Tuesday, January 08, 2008
|
|
In NH, Stakes Are Huge ...
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
7:08 AM
|
(I attended this Town Hall in Manchester, yesterday) ...
In case you weren't aware, the stakes are huge today in New Hampshire today.
A Romney win today, combined with his second-place finish in Iowa, would make him once again the frontrunner. But more than that, it would probably also guarantee his victory next week in Michigan -- where his father was governor -- thus making him the "undisputed" front-runner for the GOP nomination.
The Romney folks (in fact, last night at a speech I attended, Mitt Romney, himself , made this point) argue that two consecutive second-place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire would make him the consistent winner, and thus, the candidate to beat. But this theory ignores the fact that Michigan is next week.
Don't forget two important things:
1. John McCain won Michigan in 2000, and
2. Because Michigan moved up their calendar, and was thereby "punished" by the DNC, Barack Obama will not even be on the ballot in the state. This, of course, means in a two-man race against Romney, McCain would essentially have Michigan Independents all to himself.
New Hampshire is always important, but this year -- because of the compressed schedule -- the winner of New Hampshire is probably also going to win Michigan.
Yes, today is huge ..
|
|
|
IA and NH don't represent the conservative vote. Get past them and get on with picking our candidate. The media frenzy is alternately making me sick and bored. |
|
I'm supporting Romney because he is a full-spectrum conservative, but mostly because of his fiscal positions. I'm a doctoral student in finance right now (after many years in the private sector). It's refreshing to finally see a candidate that knows something about the nuts and bolts of a capitalist economy. Romney's a grown-up and has the skills (both business and political) to actually bring pragmatic change to Washington.
|
|
Before its too late - we better get behind the only guy who can win in november against oslama. All this dreaming about Hunter and Fred - give it up already. Mitt must win.
|
|
|
I believe that only Romney will be able to win against Obama because Romney can own all of Obama's hope and vision, by simply stating that he agrees with Obama and has already show that he can do what Obama can only talk about. Romney for the WIN. |
|
|
McCain will win today and he will be our best shot against Obama! |
|
Who are these Republicans who are voting for McLame?
He has betrayed the party again and again. He's a liberal. What kind of idiot thinks this old, crotchety egomaniac can win against either Hillary or Obama? McLame would be a total disaster. The amazing thing is why arent the others taking out ads that say "This Guy Is A Lib, he'll raise your taxes, appoint activist judges,give full federal goodie bags to illegal aliens, suppress your right to free speech, give ACLU lawyers to terrorists and regulate the economy into a permanent depression just like the other Libs in this contest." And show McLame shaking hands with Dead Kennedy as they passed their Amnesty Bill. Why arent Republicans paying this guy back for his betrayals? |
|
|
Hugh argued that whoever wins the democratic nomination will have tons of money (soros etc) so we need Mitt's Money to ensure we remain competitive. Considering Mitt's new born-again conservative positions, all a person has to do to become a republican party establishment candidate is have enough money and change his or her positions to suit the establishment's conservative standard and voila! they are the nominee to beat. The Republican party credibility is at stake, if we begin by annointing a nominee based on the going price then work backwards to convince the base to vote for the annointed nominee - we as a party have lost our soul and sold out to the highest bidder. This primary should have been about our principles as a party and what distinguishes us from democrats, then proceeded to listen to all candidates and find a good pair who can win in November - then begin fund raising for them to meet the Soro's etc challenge. If Mitt's Money buys the nomination - republicans have a problem with members like myself becoming independent and hardly ever voting republican again. I hope republicans do not sell out principles to the highest bidder. Lets get a strong pro-life/security-foreign policy ticket like Huck/McCaine. Our principles will allow us to keep the whitehouse and our respect/dignity. |
|
Mitt must lose. he says all the right things, but what i glean from it all is a lack of authenticity. He just tells people what focus groups say they want to hear.
My own acquaintance with Latter Day Saints is such, that initially i was excited about the Romney campaign, and even gave him the benefit of the doubt on his flip-flops on abortion and SSM. The LDS people I know are honest to a fault, and hard working t a fault. While Mitt meets the second criteria, I just don't trust the man.
So for me, the Mormon factor was never an issue in the negative sense, in fact it weighed in his favour.
I like Mike Huckabee and his message, which is more christian in the true sense than any of the past "religious right" candidates.
However, I think the man for this hour in history s John McCain.
I may not agree with his every position, but at least I know he's going to tell me what I need to hear, not neccessarily what I want to hear.
I believe he is the best person to counter the Islamic radicals, and another problem: Vladimir Putin. He can go toe to toe with this new Comissar-Tsar.
Kudos to Mitt for bringing up the issue of the Peoples' republic of China as a threat to the economy, but it would have more resonance had he started talkingabout that earlier, instead of slinging mud at Mssrs. Huckabee and Mccain.
Finally, there's the electability factor. We smigly say that Hillary Clinton is not likeable. By nominating Mr Romney, the GOP would essentially be placing their own Hillary Clinton at the top of the ticket.
McCain and Huckabee both score well on likeability and integrity. McCain and Giuliani score well on national security and dealing with/standing up to bad guys.
Mitt, ufortunately comes off as the man who's trying to be everything to everyone, and that simply does not work. In a tight spot, you need to rely on judgemnet and principles, there's no time to pull a focus group together. |
|
Republican Vote Irrelevent
It doesn't make any difference whether McCain or Romney or Huckabee or Thompson or Guiliani wins the Republican nomination. Obama will beat any of them in a landslide. That's right, Obama is going to win it all. The best thing the Republicans can do is nominate Ron Paul so they can blame him for losing. Otherwise, he'll be blaming them and the war when Obama takes the oath.
|
|
|
can beat Obama any day! but you are right anyone else would not do it, and Mitt with his new combining Hillary's strategy and obama's i.e. I am the only one with the experience to make change (Hillary's sound bite) and I am a washington outsider and we can't keep sending the same people back to washington (Obama's line) - would be toast! Obama is beating Hillary with that message and if NH is an indication of one's ability to attract independents Obama will win. Don't forget Mitt has already lost the minority and evangelical votes....so independents would be his only hope. However, a Huck/McCain ticket is solid on a culture of life and foreign policy and it would draw independents who love McCaine. This draws a clear contrast for americans and Obama would not win. |
|
There are 10 months ahead of us here, and Obama is going to have to put up, or shut up.
the ideal situation for us would be for Obama to ride the wave and do irreparable damage to the Clinton machine.
Make no mistake about it, the Clintons are bringing in Carville and Begala and the party will rip itself apart. The Clintonistas will either win and have turned off many people in the process, or lose, and take their marbles and go home, leaving Obama without the infrastructure he needs.
I think that Mccain or Huckabee could take down Obama, even in a best case scenario for the Senator from Illinois. He won't survove the scrutiny. Huck doesn't have the celebrity status, but can go toe to toe with Obama on speaking. Furthermore, Huckabee's record concerneing blacks as governor speaks for itself, and this will cut into Obama's domination there.
McCain has real experience, unlike the former first lady, and will beat him hands down.
As for Romney or Giuliani , it's hgard to say whether either of them could take down Obama, however, bith have actual records in office longer than Obama's and serious accomplishments to their credit, so in spite of their lower likeability factor, they will better stand the test of scrutiny than will Obama in the months to come.
|
|
|
We need to put things into perspective for everyone in this nation. This so called "momentum" that Barrack Obama is leading is incredible, but not in the good terms of incredible, to me its incredibly disappointing. First and foremost you have to ask yourself questions about a candidate, you can't be foolishly sucked into their false hope speeches without asking yourself "Are they really capable of this? Do they really have the background to lead a nation?". Obama HAS NOT BEEN TESTED. How can you depend on a leader at this critical time in our nation when they have not been tested, moreover; I feel Obama is too green and just trying to get some political background on his resume. The strongest candidates out of both sides who have the most experience are Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson, and John Mccain. However, don't leave Romney out in the cold because he has much potential and a lot more experience than some of the other candidates. What does experience mean when our current president is making the mistakes we didn't want to see happen you might say? Experience has A LOT to do with anything. From decision making, to war tactics. Experience does not represent Status Quo, experience represents leadership and a knowledgeable person in that field. Just put it this way, would you choose Tom Brady or Vince Young as your Quarterback? Experience vs Youth! If you have no experience in leading, how can you convince me your going to keep my country safe, secure, and financially progressing? Furthermore, change is not made by hopes, it's made by action. Being a senator for 2 years doesn't necessarily give you the experience. If Obama were a Governor, then you can fight the argument saying he has 2 years of leading a state under his belt. |
|
As I talk to society and the public, I ask them if they are voting, and if so, who for? They tell me Obama. I ask them why? They tell me because he is cool, and he is black, and this country needs a black president. I ask more people the same question, and they tell me they are voting for him because of the change, and because he is a great speaker. Not one single person can explain a reasonable answer for why they are voting for him. I've never heard anyone saying they are voting for him for his policies, for his ideas, all I keep hearing is Change! When Kennedy and The King Jr. had visions of hope, they also had the background and knowledge of detail specifications of how they were going to bring that change of hope. They did it by action, not by words. Regardless of who takes office, Republican or Democrat, WE WILL HAVE CHANGE. Change is a given factor after the Bush Administration. Change is not the battle to fight for, it's who can bring about that Change the best. Experience or Youth?
|
|
I work for a social media research company and we came up with a predictive algorithm which analyzes blog activity and sentiment. We used this for the Iowa caucus and it predicted the results perfectly. In NH, we have McCain and Obama far ahead of the rest. Edwards is actually a distant third. You can read more about it here:
http://www.collectiveintellect.com/2008/01/running_up_to_th e_iowa.php |
|
EconDoc writes: "...a candidate that knows something about the nuts and bolts of a capitalist economy...."
Molee writes: "Romney can own all of Obama's hope and vision...."
Isn't that a contradiction? How can Romney be both a "nuts and bolts" guy and a hopeful visionary at the same time?
Romney has never struck me as a visionary. He campaigns with a set of talking points that have clearly been tested by polls and focus groups.
And in an era where people have lost their health insurance due to layoffs due to outsourcing, voters are not going to be turned on by a vision of laissez-faire capitalism.
|
|
NH is not huge folks, it's just the second in a long series.
The real race starts when it get's to SC, and I'm betting that the only conservative in the race, Fred Thompson, will win BIG! |
|
Since McCain is rising and Rudy is depending on Super Tuesday, what happens if McCain is competitive come Super Tuesday?
These two guys steal votes from each other, making it more likely that Romney wins some of the winner-take-all states.
Rudy should be hoping and praying right now that Romney wins and McCain drops out. He needs Huckabee to stay in so that the non-bigoted evangelicals keep voting for Huckabee and not for Romney. |
|
Scheduled Payments
Romney for...
Romney for President $250.00 01/15
|
|
Republican Scorecard
Romney30
Huckabee21
McCain10
Thompson6
Paul2
Giuliani1
Hunter1 |
|
|
|