Monday, July 09, 2007
|
|
Romney Rising
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
11:08 AM
|
|
Romney's strong effort in Iowa is producing an interesting strategy from the MSM eager for a long campaign and perhaps soon from other GOPers, which is to simultaneously attempt to downgrade the importance of the caucuses while setting up Romney to lose the expectations game. The Politico's story, "Does Romney Have Iowa Locked Down," is exactly the sort of story Mayor Giuliani and Senator Thompson love to see as it both puts in play a meme that, if repeated, diminishes the excitement around the first-in-the-nation contest while also setting the bar for Romney very high. Expect more "Iowa doesn't matter as much as it used to under the old calender" talk from every candidate who sees Iowa as a lost cause (Senator McCain followed by ?). The MSM will also start harumphing about the fading importance of the caucuses as soon as a front-runner appears on either the Dem or GOP side. They need a long campaign and an extended primary fight.
But nothing beats winning, and no matter all the spin, Iowa is a key test of the ability to organize and win in a purple state crucial to '08. The GOPers skipping Ames made one mistake. Underestimating the importance of the January caucuses would be a second huge mistake. You can't win a nomination by losing elections.
And from the National Young Republicans Convention:
HOLLYWOOD -- The straw poll results from the Young Republicans national convention are tallied, but according to some attendees, they come with a big asterisk.
Former Gov. Mitt Romney, who spoke moments before the balloting, won* with 46 percent followed by former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson with 28 percent and then former mayor Rudy Giuliani with 10 percent. The other seven candidates took a combined 22 percent. A total of 366 votes were counted.
The asterisk was prompted by a number of Thompson fans who complained that some Romney supporters were voting even though they weren't Young Republican members.
It seems Thompson's folks lost sight of the fact that the straw poll is absolutely meaningless -- it's just for fun.
Memo to the disappointed Thompson folk among the YRs: There is no crying in baseball, or straw polls.
|
|
Liberal Patriot writes:
"The rest of America is not nearly as gullible these days."
Come on LP, get down to specifics. You are s pretty rational and decent guy. Without using standard cliché or epithetes tell me why you think Obama would be a better president that Romney. Point for point not cliché for cliché. |
|
I'll agree that Hillary would be our weakest candidate--and ironically, she is the most right-wing of our candidates. We have a genuine opportunity to elect someone who is as far to the left as GW was to the right, and we may end-up selecting a candidate who is the least electable and the most accommodative to the other side. Go figure.
That said, even Hillary will beat Mitt. Not that anyone is underestimating Mitt's lean, mean, flipflopping machine. It is just that there is no daylight between Mitt and the contemporary Republican leadership. The corporatized, sanitized political technics may sell well with the base--after all, those guys will believe anything (including the idea the GW was a man of high character, when in fact, he was callow and lazy). But America ain't buying that stuff anymore.
Slick Willard may have what it takes to migrate from Governor of Mass to Republican Presidential nominee, but it stops there. The rest of America is not nearly as gullible these days. |
|
Ordinary Coloradan writes: "Its the shady way Romney hijacked the vote." Winston: "They was bussed in."
You two are a cranky sort, but at least get your facts straight be fore you start making things up. It is easier to remember your sorry story line.
The National YR convention was in Florida. The Florida YR president is a Mitt supporter. This fell in his lap. He didn't need to bus anyone in as the Convention came to him and like any good player he seized the opportunity.
Sour Grapes anyone?
|
|
Its the shady way Romney hijacked the vote.
Smacks of elitism, and not giving a crap about the people whose convention he abused to try to create the illusion of support.
That's very telling that Romney is dishonest and doesn't give a crap about the base. He treats them just like his dog.
It also shows the fundamental dishonesty at the core of the Romney campaign: he cannot get support, so he is tryign to cheat, lie, buy or steal headlines to make fakje support.
Perfect for a fake candidate and his fake conversions to conservative issues.
|
|
|
I don't know how anyone in their right mind could vote for Hillary over Mitt. She is going to look quite ridiculous against him. Perhaps he will do better than you think. I would not underestimate him. We'll see. I believe that he is by far the most qualified of all the GOP field. |
|
I personally am begining to think Slick Willard will take the nomination. It is amazing how monomaniacal his supporters are. We'll have to see, but given FDT's baggage and the fact Rudy is not really a Republican (more like a Democratic Hawk), maybe Mitt is the man.
And he's gonna be obliterated in November '08. Phew. Oh the humanity. The public will look at him, and the guys around him, look at Bush, shake its head and pull the lever for the Democrat. |
|
|
None of the posts have said anything about Mitt's speech. Lot of good zingers in there that make the Demos & HRC go "ouch!" |
|
|
classic NEOCON that it clearly shows that the GOP has been truely infiltrated by a bunch of card carrying republicans that would vote yes to "Mandatory Abortions for all!", if the GOP called it conservative!.........Real conservatives are conservative by choice, and Republican by circumstances!.............DIXIE was so Democrat at one time that Vicksburg Mississippi refused to celebrate the 4th of July until 1944!.....General Longstreet was never forgiven by the South for becoming a Republican and friend of U.S. Grant after the war!.......But when the Democratic Party became a party of abortionist, homosexuals, cowards, communist panderers, and decided to give the Panama Canal away, RONALD REAGAN seized the opportunity and recruited it's conservative members!(And they ARE on loan). These same silly a$$ liberals that the GOP now calls "TOP TIER CANDIDATES" will again be driving the Southern Voters towards a third party................They will not win, but who cares, because they KNOW WHY THEY ARE CONSERVATIVES, and again they will say that the GOP abandoned them just like the DEMS did in the eighties!...................So, sit on your couch on election noght and watch the entire SOUTHEAST turn blue again because the GOP LEADER GWB shoved Illegal immigration down their throats!.....And then gave them liberals as an option!........If GWB, Graham, Lott, Kyl, Hagel, McCain, Romney, "Cute Dresses Rudy", and Specter is the leadership of the GOP.....................GOODBY! |
|
|
organized? Romney spends more time and effort organizing his people to win these things and Thompson whines about it? Sounds like a sore loser. On the other hand, it is starting to look like it is no longer a coincidence that Romney keeps winning these things. He is better organized than the others and has a winner's mentality. |
|
|
that if we quit leaving comments on the Romney pieces, then Hugh and Dean (Surfin' USA) will quit writing them. This will be like a mercy flush. |
|
...his supporters vote? Come on. I will grant that the results of this straw poll do not necessarily reflect the breakdown of support at this point. I don't put much stock in these results either. That being said, why has it now become devious for Romney to have had a good turnout with his people?
What Romney has is called loyalty, and it is something the other candidates would do well to cultivate. There are a lot of loyal Romney supporters who don't feel the need to ask permission of any of the other candidates before they show their support--even in straw polls that seem to be beneath the dignity of some supporters of Thompson or Giuliani.
It is funny. When I first read Hugh's post, I thought I disagreed with him in his assessment about the griping of the others. That is, until I saw how agitated some of the commenters in were in their remarks. I can see that this really does annoy some people. |
|
|
Mitt Romney is clearly the best candidate for the Republican nomination. He has a great family, a resume that tops all others, and transformational leadership that this country needs so desperately right now. He won because he is the best candidate, there is allways someone that is screaming foul-play, but the facts are that Romney won, and it is not hard to see why. He is clearly (in my view) the best candidate with the strenghts this country needs. |
|
deceitful actions like Romney carried out at the YR convention, essentially leaving a bad taste in everone's mouth, bgins to remind me of another president.
With transparently stupid stunts like this, Mitt grows more Nixonian every day |
|
Young Republicans are set to have a straw poll of their members and one of the candidates, desperate for some good ink, buses in 100 non-Young Republicans to hijack the poll.
In any other election that would be refered to as fraud or ballot box stuffing.
Pathetic and another weird act by an odd-ball candidate.
Take away the bussed-in 100, bought and paid for by Willard M. Romney, and you get the true nature of the Young Republican's sentiments. |
|
But I don't exactly get the attack that bussing in supporters is "unfair." It shows groundgame -- which is what you need the day of the caususes. The fact is, the caucus is hardly democracy at work -- it involves a tiny portion of the electorate, and the results are almost exclusively based on who can rally the most people to mill around all day. So whatever the complaints about this event, Romney is merely practicing for his big moment.
As for the complaint about "buying" the caucus -- welcome to American democracy, where money equals speech as far as the Supreme Court is concerned.
And Ordinary Coloradan -- you are a charmer. But while I was, of course, kidding in the details, I am deadly serious when I suggest that Thompson will not wear well on the electorate. The problem is that people imagine him to be precisely what he is not: some sort of very conservative outsider. He is not conservative enough for those who are dissatisfied with the current crop (though likely too conservative for independents), and he is anything but an outsider -- whatever you might say about the story about him leaking info to Nixon (who hilarously called him stupid), it does remind us that Fred has been in DC for about 35 years |
|
it is off putting to say the least that Hugh continually props up a political candidate. And that he just happened to write a book about that same candidate. Can't be any linkage could there?
And yes, Romney is surging all the way up to 9.6% in the national polls. Look out double digits here Mitt comes!! |
|
|
It’s very odd that he still *needs* constant hyping now that he has the 2008 and 2012 elections sewn up. Are we shooting for a repeal of the 22nd amendment and a three-peat in ’16? Dare we forecast a monumental showdown between Presidents Bill Clinton & Mitt Romney in nine years? |
|
From the American Spectator:
Romney, and his on-site organizer, Jordan Sekulow, bused in about 100 Romney donors, all of whom appeared to exceed by at least 20 years the under-40 age requirement typically used as a guideline for YR membership.
"We're all young at heart," said one Romney backer, who happily submitted a ballot for Romney and claimed to be "younger than 70."
In the end, Romney won the straw poll with 168 votes. Fred Thompson, who made a surprise appearance at the YR luncheon earlier in the day, came in second with 103. Rudy Giuliani was far back in 3rd, with 37.
"I guess Governor Romney did need every one of those 100 tickets he used," said a YR board member. "This isn't one of our finer moments.
---
Go Mitt GO - BUY the FAKE support you cannot earn honestly. Treat the base like toilet paper -to be used and tossed away!
Yay MUTT! Glad we are seeing the REAL Romney while we have time to run him out of town.
|
|
|
"A day without hyping Mitt is a day wasted." |
|
|
but there is no good way to post a long link here - they need to allow the anchor and href tag. |
|
Links:
Video of the Senior Citizens voting in the YR poll
http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/07/08/mitts-70-years-young-republicans/
One of the RedState articles
http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/the_romney_advantage_who_needs_grassroots_when_you_can_astroturf
The traditional rule that only delegates can vote in the YR straw poll has been changed. his just might explain how the rules were changed -- the Executive Director of the Young Republicans is also the St. Johns County Chair for Romney's campaign. The convention's chief organizer is Brian Graham, who is also a Romney backer.
And here is an eye witness account, and photos:
http://virginiansforfredthompson.blogspot.com/2007/07/reflection-on-yrnc-2007s-controversial.html
Noteable clips:
As you can see in these photos, the dinner was packed, but not with YRs at all. There were tons of persons well over 40 (the cutoff for YRs) and a number of children. All of whom supported Romney.
Drafted motion to present to the YRNF at its Saturday business meeting to (as a compromise) allow all votes to be cast and counted, but bifurcate the results between Delegate Votes and Total Votes. After searching high and low, I found a copy of the Standing Rules of the Convention, which said the motion should be on an official Motion Form. I complete the Form, made 50 photocopies passed them to the YRNF leadership and prepared to present the motion.
Confronted angrily by the YRNC 2007 Chairman (a BIG Romney supporter) and another Conference Organizer (who was professional but also a BIG Romney supporter), they pressured me to drop the motion
As a final note on this debacle, and let it be put behind us after this note. As the YRNC 2007 Chairman announced the Straw Poll results with Romney beating Fred and Rudy 168 to 103 to 34, audible boos and hisses were cast at this bogus result.
Finally, here is an unbiased writeup from Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic - who, unlike Hugh, doen'st have his head parked in Romeny's crotch.
The perception among YRs I've been corresponding with tonight is that Romney is trying to pack the straw poll. Maybe it's not true. But that's what these YRers believe.
One real, dues-paying Young Republican e-mailed to note that his identification was not checked when he cast his ballot. Another noticed that reams of Romney supporters, many of them not terribly young, had "flooded" the convention on Saturday. One delegate -- Neil Miller of Virginia -- wrote a resolution urging the bifurcaton of straw poll results into credentialed convention attendees and visitors, but for some reason he decided not to present it to the convention, and it died without being born. It would not have been binding; the convention operates as a separate legal entity from the YRNF.
All that effort, and the reports I'm getting suggest that Fred Thompson's Friday night appearance was the piece de resistance of the conference. He was introduced by Mary Matalin, who, in what attendees assumed was a swipe at Romney, called Thompson the race's true "principled" conservative. After his speech, Thompson spent a half hour shaking hands with the crowd. His stock is rising; perhaps it's a short term rise -- most Republicans are day traders, at this point. But you can't "rig" enthusiasm.
Two independent witnesses, one of whom was a Romney backer before tonight, e-mailed me to say that Thompson heard more applause than Romney.
---
OK so lets see - buy offs, poll packing, strong arming, and then stomping the YRs in order to produce a headline he wants. Yeah, real good there Romney.
In trying to create a false "support" poll, Romney instead showed how little he respects the rules and the people - and how shabbily he steamrollered the YRs and drowned out their voices.
Way to go Mitt, way to show how much of a fake you are and how little sincerity there is in your campaign.
In the words of one of the delegates: "the shady activities involving the straw poll really angered a lot of people"
Now lets see you spin THAT Hugh!
Way to build up the trust Mitt. Multiple Choice Mitt, Mr Flip Flop, and now "Shady" Mitt - the dishonest poll packer - who could not stand and take a straight up vote.
|
|
..the only way you can get nominated is to buy the primaries.
What sort of candidate are we running if the only reason Mitt gets the nomination is because of his money? |
|
|
Actually the RNC et al are not the ones who think Iowa or NH are the most important primary states, though they come before Fla. It is the MSM and now Hugh who is flacking for Mitt, that want, desire, Iowa and NH to be soooooo important.Sure Mitt may win these two and thereby in the sound and sure way that campaigns have always been decided, Mitt will gather mo and gain more dough and thus win. But, this year Feb. 5 will actually decide whether Mitt is a national candidate. If he is, and then wins, he is the nominee. If not, either Fred or Rudy will win the nomination. Hugh is as ever over optimistically praying, wishing, urging the old way of the nomination process. He may be right in the long run but Mitt is still running at 9.6% of likely voters according to RCP. |
|
"How can Iowa - with a handful of delegates that are completely unrepresentative of the vast bulk of America - possibly matter more than, say, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Texas, California, Michigan, South Carolina, etc, etc. ..."
Because Iowa and New Hampshire will take place 72 hours before Florida. That is why the NRC uses the following formula to determine the nominee:
50% IA +
50% NH +
0% FL +
0% SC +... |
|
Hugh, I'm a longtime listener/reader, but your endless spin for Romney, at the expense of other Republica candidates, is diminishing your credibility as a political analyst. You can't serve two masters.
Best wishes,
Laura |
|
the hit pieces on FT are just starting. if he can't stand up to it with articulate responses (not like his response to LA Times article) color him Wesley Clark.
|
|
... Iowa doesn't matter.
How can Iowa - with a handful of delegates that are completely unrepresentative of the vast bulk of America - possibly matter more than, say, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Texas, California, Michigan, South Carolina, etc, etc. ... in other words, the OTHER early states that actually look like America the whole, and not like the fraction of 1% of Americans who make their living selling government subsidized corn-based ethanol?
Hugh ... get a clue ... you can't win the nomination with two tiny rural backwaters ... it takes all those other 48 states, or a very large proportion of a handful of the big states, to win the nomination. The reason Romney is behind in the national polls is because he is so far behind in the other 48 states not named Iowa and New Hampshire.
As a decades-long resident of Florida, and former resident of both California and New York, I can say fairly authoritatively that pretty much ZERO residents of those big, urban EARLY PRIMARY states are depending upon the Iowa hog and corn farmers, or the maple-syrup tapping north woods New Hampshirites to tell them who to vote for as Republican nominee for President.
The only excitement about the results in Iowa or New Hampshire will be confined to the winning campaigns and the residents of those little bergs dotting the snow-covered fields, while most of their former thunder will already have been thoroughly stolen by Florida on January 29, and then the huge glut of states voting on Stupendous Tuesday (February 5).
Hugh Hewitt: Bagdad Bob reincarnated! |
|
If the straw poll is "absolutely meaningless," why is it relevant to the discussion of Romney's prospects?
And if it is actually meaningful enough to deserve consideration, why fault Thompson's supporters for complaining that Romney's supporters artificially increased his share of the vote? After all, one would suppose that a poll of Young Republicans should actually sample... Young Republicans. |
|
Hugh is right that Iowa is a key test of organization. But the MSM is also right that Iowa is fading in significance.
I hope the campaign is not dominated by results from the early caucus/primaries. The ability to win the primaries in big swing states (Ohio, Florida) should be more important now, as voters seem to be more sophisticated in understanding electoral politics. As early as 2002, it was obvious that a few states would determine the winner in 2004. I want the R nominee to be able to show an ability to win those key swing states.
And Manfred, dump on your namesake/idol all you want (Fred is da man), but we'll see how he does when the votes are in. If Fred wins the nomination, he'll make the election much closer than it should be, in an election that the D's should win, given W's current problems. But it comes down to a choice between two candidates. I like Fred, Rudy, and Mitt, but so far I think Fred has the best chance to beat Hillary or Obama.
|
|
strong allegations, but where did you get your information? back it up.. please?
anyone can throw out accusations, but if these are fallacious you become worse than let say.. tricky dick?
where did you get your allegations from? |
|
Manfred, if you believe what you wrote, you;re laughable.
Why not go play with the "special" kids over there(pointing to the Ron Paulists), grownups here have work to do. |
|
Hugh recent responses to criticisms of the Romney campaign demonstrate that he has mastered the fine art of political spin. He could probably earn a very good living as a professional campaign consultant/PR director, i.e., get paid for what he is now doing for free.
Suggestion for Fred Thompson: if you are asked about Mitt Romney's manipulation of the straw poll, he should respond: "That dog won't hunt. It won't even ride on the roof of the car." |
|
Threw himself under the bus when he allied himself with Kennedy. Hugh's analysis of the bill showed how badly it was written, and Bush's insults to those of us who opposed the bill on first principles (like securing the border FIRST for the sake of national safety), calling us racist - well that was too much.
We didn't do anything - BUSH is the one that picked the wrong fight. And he lost. Deservedly so.
We never were going to get the Hispanic support of those who would have been brought in under amnesty - they are net takers of government services, and thus Democrat voters. You're fooling yourself to think otherwise.
If George wants to climb out from under the bus, he is welcome to do so. But after Myers, NCLBA, bungling the Iraq War through inarticulateness and stubbornness, and now this? He'll have to get his head out of his rear and get up by himself.
The best way would be for Bush to simply grab part of the immmigration bill and push it forward (like some of the stuff coming through the House). Support a law that better secures the border, and be the cheif executive dammit! Build the authorized fence thats already in the law, and enforce current immigration laws at the border and internally. The public supports that by a WIDE margin.
After that's in place next year, then come talk to us about amnesty via assimilation - we'll back it as long as its reasonable (true background investigations, English proficiency requirements, back taxes, no welfare access for 5 years, no legal troubles, and other restrictions, etc) - basically take the bill that failed, implement the security stuff now, and come back and do the "normalization" stuff next year.
Morton, step back and look - by supporting Bush in things like this uncritically, YOU are part of the problem.
|
|
HH wrote:
"There is no crying in baseball, or straw polls."
but also preceded by:
"...a meme that, if repeated, diminishes the excitement around the first-in-the-nation contest while also setting the bar for Romney very high."
If complaining about overly high standards for Romney isn't crying, isn't it at least a little advance sniffling? |
|
"Romney's strong effort in Iowa is producing an interesting strategy from the MSM eager for a long campaign and perhaps soon from other GOPers, which is to simultaneously attempt to downgrade the importance of the caucuses while setting up Romney to lose the expectations game."
Nope. The changed calendar, where states that actually matter, such as Florida and South Carolina, now vote almost as early as IA and NH, has changed the strategy of most of the candidates. Instead of spending millions on TV ads in Iowa in the spring of 2007, they're methodically building support in FL, a state with 27 electoral votes.
The MSM, Rudy, Fred, McCain, and the rest of the world aren’t *causing* Iowa to matter far less than it did in 1980; they’re merely recognizing that this is so.
Not that there isn’t a tiny amount of sour grapes in, say, Rudy deciding that if he can’t excel in Iowa, he just won’t compete at all. Mostly the cause and effect run the other way, but it’s true that there’s also a feedback effect and to a small extent he and the others are reacting to low levels of support by reducing their campaign efforts and goals. But this is an eminently sensible decision, and one that will play very effectively. Romney winning in an uncontested walkover will count for far less than Romney winning a toe to toe battle where Rudy invested just as much time and money in IA as Mitt has and will would count. Rudy is sensibly not going to allow that to happen.
Edwards and Mitt will win some small, 95% white state, and within a week or two of that, Florida will put those candidates third or fourth. And no one will remember who won Iowa, or that Iowa had even voted. People don’t talk about spring training results once the regular season & playoffs begin.
BTW, haven’t you noticed now that polls for states other than the four early ones have starting coming out, we can definitely state that there is no “Romney rise”? No longer is it even semi-plausible to pretend that tiny New Hampshire is the norm and South Carolina and Florida just have unaccountably low levels of Romney fever. Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio, New Jersey, California; the news is coming in from all points of the compass, and unless you’re named Fred or Rudy, you’re not going to like the message.
6% support for Mitt in Ohio pretty much says it all. If he can’t gain significant traction in the midwest, he can’t gain it anywhere (and we can stop slandering bogeymen southerners who supposedly won’t vote for Mormons, now that we see that Ohio and New Jersey are just as indifferent to Mitt as the Carolinas are). |
|
|
The Thompson campaign seems to be moving through the regular stages at alarming speed -- indeed, before he even announces. First came the irrational excitement -- he is Reaganesque!; then came the trickle of stories that deflated that image -- lobbying for pro-choice groups etc. Now comes the whining when they lose a meaningless poll. At this rate, he will concede before he declares! |
|
All I have been hearing this morning is how the Republicans are basically giving up (on the war, 2008, baseball...)... I'M SICK OF THE WHINING. Conservatives need to snap out of it and get back into the game. THE BIGGEST MISTAKE MOST RADIO-RIGHT HOSTS ARE MAKING IS THROWING BUSH UNDER THE BUS. I'm still a huge supporter, AND FAN of the President. Most of the initiatives he's brought to the table are right-on (tax policy, social security proposal, health deduction proposal, trade, etc.). The economy is booming, and as far as the GWOT, he's a warrior. Our troops are kicking butt. We are winning. By the way, Bush's instincts on immigration are largely correct. As a businessman and economist, we needed to think about the megatrends that are inexorable, and work them to our advantage. UNFORTUNATELY, THE GOP HAS PROBABLY PASSED THE INFLECTION POINT WHERE WE WILL NEVER HAVE THE MAJORITY OF HISPANIC SUPPORT - EVER. Gee thanks. You won some stupid battle, and lost the war. And this is the fastest growing segment of a largely, hard-working, conservative demographic. The end feels near as Laura Ingram frequently has Pat Buchanan on her show, and fawns over the SOB.
Anyway, I want to win next November. We can do it. We've got some great candidates (I'm a Rudy fan, as he is the ONLY one who truly understands the GWOT, and can articulate it, and the way forward). I'll vote for whomever we choose, but the Senate and the base ARE PISSING ME OFF!
Morton, Atlanta |
|
Forgot to run spell-check. You guys need to build one in here. Last para should read:
Romney should be ashamed at having to bus in some 60 year olds to overwhelm the legitimate votes the Young Republicans cast - and shaming them(the YR) in the process by smothering their chance to have a bit of headline and let the world know what they, the YR's think (and not distorted by a bus-load of senior citizens paid for by Romney).
Fakery of this does not mean support - it means the opposite. Give it up now Mitt. Tie in and become the VP candidate now, while you still have a shred of credibility. |
|
Being slimy by changing the rules and stuffing the ballot box with NON-YRs, then trumpeting the triumph, well that is flat out lame.
Its an admission by Romney that he is NOT popular enough to get by on his own - so he will resorting to abusing the rules, and comitting tricky-Dick Nixon style actions.
"Mitt is a fake, a slick scamster, and a flip-flopper who is trying to buy his way in" is what that tells me.
He can't even stand on his own without trying to buy a poll.
Pitiful.
Romney should be ashamed at having to bus in come 6 year olds to overwhelm the legitimate votes the Young Republicans cast - and shaming them in the process by smothering their chance to have a bit of ehadlines and let the world know what they YR's think (not what a busload of senior citizens paid for by Romney).
Whats the matter Romney, scared of a Fair contest? |
|
|
|