Image 01 Image 03

Romney tells us who he fears, launches attack ad against Newt in Ohio

Romney tells us who he fears, launches attack ad against Newt in Ohio

Romney does not appear to be falling for the second political death (or is it third?) of Newt, because his SuperPAC still is going negative against Newt.

Perhaps his team knows, based on internal polling, that for all of Santorum’s caucus wins and next best thing hoopla, Newt remains the greatest threat in big ticket primary states.

This has just started running in Ohio, via Buzzfeed, h/t @RSMcCain who notes, “Further evidence that Team Romney is starting to freak out.”

Rush always says, they will tell us who they fear.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


And for how long did Romney go after Perry, even after Perry’s numbers took a fatal dive? I think you are in denial.

What is amazing about Santorum is not only does he have more wins than anyone else, but that he has done it with less money than all the others in the race.

    You left out that Santorum has had no negative ads aimed at him, nor has his voting record been vetted. Sliding under the radar this long is what is amazing.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to Astroman. | February 8, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    Why don’t you answer the question, “for how long did Romney go after Perry, even after Perry’s numbers took a fatal dive?” How many ads did Romney or his SuperPAC run against Perry? And when? My memory is that Romney just sat back and let Perry self-destruct at debates, but my memory may be fuzzy. So enlighten us.

      Romney continued to go after Perry, debate after debate, long after Perry’s numbers tanked (for good). In those debates, Romney had no greater vitriol than for Perry.

      What you have left out in your analysis is that Romney is a very petty man. That is one of the reasons why Romney continued to dog Perry, and I believe it is why Romney is continuing to dog Gingrich. Romney is like Obama in that regard.

      The other major factor for Romney sending out another add against Gingrich is because Santorum really shocked people last night in how well he would do. It takes time to put together polished attack ads and to turn a ship that is already in motion. But don’t worry, you WILL be seeing some blistering attacks against Santorum in the near future.

      It’s been a while since I last saw the polling in Ohio, but if I remember correctly, Santorum has been leading Newt there, and with yesterday’s results, I seriously doubt Newt will all of a sudden have a surge against Santorum in Ohio.

      Really? Then explain why Romney’s website, designed to attack Governor Perry, is still up and still adding new information to it on a regular basis. That’s hardly sitting back and letting another candidate self-destruct.

      Santorum and Gingrich are basically tied for delegates today, and while yesterday was bad for Mittens, it was worse for Gingrich. Numbers don’t lie, professor.

      The new ad attacking Gingrich wasn’t created just last night. Not only did the ad have to be produced, air time had to be purchased and all that takes time. 12 hours doesn’t cut it.

      But Santorum shocked the Romney campaign with his win in Colorado. And Santorum took EVERY county in Missouri, including the City of St. Louis. While Gingrich may pull a few delegates out of the Missouri caucuses in ten days, Santorum will carry the momentum if he continues to campaign there. And remember, Missouri was just the first of Bible Belt states to have a primary. And between now and the first of April, there are not enough delegates to win the nomination, even if one candidate sweeps all primaries between now and then.

        wodiej in reply to retire05. | February 8, 2012 at 6:34 pm

        voting was way down in Missouri. And Gingrich wasn’t in the running. I’m sure Santorum would have gotten half of what he did there if Gingrich had been in it.

          Astroman in reply to wodiej. | February 8, 2012 at 9:39 pm

          The problem with that analysis is the voter turnout was also low in the two states that had Gingrich on the ballot.

          And in both of those states where he was on the ballot, Gingrich was still a non-factor. So whether Gingrich made the ballot or not, it was basically irrelevant to the results. The truth is, it was a terrible night for Gingrich, and a great night for Santorum.

          The only thing that remains to be seen is this: was last night indicative of the race moving forward, or was it only representative of those particular states? I’m leaning very heavily

    MerryCarol in reply to Astroman. | February 8, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    Not only is your memory fuzzy, but also selective.
    And contrary to what you have been telling your readers,
    Perry and his SuperPac spent nearly as much in Iowa as Romney.

    Newt could not counter the attacks; his campaign had no money.

    And finally, if you are going to quote Rush, then
    Stop Whining About Negative Campaigning

      Valerie in reply to MerryCarol. | February 8, 2012 at 3:30 pm

      I heard Rush in the original broadcast, and thought that he might be right in his niche, but wrong for an election. It’s ok with me if someone points out a lie.

      Romney’s course of conduct is a disaster for the Republican Party as a whole. The argument that Romney might be closet liberal doesn’t bother me in the least. That he engages in deliberate lying and character assassination is a deal-killer for me. Of all the candidates that have been chewed up in this election, Romney is the one that is sleazy.

At RealClearPolitics, nationally Gingrich is polling closer to Obama than Romney (Obama +3 over Gingrich, but +4 over Romney). And this is after Romney has spent $30 million in negative ads attacking Gingrich.

    Say_What in reply to OCBill. | February 8, 2012 at 2:02 pm

    A fool and his money are soon parted! And Romney is a fool if he thinks the Conservative vote will go his way.

Santorum and Gingrich need to divide-and-conquer on Michigan and Arizona.

Sounds crazy, but if Gingrich can stay very close or win in AZ, and Santorum very close or win in Michigan, then I think Romney re-establishes no momentum into Super Tuesday after what was supposed to be an easy month.

Keep the not-Romney machine going …

I think Romney’s people are losing it because the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. But then, they’ve got nothing else. So, if he bashes Newt the votes go to Santorum, if he bashes Santorum, the votes go to Newt, but in either case they won’t go to Romney.

Would Santorum endorse Romney or Gingrich if he ever decided to drop out?

If there’s a plan in the works for Santorum to endorse Romney it would explain the focus on Gingrich.

Midwest Rhino | February 8, 2012 at 1:45 pm

Krauthammer still seems to think Gingrich is hunky dory, except feels he lacks discipline. Charles fears he would come out with some wild new policy every week. He admits Romney is uninspiring, but steady.

Romney is steadily negative and dishonest about Newt’s history with the Reagan era. Romney is steady on implementing Obamacare on the state level. Romney is steadily holding the many positions, at least steady since the latest flip flop.

Romney has proven that when he has 4:1 spending advantage, he can effectively attack conservatives and win. Everybody is still in the game, with Romney the least conservative, except for Paul on international issues. So maybe Paul gets his brokered convention, and the sleeper cell Paulbots reveal their presence.

I’ll be donating to Newt.

DINORightMarie | February 8, 2012 at 1:58 pm

I expect a blitz against Santorum to come in the near future.

Oppo research and putting together ads by the super PAC takes time, especially if you didn’t expect the polling data to prove true.

Romney is desperate. He looks it in debates, IMHO, and the defeats last night will spur him on. Hope he implodes, hoist on his own petard.

    StrangernFiction in reply to DINORightMarie. | February 8, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Attacking Santorum from the left socially or having the gall to continue attacking him from the right (Romneycare is the conservative?)is going to be very tricky for Mutt. The amount of hatred for Gingrich (who I personally prefer) has made him an easy target, and regardless, Mutt’s game is getting old.

Still more of the same I’m surprised Romney hasn’t used Brit Hume’s clip berating SC for being so stupid.

The negative ad is no surprise to us who were the recipients of the $17 million firebombing here in Florida. It is why I despise Romney about as much as Obama. If Romney is the best the Republicans have to offer and if the Republican establishment is supporting such a despicable man, then I am “outta here”.

In spite of Gabriel Malor’s claims, when the choice is between two evils, I do not have to pick one.

    StrangernFiction in reply to RickCaird. | February 8, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    and if the Republican establishment is supporting such a despicable man

    Up until now the establishment has been able to hide behind the we don’t like Gingrich meme to an extent (hey, they’re not in the tank for Romney, they just think Gingrich has too much baggage and is too unstable to get elected). However, that meme will incur some serious damage if they go after Santorum. And they may have to now, if indeed Mutt is there man.

Windy City Commentary | February 8, 2012 at 2:11 pm

Step 1 for Romney is to end Newt’s candidacy. That way when he commences carpet bombing Santorum, Rick’s voters will have nowhere to go but to Romney, or Ron Paul. If Romney starts bombing Santorum now, he risks Santorum voters going to Newt, Santorum dropping out, and Newt crushing Romney in a head to head battle.

I put this comment on another post, but I feel like I need to say it again. I really like a lot about Rick Santorum, BUT he is being short-sighted.

Santorum’s emphasis on managing social issues misses the mark and an opportunity. This emphasis will not appeal to social liberals who otherwise are upset enough about the economic situation in this country to overlook their ideological differences with conservatives on social issues, and vote for fiscal responsibility. Santorum doesn’t offer them that opportunity. Reducing the debt and size of the government must come first.

    Astroman in reply to janitor. | February 8, 2012 at 3:55 pm

    Santorum hasn’t made this campaign about social issues. He has been focusing on economics and Obamacare.

    It is all the libertarians and social liberals in the Republican party that obsess over Santorum’s social conservatism.

    But whatever. Last I checked, being for traditional marriage was an electoral winner – which is why even Obama still pretends to support traditional marriage.

      wodiej in reply to Astroman. | February 8, 2012 at 6:39 pm

      They have done surveys and voters are overwhelming (75%) concerned first and foremost w the economy. To think it is about social values is not rational.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to janitor. | February 8, 2012 at 7:24 pm

    Actually, in all the speeches I’ve heard, Santorum concentrates on reviving and protecting America’s small business and manufacturing base, jobs, strategies for economic recovery, energy and tax and environmental regulation reform.

    Then he talks about entitlement reform, job training, and the family.

This is an easy one.

Gingrich skipped CO, MO, and MI because he had no chance there, for various reasons. Instead he went on to Ohio, where a news clip was shot of him addressing an audience saying he was ahead there, “by a little bit,” in one unnamed poll. Romney put this ad out there more preemptively, than anything else.

Rather than being ‘scared’ of Gingrich, Romney is not taking anything for granted, in a primary that has gone in almost every direction possible.

ARG Poll: Newt Gingrich ahead in Oklahoma

A new poll of Sooner State Republicans released Wednesday shows Newt Gingrich leading the GOP presidential field in Oklahoma, just weeks before the March 6 Super Tuesday primaries:

“Thirty-four percent of likely Republican primary voters said they would back the former House speaker, while 31% said they would vote for Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, according to the American Research Group survey.

Rick Santorum, who pulled an upset Tuesday night with his three-state victory, came in [third] with 16% and Texas Rep. Ron Paul took fourth place with 10%.


As for tea party support, Gingrich took a wide lead over his opponents. The poll shows Gingrich with a 46%-26% advantage over Romney among those who support the conservative grassroots movement, while Santorum followed behind with 15% and Paul at 7%.

The Gingrich campaign’s strategy is to aggressively focus on the Southern states and the battleground state of Ohio.”

“Santorum, on the other hand, shouldn’t get too cocky about his victories. There was no grassroots surge propelling him to victory, in fact turnout for him was just as lackluster as it was for the Romney victories. Compared to 2008, turnout in Minnesota was down 24%, turnout in Colorado was down 7% and turnout in Missouri was down a whopping 57% thanks to the primary becoming non-binding. He won by taking votes from Romney and from Newt, not from actually exciting the base and getting them to show up on caucus night. Also, just to put things into perspective, if you add up the turnout of both the Minnesota and Colorado caucuses, it was slightly less than the turnout in Iowa, which has less than one third the population of those two states. Put another way, only 1% of the population in those states turned out to make their preferences known, a very paltry turnout percentage. Santorum has yet to prove that he has any sort of mass appeal and whatever appeal he does have will be tested over the next few weeks as the Romney camp vilifies him for everything they can find in their opposition research of him.”

    retire05 in reply to NewtCerto. | February 8, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    While you try to diminish Santorum’s wins last night, you fail to acknowledge that although there seemed to be little enthusiasm for voters to go the the polls/caucuses, there was even less enthusiasm for Romney and Gingrich once they got there.

    You also try to equate voter turnout to population. Yes, there is no denying that voter turn out in Missouri was less than in 2008, but the number of registered voters is also down, by 68,000, from 2008 to 2010. There was a spike in registered voters in Missouri in 2008, but that spike manifested itself into votes for Obama, not McCain.

    And at the end of the day, it’s vote count that matters, not levels of enthusiasm.

I don’t care how many times Santorum goes to church or what the bible belt thinks, there are lots more states to go and Gingrich is the one w the big, bold ideas that can get this country back on track economically and do it quickly. He also has the credentials to prove it. Santorum just doesn’t have the resume and Romney is a liberal.

    retire05 in reply to wodiej. | February 8, 2012 at 8:09 pm

    Whoa there, hoss. Before you drag out your pom-poms to root for Gingrich, remember, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. I think all the remaining GOP candidates are equally unacceptable.

    And while you may be “sure” that if Gingrich had been in the Missouri primary Santorum would have gotten half the votes, that is a pure hypothetical that you have no basis for. The flip side of that coin could be that NONE of the current four excite Missourians enough to make them want to vote. Also, YOU may not care what the Bible Belt thinks, but no candidate can win without it. And maybe, just maybe, your attitude is part of the problem. For way too long, people have cared what the failing states of the northeast think. It’s time to care what the Heartland and the South think since they are the ones propping up the rest of the nation.