... with Romney losing. |
|
I'm flipping like the Mittster. I was for Rudy, then Mitt, now thinking the war hero. I think McCain has enough non-Republican pull to win in a non-Republican year. I don't think Mitt is going to be able to win the general even if he manages to get the nomination.
The GOP needs to figure out how to rebuild. Hugh and the rest of talk radio needs to figure out how to deal with the Fairness Doctrine. Amnesty is a done deal. But future history books won't give more space to Hillary Clinton than George Washington if McCain wins. We won't have the Hillary Plan that completes all that New Deal fascism started. McCain might be the only hope to stop the hell the Dems will bring. |
|
I was hoping that Obama would pull it off. It looks like older voters in New Hampshire "blinked" at the idea of generational change. Too bad.
As for Romney, if he doesn't win Michigan, where his father was Governor, he's done as a serious candidate. If Thompson doesn't win South Caroina, same for him. My bet is the Repubs head into Super Tuesday with a three-way choice between Giuliani, Huckabee and McCain.
What was really interesting to me is that only 22 percent of Reublicans in the exit polls ranked immigration as their top issue. For Dems it was below 10 percent. The far right and talk radio may be up in arms on the issue, but the electorate as a whole, in both parties is not. If McCain or Giuliani are the nominee, immigration will cease to be an issue because their positions are indistinguishable from those of Obama and Clinton.
Oh, and will somebody please tell Edwards he's done? |
|
I freaking hate saying this to give myself credence in making points, and I never make it known in Republican precinct committee meetings but I'm a wounded infantry vet. I greatly admire Sen. McCain for going through what I don't know if I could. In dealing with a brain injury that keeps me inside 6 of 7 days of the week against my will I spend most of that time thinking about foriegn policy. I was there in Afghanistan rounding up the guys that are in GTMO and burying the corpses of men women and children they killed to keep order in towns before we liberated them.
I am greatly concerned that the detainees will get right to lawyers and those lawyers will get them released. They will kill again if that happens. Probably not Americans, but Afghanis and Pakistanis for sure. I am greatly concerned about those innocent lives.
I am disturbed to see such anti-romney furvor. While I support Romney now mostly, I also support Thompson and Giuliani. I mainly do not want to see these people free to kill again. I am beginning to be disturbed by some with severe anti-Romney hate, do not let that fracture the party so much that they go free to kill. As I am also pro-life I consider keeping GTMO in Cuba as a pro-life stance. |
|
While my joy of Mitt losing tonight is a bit tempered, knowing McCain was the winner, I will say that Huckabee will win MI.
Sad to say, we have a bunch of poor excuses for candidates in the GOP.
Rudy and Mitt are the worse, so I guess we will just have to settle. |
|
"Mitt Romney laid out a plan for winning the GOP nomination months ago, and it included, raising the most money, winning some or all of the debates, and winning the Ames straw poll as the key steps to setting up strong showings in Iowa and New Hampshire, which would at a minimum keep him in the race through the big February 2 showdown, and which might allow him to land a knock-out blow in South Carolina or Florida." -- Hugh Hewitt 08/12/07
"The plan is rolling out, just like previous Romney plans to turn-around scores of companies, stage a successful Olympics, win the Massachusetts governorship, or reform the health insurance system of the Bay State. Over and over again in Romney's professional life you see the goal identified, then the analysis followed by the plan followed by implementation in a disciplined and ultimately successful fashion." -- Hugh Hewitt 08/12/07
"Mike Huckabee's MSM-fueled lift in Iowa has already begun to dissipate" -- "Romney Rising", Hugh Hewitt 12/01/07
"This season of no surprises helps Romney --decisively." -- "Romney Rising", Hugh Hewitt 12/01/07
"Romney's New Hampshire Lead And McCain's Bubble" -- Hugh Hewitt 12/21/07
"Despite Patrick's analysis below, Rudy remains the biggest threat to Romney, though one that will materialize in late January, after Romney has carried two or three of the earliest contests and reminded the punditocracy what the National Review editors already knew: The GOP nominates the most conservative candidate who is electable." -- Hugh Hewitt 12/21/07
"So as attention turns to Christmas and then football and resolutions, we are exactly where the GOP always ends up: gathering behind the most conservative, electable Republican, who this year turns out to be Mitt Romney." -- Hugh Hewitt 12/21/07
"Pundits told ourselves..." -- Hugh Hewitt 01/09/08 the honest and disinterested purveyor of information
|
|
Are you saying only the "chattering classes" think a loss isn't a win? A win's a win. So far, three prizes. McCain got the biggest, Huckabee the second biggest, Romney the smallest. He has no chance of winning any of the pre-Feb. 5th primaries. No wins = no wins. I think in 2008, Republicans want a voter they can relate to, and that's not Mitt.
Mickey Kaus writes about the cocooning effect the MSM has on Democratic candidates. Well what is Hugh Hewitt for Mitt Romney but a massive cashmere den with HD-TV and a soda machine? By the time Hugh is done with Mitt, Mitt thinks he's won!
|
|
McTex, I agree its time for people to chill out, and I propose we start with the anti-mormon rhetoric that gratuitously fills almost every TownHall blog. It is embarrassing. Here we are trying to have a serious discussion, and a substantial number of our own just can't hide their religious hatred. I don't know if any of you read HH's book on Romney, but his question was whether conservativces would/could demonstrate religous tolerance and accept a mormon--because HH argues Romney is a highly qualified candidate. Some of you are just proving HH right for asking the question--i think its also why HH continues to believe in Mitt--he can't accept the fact that many many conservatives are a bunch of religous bigots. Conservatives should be the ones screaming foul against religous bigotry, instead of the ones fouly screaming. Now, the well has been so poisoned with intolerance it is almost impossible to discern political debate from religous apologetics. That just makes the dialogue almost impossible.
|
|
You write:*******
Just remember one thing - only 4 democrats have one the popular vote since reconstruction - yep only 4. How do you like those odds neo-fascist liberal?
*****************
First of all, we spell it "won," not "one." Secondly, off the top of my head, you puke, I can think of several Dems since the Reconstruction who have won the popular vote (Sam Tilden, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, HST, JFK, LBJ, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore). Also, I'm familiar with the distinction between winning a plurality and winning a majority--it may be that Dems hae only won a majority four times since Reconstruction. I mean, basically, except for the mid-20th century, the Dems are a minority party.
Until now. Things are changing. You're discredited. And you know what? It ain't seditious to say so. There is a mile of difference between what is good for America and what is good for your Reep party. People are realizing that now, and all the vile and nasty platitudes the likes of you can hurl at the likes of me only reinforce the simple truth that you are yesterday's news, a pathetic shadow of an once powerful and compelling force..
|
|
|
Hugh, check the exit polls. Do your homework. McCain ran as well among independents as registered GOP voters in New Hampshire. If you want to try to make your case consistent with the numbers, rather than just ignoring them, then just claim that registered GOP voters in NH are just a bunch of moderates, and the red meaters are elsewhere, who will whup McCain good - someplace. If you get your facts wrong, you often lose your case out of the box. Recheck your notes from you civil procedure class at Michigan Law School. |
|
A gold and two silvers,, not bad and the most delegates to boot! Good luck in Michigan! Hugh, you are behind a good man! Let's hope he makes it all the way to the nomination. America could use a President with brains and class! That counts out McCain AND Huckabee. Since when does a soldier/senator make a good executive? Or how about the pastor who taxed to the max and had mulitiple ethic violations? Mitt Romney will take it to the bank! (no pun intended here.)
GO MITT!! |
|
|
I have no idea who will be the Republcian presidential candidate, but tonight's results made clear to me that the Billary Machine will not be prevented from securing the Democratic nomination. Yes, I am a far left liberal who yearns for the days of Bobby Kennedy and, for a few days, I thought Obama might present an historic, transcendent return to that style of liberal politics. But it was all a mirage, the hard realtiy of the Clinton's "Republican light" has reasserted itself. Assuming there is a rational alternative, I may be voting Republican for the first time in my life. I will certainly not be voting for Hillary. |
|
Patriotic liberal spin your lies else where. We don't need a reiteration of the MSM in your bs. We know the truth because we are Republicans and have spent our lives defending it against your vile sedition, lies, distortions, half-truths and socialist anti-constitutional propaganda.
It is your side that has serious problems. Your candidates have no executive experience, no business experience and no foreign policy experience. Your NH winner tonight has the highest negatives of any candidate in the history of polling. Your 2nd place winner is basically a state senator.
The Republican governing philosophy has not failed and you know that which is why you are here spreading your neo-fascist lies. As every measure and indicator reveals it has been an incredible success, be it in foreign or domestic policy. 94% of Americans are satisfied with the personal lives - that is an unbelievable statistic. We are more respected globally than any time since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Requests for immigration at our foreign embassies have never been higher. We have had, what is it, 59 months of job growth and historically low unemployment. We have more people moving from the middle class to the upper class than any time in world history. We have such incredible standards for character that we kick our bums out instead of defending them and denying their wrongdoings. And we have defeated al Qaeda in Iraq and liberated 50 million Muslims from tyranny. If you and your neo-fascist allies want to continue to defend those tyrants then by all means do so. You are just ensuring a Republican landslide this November.
Just remember one thing - only 4 democrats have one the popular vote since reconstruction - yep only 4. How do you like those odds neo-fascist liberal?
|
|
Patriotic liberal spin your lies else where. We don't need a reiteration of the MSM in your bs. We know the truth because we are Republicans and have spent our lives defending it against your vile sedition, lies, distortions, half-truths and socialist anti-constitutional propaganda.
It is your side that has serious problems. Your candidates have no executive experience, no business experience and no foreign policy experience. Your NH winner tonight has the highest negatives of any candidate in the history of polling. Your 2nd place winner is basically a state senator.
The Republican governing philosophy has not failed and you know that which is why you are here spreading your neo-fascist lies. As every measure and indicator reveals it has been an incredible success, be it in foreign or domestic policy. 94% of Americans are satisfied with the personal lives - that is an unbelievable statistic. We are more respected globally than any time since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Requests for immigration at our foreign embassies have never been higher. We have had, what is it, 59 months of job growth and historically low unemployment. We have more people moving from the middle class to the upper class than any time in world history. We have such incredible standards for character that we kick our bums out instead of defending them and denying their wrongdoings. And we have defeated al Qaeda in Iraq and liberated 50 million Muslims from tyranny. If you and your neo-fascist allies want to continue to defend those tyrants then by all means do so. You are just ensuring a Republican landslide this November.
Just remember one thing - only 4 democrats have one the popular vote since reconstruction - yep only 4. How do you like those odds neo-fascist liberal?
|
|
Come on, guys -- give Hugh a break. He's so heavily invested in Mitt and was probably counting on better access or maybe even some appointment -- dare he expect Attorney General? (After all, if organizing accommodations for people playing and watching games is worthwhile experience for commander in chief, why wouldn't being a law school lecturer qualify you to be AG?)
But now it's all crashing down, and poor Hugh will have to keep doing those incessant book tours.
You don't really think Hugh believes all the nonsense he's been spouting, do you? |
|
|
I love to say it, "Romney lost." His loss is a victory for Huckabee. I don't think Romney is done, not by a long way. I wish he would go away, can't stand the fake. Congratulations to McCain, was glad to see him win after the negative ads from Romney. |
|
According to exit poll data, Mitt Romney did well among New Hampshire Republicans and Republican-leaning "undeclared" voters who say immigration is their number one issue, trouncing McCain 56 percent to 19 percent. Unfortunately for Romney, only 23 percent of the Republican primary electorate said immigration was their most important issue. Among all other issues - the economy, Iraq, and terrorism - McCain won handily.
Immigration topped the issue list in the Iowa entrance poll, but caucus-goers who said it was the most important issue went for Huckabee over Romney, 36 percent to 30 percent, despite Huckabee's record and Romney's ceaseless attacks on it.
America's immigration laws are in need of reform and voters' concerns over illegal immigration ought to be addressed. But the Republican electorate doesn't seem ready to choose a presidential nominee based solely on his stance on "amnesty." And the endorsement of Tom Tancredo doesn't count for much.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/CampaignStandard/2008 /01/the_immigration_trap_cont_1.asp
And McTex is right, we do have good candidates, and all of them are better than Hillary, Obama, or (Godforbid) Edwards. |
|
Wrong. We Democrats have primary fidelity to democracy itself, not to a particular candidate. While I was pulling for Barack, upon reflection, I'm glad he lost, as it will bring more voters into signing-off on who gets to hold the world's most important office. Nothing wrong with that. It is called "government by the consent of the governed," and this business of leaving it up to the insiders, the media, and IA and NH, is a pretty ridiculous way for a democracy to do business.
In the end, we Dems will unite behind our guy (or gal). And THAT candidate will be vetted and ready to roll. The "energy" will hit its pitch when it has to, in the autumn. On the Reep side, unfortunately for you, there are some real schisms. Add to that the failures of the Republican governing philosophy--strategic policy failures, fiscal policy failures, and personal character failures--and it is very difficult to see how the Reeps will turn chickensh-t into chicken salad. |
|
My God people chill out. I am a political scientist and a longtime campaign operative. I served as campaign manager for a gubernatorial campaign. I understand politics and I understand having passion for one's horse in this race.
But let's be honest. The Republicans have an incredible field of candidates. Maybe the finest group since 1980. Yes none are 100% bona fide conservatives and all have shown a willingness to compromise with dems in the past. But all also have incredible conservative credentials, impressive records, extensive experience, and blow all of the dem candidates out of the water.
In truth no conservative will sit out the 08 election. NOT ONE! The socialists running for the other team will ensure that. Personally I lean towards McCain with Rudy in a close second and I am as conservative, philosophically speaking, as the gipper. Both are good men, great leaders and can win independents in large numbers.
We need to stop attacking each other and remember that who ever the Party ultimately picks is going to be a far more talented, esteemed and conservative candidate than whoever the Dems pick.
I do think Hugh and, to a lesser extent, Rush has drunk the cool aid. Yes it would be nice to elect Jesus Christ but the truth is our candidates are fallen men and far from perfect. BUT they are also miles ahead of Hillary, Obama and Edwards in character, experience and credentials. Let's not be guided by our emotions, that's the domain of the left. Let's be pragmatic, support our guy and be grateful that we have such an incredible field of candidates.
|
|
I am trying to understand Hugh's nearly fanatical willingness to spin the Romney campaign as a winner. I realize Hugh called the race early with his book A Mormon in the White House. And I understand he therefore has a deep well of ego invested in this race. But his willingness to spin two MAJOR losses (that should have been wins) into a positive outcome for MR is indeed approaching fanaticism. Is it possible that the MR campaign has promised Hugh access to 72 virgins at an LDS temple? At some point Hugh is going to realize that there will be no Mormon in the White House, not this election anyway, and there's going to be nothing left but a m*r*n behind the microphone. When will Hugh decide to cut his losses?
|
|
|
January primaries we will have McCain and Huck finish 1st or 2nd in Michigan, SC, and NV. Huck or Rudy will finish 2nd in FL. Romney will be a distant 3rd in all these states - he will loose second place with 6+ points. I hope on super tuesday americans will give Huck/McCain the nod for President and VP by giving them a 1st and 2nd win finish throughout! We need a STRONG pro-life/security-foreign policy ticket. |
|
|
I do agree with the last comment that maybe we all should calm down a little. McCain is having a good run and he may win or not. I just read an article about him that gave me pause. He has two sons serving in the military and just fought a long battle from August to November ensuring that the surge stays funded and successful. I get the sense that McCain cares more about that accomplishment than this presidential election. I think about that and think that in the end we can scream about which candidate is better, but to feel good about ourselves as Republicans we have to stand up for our principals to the end. McCain has a soldier's code that I don't think I measure up to or any of the candidates for that matter. I hope that whoever is the standard bearer for our party that they can have that sense of resoluteness and sacrifice. It is obvious even to Mitt Romney supporters that that is the reason why many people who voted for McCain tonight voted. Now it is time for the other candidates to live up to that sense of honor. We will need to vote for one of them. |
|
Peak--we have disagreed in the past, but what you said above made a lot of sense. You are right. Mitt is a good man. So is John McCain.
Pasadena Phil, you being an ideologue. Your vision of conservatism and the GOP is basically a recipe to become a version of the Libertarian Party (the party that always loses, but maintains its purity). You will not vote for McCain or Giuliani? So we would be better off with Hillary or Obama in charge? I am not thrilled with what George Bush has done on many issues, but I know we are a darn sight better off than having Al Gore or John Kerry in charge. I am no Huckabee fan, but even he is better than Hillary or Obama.
Now Victor Davis Hanson has lost all credibility to you because he sanely points out a hard line deportation stance would doom the GOP in the general? Even Mitt Romney is not serious about deporting them all (he backed off it when pressed and basically took the same stance as John McCain about just deporting some of the illegals). I think you have really lost it.
We have a war against a dangerous enemy in that still needs to be won. I know Giuliani, Thompson, and McCain get that. I assume Huckabee and Mitt get that. I know Hillary and Obama do not.
I overestimated you. You are not a serious guy. |
|
|
Huck/McCain ticket. With a democratic congress and senate, we need a strong pro-life president who will veto their pro-abortion/embroy destruction bills. Also, a strong team on defense/security who will keep us safe because the congress will most probably want to end all programs like spying on crimnials using phone lines etc. Huck/McCain ticket can win in November against Obama or Hillary. |
|
> he's the only full spectrum conservative condidate winning any votes..
Translation: He's held every possible position, across the entire spectrum. Vote for Mitt, sometime, somewhere, he's for a moment held a position that you have!
+ + + |
|
|
I continue to be amazed by you xenophobic Mitt haters . . . . who cares if he keeps running? If Mitt doesn't win the nomination, it means the GOP is dead as the standard bearer for conservative ideology. Even if we could put McCain/Huckabee in the White House due to Hillary's negatives or Obama's inexperience, McCain/Huck will "solve" our economic and immigration problems in a way that will doom the GOP forever. How would the GOP EVER recover from that? So, bash Mitt all you want, but he's the only full spectrum conservative condidate winning any votes.. . . i'd rather be a defeated conservative than have conservatism defeated. Reagan had Carter . . . now the GOP is angling to BE Carter. Amazing. |
|
|
For the anti-romney crowd. Calm down sirs! |
|
|
the arrogance of Hugh and Romney saying Rudy is the only credible candidate to beat and that McCain and Huck are just passing by-passers who won by fluke, explains why americans won't be voting for Romney. Hugh, all candidates may not be equal in terms of having $200 million in personal assets - but then again, most americans don't care! What Mitt has done, with your help is under estimate his opponents and that is the worst rule of competition. Didn't they teach that at harvard business school? |
|
... in order to get Hugh to admit it hurt his chances?
Romney stumbles and falls off platform? Hugh thinks it helps with the "klutz" vote.
Romney takes the wheel and runs over a little old lady? Helps him with those with points on their driver's license, and also those looking for innovative solutions to Social Security.
Romney loses Iowa, NH, and Michigan? Helps with Southerners who don't like them northern states.
Is there, in fact, anything Romney could do, any indignity or setback he could suffer, that Hugh wouldn't see as a net positive for his campaign?
Heck, if Romney dropped out of the race, Hugh would probably claim it improves his chances, "because now he's running under the radar . . ."
|
|
...you do make a compelling argument below. Historically we have won this way via the base. But this year so many of us just don't know what else to do. We really don't. And the dogs just won't eat the dog food relative to a Mitt Romney. Regardless. I hear you. I really do.
"...It was a big mistake for the party elites to frame the race as "only (name your RINO) can beat Hillary" and count on conservatives to hold their noses in the end and vote for the RINO. This election will be for the GOP the way 1980 was for the Dems if the GOP doesn't reconnect to its base. The GOP has gone full circle since then and has used up all of the good will from the Reagan years. They are once again the stupid party, and shrinking. No party has ever won the presidency while the party lost membership." |
|
"romney rising"
"huckabee's very bad week"
"romney is fighting a war on two fronts --
and he is winning"
"romney rising"
"the base will not accept mccain"
"romney rising"
"I come not to bury huckabee...he has buried himself"
"mitt's strategy for victory continues to roll out"
"romneyrisingromneyrisingromneyrisingromneyrising"
|
|
I like the way this is playing out.
1) I believe that Obama would be harder to beat than Billary because of his energized base.
2) I had expected Obama to sweep NH, NV, SC and be on a roll for the FL and Super Tue contests.
3) At that point somehow things had to turn back to Billary for the GOP to have a chance.
4) An extended Billary/Obama Dog fight now looks to be shaping up with two consequences:
a) Draining Dem Cash stashes.
b) With a Billary Dem nomination, Obama faithful end up as happy as a little kid who just had his candy taken away and either no-show in Nov or Hate Billary all the way across the aisle.
With tonight's turn of events the GOP change candidate and Hugh's horse may have caught a good break. |
|
...in reaction to Team Mitt's hard spinning...
I hear they are going to make "Flipper The Movie". It would star Mitt Romney and include a few moonwalking tail stands and alot dolphin chatter. Romney cannot run away from his flip-flopping. |
|
GREAT JOB MITT! As everyone knows he's the only Republican candidte to come in 2nd, 1st, & 2nd again! Plus he has the most delegates. It's great to see a candidate who has such optimistic goals for our country do so well. His message is resinating one state at a time.
Saltsman, a campain advisor of Huckabees was on this evenings 10:00 addition of Hannity & Colmes, is quite an angry guy. He's extremely defensive about Huckabees weak showing in New Hampshire tonight along with his no show in Wyoming. Both Huckabee staffers, Ed Rollins & this Saltsman guy are so agressive & bombastic. Quite worrisome to see who Huckabee surrounds himself with...very insightful.
BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER!
|
|
I said earlier the Hugh attack machine is one big reason for Mitt's losses. It just turns folks off to Mitt, and if Mitt did get the nomination, what Fred, McCain or Huck folks would support him in the general?
The indispensable Geraghty just posted this:
Mitt Romney: You're in tough shape, no two ways about it. But you're not dead. Michigan is huge; I think you have to win outright, otherwise you become the King of Silver Medals. But the dark cloud over your head has some silver linings - you still lead in the delegate race, you've got the money to compete in every state, and you can run a 20 state campaign on February 5. Having said that, you've got to stop going negative — er, sorry, "contrast" on your opponents. Not only are you possibly kneecapping an eventual GOP nominee, it's just not helping you.
|
|
Sorry Mitt you are going the way of American Motors. Time to cash in and cut your losses.
For what it is worth all of the other Guys could use some of your cash, but my guess is you won't be loaning them any.
Can't say that I blame you after the way they beat you up in the debates. |
|
|
|
I would second those commnents about Hugh. His comments on the radio tonight on McCain were disrespectful. The man just one and Hugh was picking on his looks.
Look just admit it. McCain won among republicans as much as independents and exit polls aid republicans thought that McCain was honest and a real man, and that Romney was negative and phony.
Is Romney listening, or is he still listening to Hugh Hewitt. |
|
I think Mitt's head may be clearer than Hugh's, after all its Mitt's money, not Hugh's. Mitt must be able to see the early win strategy failed, and failed catastrophically. He is up against a strong Huck and a resurgent McCain in MI. Mitt cannot win SC. And he is behind both Rudy and Huck in FL.
The plan was to get momentum from early wins and parlay them into a cascade of wins in the latter races.
He has no where to go, and if he is a rational businessman, he must be thinking about cashing out before he become the next Harold Stassen of the primaries. |
|
He figuratively won Iowa, and now he's figuratively won New Hampshire.
Just a question, though, Romney fans. You know very well you're going to need independent votes to carry the GOP to victory in November. Yet you rip McCain for depending on independent votes. Romney gets NO independent votes. What does that tell you? What are you counting on? |
|
According to exit polls:
37% of Republican votes were non-affiliated.
Of those non-affiliated 39% or 30,200 voted for McCain.
Of those non-affiliated 27% or 20,900 voted for Romney.
When the non-affiliated are removed this leaves registered republicans:
37.0% or 48,882 voted for McCain
35.4% or 46,680 voted for Romney
Accordingly, the real race was much closer although McCain still wins. (88% reporting)
|
|
|
That's an interesting take. Maybe you're right. I just think the base would come out for Rudy, albeit reluctantly, and that he would bring in more independents. But you make a good case as well. |
|
The attacks led by Hugh on McCain and Huckabee are very low class. Now I only come here for the comments and to post and here the real positions on my candidate (Huckabee) from the comments.
I am still supporting him, but way to go John McCain. I guess this shows what Romney's negative ads did. Maybe he didn't run any in Wyoming and that is why he won.
Peak Oil writes: Tuesday, January, 08, 2008 11:56 PM
Mitt Romney is a good man
The denial on this board is an interesting study. Hugh Hewitt and Dean Barnett are the dumbest pundits in America. Always wrong.
All the disgusting smears by Mitt's supporters against a true American hero failed in NH. Hugh Hewitt should be ashamed of the lies he spreads about this honorable man. Hugh has made alot of enemies in the way he has conducted himself in this contest. I think he has hurt Mitt way more than he has helped him. |
|
I disagree on who is our strongest candidate. Here is how I see it come November...
1) McCain (experienced and respected)
2) Huckabee (change candidate and very likeable)
3) Thompson (will bring out all the conservatives)
4) Rudy (social conservatives would sit at home)
5) Romney (Country club type, would get killed) |
|
Who won New Hampshire in 2000?
McCain.
Who won Michigan in 2000?
McCain. |
|
Two things are for certain...
This is a wide-open race on both sides and there really is no front runner...
As usual, MSM trip all over themselves with incorrect predictions and dopey analysis... |
|
are just fat unicorns
and girls love unicorns
We need that demographic |
|
Phil,
You mistakenly wrote that McCain needs Independents to win. Does this change your opinion at all? More registered Republicans voted for him than Romney.
McCain Wins Registered Republicans... [Rich Lowry]
...according to CNN: 38-31. His margin was a little smaller among independents: 36-30. |
|
|
Romney might be in the thick of a race now; but at least there is a race and he won't just arrive to get his nomination. |
|
Not by a long shot. He WAS unable to do what his fellow MA politicians (Dukakis, Tsongas, Kerry--albeit Dems) did do in NH, and that is win. Still, with Rudy fading and Thompson probably bailing at some point, Mitt will get at least "the bronze."
Mitt SHOULD be well-positioned to be the midpoint between Huck and McCain, but for some reason, he isn't. The other candidates really seem to be contemptuous of him, and that is going to affect his ability to win that nomination.
Count your blessings, Reeps, because he's your weakest candidate. In order of difficulty, from toughest to weakest, your guys are: Rudy, McCain, FDT, Huck, and Mitt.. |
|
He'll need to divide his efforts on two fronts now that both Huck and McCain will challenge Mitt in MI. And as an earlier comment so very well put, MI is very different than NH. Huck and McCain are on much more equal footing with Mitt and Mitt can only be so effective no matter how many attack ads he tosses out there.
Maybe Dick Morris is right in saying that Romney is finished. |
|
|
Peak Oil I think Hugh relentless attacks on other Republicans played a significant part in Mitt's losses. Voters this year are reacting, well, negatively, to negative campaigning, but Hugh was too busy calling folks bigots and nutters to notice. |
|
|
|
|
The most interesting point you make is that for McCain to win the nomination, it requires that non-Republicans vote for him. Those votes will go Democrat in November. That's the problem with this election. There just aren't enough Republicans. The Dems get to pick both candidates. |
|
What Hugh is forgetting to "remember" is that Mitt lost a state tonight in his own backyard. Southern NH, where most of NH's populace resides, is dominated by the Boston media and has seen Mitt for years. Imagine if McCain lost NM, Huck lost MS, or Rudy lost NJ and you'd have equivalents in significance. Tonight was far more than the body blow that IA was, it was very likely a political death sentence. Mitt had the geography, the money, the ground game, the experienced team, a decent debate performance, and yes, even the hair. You know what? He still lost (6 pts. as it stands now).
There is no way to spin this as a positive and not look like a complete imbecile..not that that's stopped Team Mitt from trying....
Hats off to McCain...winning in a state that had soured on him until just a few weeks ago. |
|
Huckabee IS NOT running for PASTOR of the UNITED STATES; HE IS RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and HE IS QUALIFIED TO LEAD.
During this election we are seeing the desperation on the political masons who are trying to keep their cronies in power to keep their financial and political collusions in place for their personal power network. Now the public is now becoming aware of why their voice gets unheard. Their is an establishment that designed it that way. Various conservative talk show hosts strive to convince the public that they should have the right to cherry pick the next Republican President. Hugh Hewitt and others do not want the public to be aware of the money they receive trickled-down from Mitt Romney's campaign...cha-ching!
Mike Huckabee is presidential material and is alone able to defeat Hillary & Obama. I am now convinced that those wealthier donors to Romney's, Giuliani’s, and Thompson's campaign have wasted their money and if they continue, are wasting their hard earned money on candidates who do not have voter appeal or substance. As a member of the younger generation, I will tell you point blank, Romney, Giuliani, and Thompson DO NOT connect with us.
I am so glad MIKE HUCKABEE is a real problem-solver and has a strong command on the issues. Huckabee is for security our borders, AGAINST AMNESTY, and has the MOST RESPECTFUL approach to Hispanics and their children. I assure you THAT MITT ROMNEY HAS LOST THE HISPANIC VOTE ENTIRELY. THEY are the LARGEST minority population in AMERICA .
Listed are 25 reasons why I and the majority of others switched our vote to Huckabee at:
http://evolutionfacts.townhall.com |
|
How much of Romney's own millions will he burn? He was supposed to win NH his neighbor state?
Hugh still has a "man-crush" on Mitt though!! |
|
Independents can vote in either primary and Hillary is the only Democrat on the ballot. Which Republican do you think will benefit from that?
What every last person who has qualms with McCain should be honest enough to admit, is that none of you thought McCain would get more registered Republican votes than Romney. He did. That is huge. If he had not that would have been the spin. The number one issue? Iraq. Again, who does that favor?
"Whatever the differences between us, so much more should unite us. And nothing should unite us more closely than the imperative of defeating an enemy who despises us, our values and modernity itself. We must all pull together in this critical hour and proclaim that the history of the world will not be determined by this unpardonable foe, but by the aspirations, ideals, faith and courage of free people. In this great, historic task, we will never surrender. They will." - John McCain 1/8/8 |
|
Hugh is officially mental.
"Romney's argument blows past the chattering classes working on old models: When Romney had to beat a dominant Rudy Giuliani, he had to win one.."
It was fascinating to hear Medved fairly accuse Hugh of lying today. As he was. The pathology here is amazing. |
|
|
I read "Mexifornia". He has now lost all credibility with me and other people as well. I don't want to guarantee a victory for the Democrats, I want to guarantee a hollow victory to the next president by making sure he/she wins with 38% of the vote or less. If enough people follow me, both parties will be in disarray. America is more than ready for a second party. If the GOP nominates a RINO, you will see what happens with those of us at Townhall who will have seven months to torture the shrinking RINO party. |
|
AND MCCAIN !!!
heheeheheehhee !
wow !
Seems McCain pushed Global Warming just enough to get the independent liberal vote to save him.
NH must love Senators who oppose tax cuts...
McCain got trounced in the debates, and even believes Social Security was 'fixed' in the 80's, that is why he is the one to FIX it again ?
OH my...
John McCain only says, 'i am experienced vote for me...'
NH endorsed Hillary as well !
maybe in a closed Primary, we can get the real sense of what Republicans want...
Conservatives are not going to be happy with McCain...
yikes.
|
|
|
Could you look into interviewing the WINNER of a primary instead of the also ran? |
|
|
Anybody have ideas why the polls were pretty accurate for the GOP in NH, but so far off for the Dems? |
|
You all that are saying "Mitt is dead" are delusional. He's ahead in "delegates won" (as well as total votes as Hugh pointed out)-
he needs to hammer that point and "go positive" with concrete examples of his successes in each phase of his life(Governor, Bain, and the Olympics). |
|
Sigh. Its certainly interesting that the "old model" for the nomation process is now getting trashed, considering that that's what Romney's entire strategy was based on.
Its true that Romney is still in the hunt, he does have the resources and the organization to give it a good run. However, Michigan is his big test. He's led there and its the state George Romney used to govern. Its practically Romney's second home state. If he wins that helps him a lot. If he loses, momentum is totally against him.
One interesting point: thanks to circumstances, the Democratic primary in Michigan doesn't matter at all. That means Independents have one place to go to cast a vote that matters: the GOP ticket. If McCain enjoys the same independent advantage he has elsewhere, Romney is in massive trouble. Wyoming and Nevada won't possibly mitigate against a loss like that.
Organization is important, but you can't win without momentum. Winning requires winning. Super Tuesday will decide the nominee, but Michigan will go a long way to deciding who the frontrunner of this race is. |
|
Because that is what he is going to get in Michigan.
Either Huckabee or McCain will win Michigan. Romney will then finish in third. IMO...once that happens...there is nothing that Romney can say.
This race is between Huckabee and McCain people. Rudy will hang around till he loses in Florida.
Take your pick: Huckabee or McCain. |
|
|
If McCain is the nominee, I will vote for someone else. It never seems to work out when I hold my nose and vote for a RINO like McCain. That liberal or "not a patriot" line, surely you can do better than that. You certainly can't argue based on the issues. You like McCain because he is a "great guy". Or maybe you are a gay traitor (two can play that game). So what that he is just Ted Kennedy in disguise. I will not vote GOP if the nominee is McCain, Giuliani or Huckleberry. I have said it a thousand times and I mean it. It was a big mistake for the party elites to frame the race as "only (name your RINO) can beat Hillary" and count on conservatives to hold their noses in the end and vote for the RINO. This election will be for the GOP the way 1980 was for the Dems if the GOP doesn't reconnect to its base. The GOP has gone full circle since then and has used up all of the good will from the Reagan years. They are once again the stupid party, and shrinking. No party has ever won the presidency while the party lost membership. |
|
They said McCain was finished in the late summer. He has evidently made a comeback.
Huckabee has had the "silver spoon" in his mouth. The conservative talk shows and blogs have discussed his record but the MSM has said very few negative comments on him. His record in Arkansas has no major accomplishments. School test scores, per capita income, 10 and 1/2 years and they are still where they were when Clinton left office.
Same for McCain. 27 years and he has one example of $2 billion saved. John has a lot of experience but what about David Petreaus.
Everyone talks about Romney's negative attack ads. That is bound to have an effect. John and Huck don't have enough cash to run negative ads about Mitt so they just trash him at every turn when they have the free air time.
Has McCain said anything negative about Huckabee? NO.
Has Huckabee said anything negative about McCain? NO.
Has anyone thought about this aspect of the campaign? Will Mitt let Huck and John run him out of the race? NO.
Romney is still the most qualified candidate for president. I get a little down with the election results because I can see what the country would be loosing. I may not be right but I remember Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. I sometimes wonder how we make it as a country. But then I remember, we are the greatest nation on God's green Earth.
By the way, I will still vote for Mitt on Super Tuesday in the Georgia primary.
And, if by chance, he doesn't make it to November, I may write him in! My one vote wouldn't keep McCain or Huckabee from beating Hillary or Obama. Just look at the polls. |
|
Hugh, a poisoned chalice? Yeah, Huck and Mac should just let Richie Rich Romney tax his own pockets and keep outspending him? They should take public financing. We paid taxes for both sides to use it.
Uhmm.. it could be kool aid in your chalice Hugh. |
|
using his own money. Spin, spin, spin Hugh. Having the most delegates after three states means nothing going into states where he is going to lose.
Oh did you notice the head to head poll Obama vs. Romney in Kentucky - Romney is down in that poll in a solid GOP state. |
|
|
The other loser tonight was Frank Luntz and his deceitful focus groups. Fox needs to dump him. |
|
Victor Davis Hanson (hardly Michael Medved) gives these words of warning:
It is fine and good to talk of "attrition" by slowly and incrementally rounding up illegal aliens as they come in contact with government agencies and need various licenses, papers, statements, etc., but you are still talking about deporting millions, who are currently working and crime-free, rather promptly. The odd thing is that should illegal immigration cease at the border, the pool of illegals here, properly screened, would become static, and not be replenished, and, if the past is any guide, within a generation melt into the American pot.
So it seems that while "amnesty" is a political death sentence, so is mass deportation-the only element of the immigration debate that would play into the hands of the Democrats who otherwise lose big on the issue.
Far better it would be for the Republican candidates to talk of securing the border first, weeding out those who just arrived, have been convicted of crimes, or never worked, but then talking of an earned citizenship program, that has rather clear markers like learning English, paying a fine, and passing a citizenship test — while still working and residing in the U.S. If the border was secure, all of that need not morph, as in the past, into a rolling amnesty.
Bottom line: Republicans have to be careful that they don't turn a windfall issue (the Democrats are mostly open-borders and captive to the identity-politics wing of the party) into a mass deportation albatross.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDBkNzQwOTgwZmQzNW NiMzQ2MmQ0Y2E5NDI3NzliM2Y=
If you want to guarantee a Democrat victory in 2008, take a hard line stance on immigration. But maybe that is what you really want Pasadena Phil. I am starting to wonder if you really are a closet liberal. |
|
"Hugh, face the facts: Willard does not connect with voters. He plateaus at 25-30 percent....all of his fortune won't save him."
Whereas Holy Huckabee, Senator McCain, and the others have all rolled up votes in the 89-90% range, I guess?
|
|
It is not accurate to refer to NH as a "liberal" state. It is not a conventionally conservative state, perhaps, but that doesn't make it liberal.
It IS true that NH is not a representative state. The best thing about the results in NH and IA is that they force the candidates, and America, and most especially, the media, to endure an election season. Democracy will not get the bum's rush, even though the Hugh Hewitt's and Terry MacAulife's of the world tried to slip their candidates by with an assumptive sell and an aura of inevitability.
I personally was disappointed in my guy Barack's performance, but as I reflect upon it, my fidelity to democracy is deeper than my support for Barack. The fact that the nomination process will continue, that a broader canvassing will be taken, and that it will probably stretch all the way to CA (one of the earliest states to use primaries) is a very good thing for government that governs with the consent of the governed. |
|
well, the McCainiacs who were crying foul when Republicans said, "stick a fork in McCain" a few months ago are the same ones prematurely shouting, "stick a fork in Romney."
I think HH is right about one thing: Rudy's decline opens the race...but, I think it swings between McCain and Huckabee --- or they have to join forces.
Anyone want to be bold enough to say, "stick a fork in Thompson..." |
|
From the way some talk here about how the voters "saw through" Romney and how "nobody's buying" what he has to sell, you might almost think that he received virtually no votes.
The figures from New Hampshire, I'm assuming, must be bogus -- because they seem to show him getting quite a NUMBER of votes.
Just as he did in Iowa. And didn't he take Wyoming? (Or is that just Hugh's spin?) Isn't he leading in the delegate count? |
|
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
just when I was trying to figure out how Hugh would spin a huge defeat by Willard, he spins this yarn.
Hugh, face the facts: Willard does not connect with voters. He plateaus at 25-30 percent....all of his fortune won't save him.
If Mitt loses in Michigan, he should pull out and pledge all the money he'd waste in the next states to charity.... |
|
Was it Flip Romney or Flop Romney that came in second again in New Hampshire. Talk about not being liked in your own backyard!
But delusional Hugh Hewitt is going to change history and have someone who lost both Iowa and New Hampshire still win. No presidential candidate who was a governor or senator from Massachusetts has ever lost New Hampshire until tonight.
Rush is switching anytime to Fred. Maybe Hugh will as well.
The RASCALS are stubborn, these Republicans Against Social Conservatives and Logical Strategies.
We can win with Huck. He is redefining conservatism in a social sense, right of Rush and Hugh, and that scares them. |
|
|
Hugh is right we don't know who will win, but I am sure who will lose, Mitt Romney. NH was his chance to shine an he fell flat on his face. He can't by the votes. One telling sign exit polls Romney ran the most negative campaign. |
|
If Romney is the nominee, I will absolutely vote for him.
If McCain is the nominee and you refuse to vote, you are voting for Clinton and Obama (and you really are either a liberal--and completely misguided-- or not a patriot). |
|
|
You have a corpse Hugh, any way you spin it. |
|
"Mitt is a cultist and spent the Vietnam years trying to proselytize the French (LOL!!!). . . . Nevada will go to Mitt. Lots of LDS cultists there." |
|
"and some from indies wanting the GOP to nominate other than Romney, whom they considered the strongest GOP nominee in the fall."
That's COMPLETE bogus and you know it.
Have you not seen every single say, Rasmussen, poll that has Romney losing to Barack and Clinton nationally by AT LEAST 10 points. I saw a poll before that he would even lose North Carolina to her.
As to the age old question what states does McCain put into play......look at the Rasmussen poll that has McCain beating Obama there by 6 points for example. Or the one that has him winning in Ohio. I imagine he could probably win New Hampshire as well. I think he also puts Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan into play.
Hugh!!! I love your show but you HAVE to stop the complete hyper-myopia with Romney. Romney will NOT win a general election where-as I think McCain can. Alright, he supports campaign finance reform and doesn't breathe fire on those fear-inducing lettuce picking illegal immigrants. GROW UP.
This election is about the war on terror. John McCain is THE candidate on that issue. If this were an "it's the economy, stupid" election I'd go with Romney. It's not. We're at war.
|
|
|
If Huckleberry wins the nomination, I will slit my wrists. I just can't believe Americans are THAT stupid. Maybe they should require urine samples to test for drugs at the polls. |
|
Hugh,
Your posts regarding Romney are no longer credible. This latest one can only be described as silly. This guy has outspent every candidate by millions and can't pull out a win in freakin' NH. Please tell me the name of another Massachusetts pol running for Prez that didn't win NH easily. NH should have been his hands down, no contest. Instead, he gets hammered.
And Rudy is leading Florida in every major poll. He's not 3rd or 4th.
I don't think that I'll be looking for any real analysis at this blog. It is no longer a serious place for Republican presidential analysis. It's simply a Romney propoganda machine. Too bad.
Does anybody else feel like they are reliving Hugh's Harriet Meyers melt down? |
|
Hugh, the problem is that Mitt has been under performing on the campaign trail. He's got to come off better if he's going to start winning states.
As for being finished... If Clinton and McCain are any guide, being declared "finished" tonight would probably improve Romney's chances in Michigan. |
|
|
who are gloating over your guy, don't celebrate so soon. The Republican pond is so small these days that "winning" when the excitement is entirely with the Democrats and when non-Republicans determine the outcome of the Republican race is nothing to feel smug about. The GOP is in deep, deep trouble and will likely be headed into November with a nominee selected by voters who will vote Democrat in the final vote. Many of us conservatives will once again have to hold our noses and vote for the lesser of two evils. What makes you think we will vote for a RINO? (I've been using that term a lot since Medved started whining about it). |
|
Guys:
He probably spent 40 million in two states and can't win. Folks don't like him or believe him. Give it up he can't win.
He loses Republicans and independents. Is there any way he could continue if he didn't have his own cash I think not.
|
|
Any candidate who excepts public financing is (by law) limited to spending no more than $40 million between now and November.
Since Hillary and Barack have each already raised nearly $100 million, this is a BIG BIG deal. Huck or McCain would most likely be the only GOP candidates to have to accept public financing, but the $40 million limitation puts both of them at a HUGE competitive disadvantage against the Dems.
Any GOP candidate who resorts to public funding can (and should) be shunned by any GOP voter who hopes for a GOP victory in November. |
|
|
I hope you're right about McCain, but hopefully not for the general in November, especially if Mitt wins the nomination. If Huckabee gets the GOP nod, I'll sit my first opportunity to vote in this country, or my life for that matter. |
|
MsFaconersCabanaBoy (awesome moniker btw as I almost spit coffee all over the screen laughing!) but I'm not sure Hugh's implication that McCain won it based on some sort of indie vote that'll be long gone starting tomorrow, is even factual. I'd have to see the final numbers but I thought the talking heads on TeeVee said that McCain won the Republican vote (but it was close.) For as sharp a guy as Hugh, that'd be embarrassing, if true.
|
|
McCain won among NH GOP, beating expectations. McCain actually did slightly better with the GOP than the independents.
It was not predicted that way, but that is the way it turned out. |
|
MR: Well, there’s no question but that our message continues to be the same message, and it’s a powerful and connecting message.
No, he did not run on the same message. He ran and lost as Mr. Conservative in Iowa, the morphed into Mr. Change, the outside who could fix Wasington in NH. Voters saw right thru this and voted for Huck and McCain. |
|
than Hugh will have you think. . .
Michigan will represent a last stand for Romney, who grew up in the state and whose father served there as governor. But his prospects are hardly sunny there, given that McCain won Michigan in 2000.
With no Democratic race to speak of in Michigan, the open GOP primary will likely attract droves of independent voters who historically have been drawn to McCain.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7801.html |
|
|
Enough with the polls. If NH proves anything, the polls are useless. They missed the Obama/Hillary numbers by a whopping 12-15%!!! McCain is popular among liberals who can vote. In NH, a very liberal all-white state where illegal immigration means Irish bartenders, the dominant party is "no preference". His margin of victory will swing back to the Democrat nominee in November in NH. This was just another example of the GOP being such a small party that the Democrats can pick the nominee for them. I agree with Hugh that the race is WIDE OPEN. |
|
All you "Romney is Finished" - McCain (or Huckabee) "is our only chance" people need to get a grip on reality!
Iowa + New Hampshire (combined) TOTAL population (not the sub-set who actually voted) represent LESS THAN 1.5% of the population of the United States.
Not to take away from Huckabee or McCain's "victories" in these two states' votes, but really, you'd think that it's OVER (that the rest [98.5%] of the United States have NO SAY in selecting THEIR candidate of choice).
At present, Romney has MORE DELAGATES than any other Republican Candidate (and THAT’S what it’s all about): Getting the PARTY’S NOMINATION.
It’ll take a LOT more than 1.5% of the population… NO ONE (Republican) has “won” TWO CONSECUTIVE States’ elections, so let’s not go popping the Champaign corks just yet, huh? |
|
|
and I just can't help myself. Hilllary stole this election and I demand recount! So, do John Kerry and Al Gore! |
|
|
of Rhino's, why not Mitt? |
|
here is something to ponder:
Latest NAEP scores drop nationally
Wednesday, Sep 26, 2007
Arkansas News Bureau
LITTLE ROCK - Arkansas fourth- and eighth-grade public school students who took a national assessment test scored at the same levels as two years ago but slipped behind the national average, the state Department of Education reported Tuesday.
So Huckabee is proud of his educational program in Arkansas.
|
|
Looks like the Kool Ade is still be served up. Mitt's plan was to win early with Iowa and NH. He lost both of them. With all his millions he cannot even win in his back yard.
Mitt had everything going in NH, he has a house there, its in the back yard of Mass and he spent tons of time there. He saturated the airwaves with ads. If he can't win in NH, he can't win anywhere.
If he can't beat a barefoot penniless Baptist preacher and or an old warhorse who campaign was on life support, he can't beat anybody.
Even if he wins MI, and there is no indication he can, there is no possibility of him winning South Carolina.- |
|
Let's review the races that matter:
Huckabee wins Iowa (1)
McCain wins NH (1)
Romney (0)
Upcoming Races:
Michigan: Huckabee or McCain
South Carolina: Huckabee
Florida: Giuliani or Huckabee or McCain
So Romney won't win any of the first 5 primaries. Going into Feb 5, he will be the big loser and no one wants to vote for a loser.
|
|
Hugh speculates that McCain got votes from some from indies wanting the GOP to nominate other than Romney, whom they considered the strongest GOP nominee in the fall.
Romney is definitely, absolutely, not the strongest GOP nominee. I can state that absolutely not now. Not probably ever. But definitely not now. |
|
1. Romney dominated over McCain among conservative Republicans with McCain winning because of independents.
2. The only plausible explanation for Obama underperforming his polls was that the youth vote didn't materialize. Obama was leading by 9-11% last night. That is a huge swing that defies the enthusiasm visible at rallies. I doubt that that many voters switched to McCain.
Once again, Republicans fail to elect the candidate of their choice. This, plus the fact that once again the Dems greatly outnumbered the Reps, maybe 2 to 1 again, doesn't bode well for November. On the other hand, it really looks like Rudy is through. One RINO at a time. McCain should be next to go. |
|
|
At least as far as the GOP race went, the RCP average was not that far off in NH. McCain was reported ahead and he did in fact win as predicted (within margin of error). The reported late Romney surge never happened (but he came in a strong second as predicted). The Democratic polls, however, were way off. |
|
nor Pennsylvania - he will not have the money to put anything in play, and will barely be able to play in anything but a bare handful of swing states. McCain is a loser.
I'm a Rudy guy, but it's time to admit the key fact - only Romney has the cash to play in enough states to win.
I want to win. That's why I'm swinging towards Romney. Our chances as a party are very slim this year. They are non-existent if we nominate a poverty stricken campaign |
|
Good lord, Hugh!
"Romney's argument blows past the chattering classes working on old models: When Romney had to beat a dominant Rudy Giuliani, he had to win one or both of Iowa and New Hampshire."
I couldn't even bring myself to finish reading the post beyond that point. I understand supporting a candidate, and the need to maintain hope. Having run a small, local campaign, I know how it feels. I sat at a laptop refreshing and refreshing, again and again, waiting for better results to come in, until the candidate himself had to tell me it was over.
I can understand "It's not over 'til it's over." But, to pretend that everything's going to be just fine because Romney's got the cash is just delusional. And to frame this all in such a way that says any candidate who accepts public financing is doomed is absolute sophistry. |
|
Please explain what happens if one candidate takes public financing. Why is this a problem?
Hugh, please post the response for all to see. |
|
|
|
|
Joe: I would not count too much on polls the way this campaign is going. The pollsters were made to look like fools tonight. |
|
|
|
Many are saying that Romney's finished -- and I suppose that the media could make that true by repeating the mantra over and over again.
But the fact is that, while McCain was invisible in Iowa and Wyoming and while Holy Huckabee was invisible in Wyoming and came in a distant third in New Hampshire, Romney took second in Iowa, second in New Hampshire, and first in Wyoming.
How, really, is that "finished"? |
|
|
It will be funny to watch the next few primaries which will assuredly be MUST WINS for Romney. How will the media be able to keep using that ridiculous line? This campaign is a violent sea and Romney has steered through such waters (see Salt Lake Olympics). I think the MSM has shown tonight that is clueless as to how this will all play out. Go Mitt! |
|
|
|
McCain won the Republican vote, dude.
Spin that for a while. |
|
|
|