Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Alabama and Mississippi Primary Results

Alabama and Mississippi Primary Results

Endgame assessment:  Big night for Rick.  Bad night for Mitt.  The Honey Badger don’t care (nsfw).

In honor of Rick Santorum’s victories, and to prove I carry no hard feelings, I present the definitive rendition of Sweet Home Alabama:

——————————————–
Alabama – % Reporting 79
Romney – 28
Gingrich- 30
Santorum – 35
Paul – 5

Mississippi – % Reporting 96
Romney – 30
Gingrich – 31
Santorum – 33
Paul – 4

———————————————–

10:45 – Fox calls Mississippi for Santorum

10:15 – Fox calls Alabama for Santorum.

Exit polls reported on CNN show Romney winning Mississippi and Santorum Alabama, but those are just exit polls.

Will report results as they come in.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

If Santorum and Newt can’t beat Romney in the deep south then this is virtually over. If they can’t win convincingly, they can’t raise money to continue.

http://www.constititionparty.com, here I come…

    Sherlock in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 7:41 pm

    I have thought for a long time that for either one of them to have a chance of winning, one of them had to leave the race to consolidate the “not Romney” vote.

      WarEagle82 in reply to Sherlock. | March 13, 2012 at 7:58 pm

      I don’t think Newt can recover at this point, even if Santorum dropped out. If Newt dropped out, it would probably help Santorum but Newt is going to have to be knocked out and carried off. I don’t think he is going to go quietly…

        Milwaukee in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 11:03 pm

        Newt is battling the media and establishment GOP. Pretty crazy that Romney paints Newt as a career politician, an insider, when the other insiders hate Newt. Santorum isn’t conservative enough to be Romney’s VP.

        Santorum is a big government, social conservative. One card played over and over against Newt is his previous marriages. Too bad. Don’t these people know anybody decent who has been divorced? Newt will make the government smaller. Santorum loves the bennies that come with big government, and Romney is stupid enough to make Obamacare work.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Newt said Romney’s strongest states were the early ones, that he will have more trouble down the road. He alluded to the notion that the RNC (Republican Not Conservative) establishment set it up that way to give Romney momentum and set him up for a win.

    That’s why Iowa was announced two weeks late to quell Santorum’s possible surge. Why the FL delegates were divied up illegally. That’s why the rules have been re-interpreted, in MI, etc.

    It seems like a political chess game to put and keep Romney on top.

      WoodnWorld in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 13, 2012 at 9:03 pm

      “Strongest states were the early ones?” And some people wonder why other people haven’t paid more attention to what Newt has had to say… Let’s look at just the remaining winner-take-all states shall we?

      Bubble Bursting in Five Easy Points:
      1. Puerto Rico on Mar. 18- 23 delegates (do Newt or Rick have the extra money/organization to fly down there?)
      2. Wisconsin, Maryland and Washington D.C. on Apr. 3- 98 delegates total (any doubts on whether he can actually pull it off in Wisconsin?)
      3. Delaware on Apr. 24- 17 delegates (no comment necessary)
      4. California and Jersey on Jun 5 (Jersey is a lock with Christie and have you SEEN the numbers in Cali lately?)- 222 delegates total
      5. Utah on Jun 26- 40 delegates (saved the strongest for last?)

      Not ONE of those contests looks good for anyone other than Romney. A little rough math tells me that is, worst case scenario for the other candidates, exactly 400 delegates Romney can count on without even including whatever he carves off in the other proportional races.

      Where was his delegate count before tonight? Uh huh. Where will it be after? Do the math. That’s right. It’s over folks.

        heimdall in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 13, 2012 at 11:32 pm

        Umm… no. Let me burst your bubble.

        Puerto Rico is proportional. Maryland, California, Wisconsin allocate delegates through winner take all by congressional district. It doesn’t matter how much you win the state by, as someone could theoretically lose the state and win all the delegates. The only WTA states are Delaware (17), DOC (16), NJ (50), and UT (40). This primary is far from over, and we may end up getting a brokered convention. Romney is not sealing the deal.

          WoodnWorld in reply to heimdall. | March 14, 2012 at 5:31 am

          This is a little game I liked to call, “Fact Checking the Fact Checkers:”

          Let’s take an incremental approach, just start with the first (incorrect?) thing you said, shall we?

          “Puerto Rico is proportional.” You wouldn’t happen to have a source/cite/link to back that up would you? I only ask because I have three that say otherwise…

          Terri in reply to heimdall. | March 14, 2012 at 7:58 am

          Even though Puerto Rico is proportional, at fifty percent of the vote it becomes winner take all.

        Tamminator in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 13, 2012 at 11:46 pm

        Why do you post here?
        Isn’t there some “I Love Romney” site that you can go to, or are you just happy being a jerk on this site?

        I would never go to a site that loves Ron Paul and spew my Newt love.

        Do you enjoy being a jerk?

          heimdall in reply to Tamminator. | March 13, 2012 at 11:52 pm

          This pisses me off more than anything with the STUPID inevitability argument. Romney may not even get enough delegates to win on the FIRST FREAKING BALLOT.

          If Romney didn’t have the boatloads of money to spend 5 to 1 or 20 to 1 air raiding his opponents, he would be just like John FREAKING Huntsman. An arrogant liberal republican that got nowhere in the nominating process.

          WoodnWorld in reply to Tamminator. | March 14, 2012 at 4:52 am

          Why do you post here Tamninator? I suspect (only) some of our reasons are the same, you have both a vested interest in the outcome of this election (and the next) and an opinion about what is going on. What separates you and I (and I don’t think I can say this any clearer, or diplomatically than I am here), is I don’t condescend to classless, profane attacks when I can’t make my argument here. What the professor links a couple of your tips and you think you can run whomever you (dis)like off? That’s bully behavior T.

          You assume this is the only site I comment on, it’s not.

          Do I enjoy being a “jerk?” If sending you (and people like you) into high orbit, exposing the fact that many of you cannot “use your words,” and, most importantly, presenting both alternative evidence and a different perspective to the cheerleading that often goes on in the primary-related comment sections, then yes, yes I thoroughly enjoy being a “jerk.”

    Uncle Samuel in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 9:00 pm

    The Not-Romneys are ahead by a large margin in both AL and MS.

      The Not-Romneys are ahead by a large margin in both AL and MS.

      That is such a silly statement.

      And to prove it, let us re-word it thusly:

      The Not-Santorums are ahead in both AL and MS.

      The Not-Gingrichs are further ahead in both AL and MS.

        WoodnWorld in reply to bains. | March 14, 2012 at 8:21 am

        Nail meets hammer. You just articulated something here that I have been tossing around in my head for weeks now. I knew there was a logical inconsistency to the “combined not-Romney” meme that I could not put my finger on; you just distilled the disconnect very neatly right there. Sincerely, well done!

      Karl Rogue in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 13, 2012 at 9:58 pm

      Conservatives beating the mandate and abortion lovers 2:1.

        WoodnWorld in reply to Karl Rogue. | March 14, 2012 at 4:57 am

        By a few points. In a region that was never supposed to be competitive in the first place.

        I will be the first person to admit a win is a win, but under the circumstances and in spite of the increased-expectations-through-exit-polling meme, Newt did Mitt a huge solid tonight.

          Terri in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 14, 2012 at 8:56 am

          A win is a win is a win, especially in the general publics eye!

          WoodnWorld in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 14, 2012 at 10:06 am

          I agree completely. Conversely, in the “public’s eyes” a loss is a loss as well. Only two candidates have proven they can win consistently and consistently win delegates, one has not.

          No one, myself included, ever “expected” Romney to win in Mississippi and Alabama but I think it’s awesome that he did as well as he did. In spite of everything, he still pulled upwards of 30% of the votes, and roughly a third of the delegates in a three-way match up.

          You see this as a catastrophic defeat, I do not. I see this as more evidence that Mitt has a broad appeal everywhere, and is not in the least dependent on playing to regional sympathies. Lord knows last night would have been worse had Newt gotten out after Super Tuesday; the Romney campaign owes Newt a massive thank-you!

conservativegram | March 13, 2012 at 7:14 pm

Apparently Drudge is already reporting. Folks on Twitter aren’t happy. Some are calling for a boycott.

ThreeputtinIL | March 13, 2012 at 7:21 pm

Is that the exit polls Fox is using?

+1 Romney in MS

Suck it down haters.

    WarEagle82 in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 7:29 pm

    It is a bit early to call either state though some people clearly can’t wait for the facts to influence the election.

    However, I will NOT be voting for Romney in any event should he somehow become the nominee. I am just simply done with the LoTE argument.

      WoodnWorld in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 7:31 pm

      I agree completely. Let’s wait until the “facts” come in…

      gary gulrud in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 7:52 pm

      I’m also a no-go for McBain. Doesn’t matter who he picks for VP. Time is up for the GOP, this turn is abysmal on the heels of Boehner’s capitulation.

        WarEagle82 in reply to gary gulrud. | March 13, 2012 at 8:02 pm

        Boehner is so busy preemptively surrendering to lefties and the GOP Senate he doesn’t have time to keep up with the election results.

        Boehner’s next appearance will on the Battleship Missouri with the Japanese government. This time the Japanese will win…

      bains in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 9:59 pm

      However, I will NOT be voting for Romney in any event should he somehow become the nominee.

      Then you are a foolish (some might even suggest petulant) voter. Ever since Bachmann (the most conservative of all our candidates) left the race, I have been resigned to voting for whomever won the nomination. Furthermore, even before our host brought out his secondary aim (I forget what Bill calls it), I knew that the real shift in balance of power – and legislative agenda – occurs in Congress. Without the House and Senate, fiscal libertarians (me), conservatives, TeaPartiers, etc can not see our legislative aims even brought to the table.

      Irrespective of who, even starting at day one of the primary process, won the nomination, their feet would have had been held to the fire; ALL would have, and still will disappoint. This is of course, is predicated on the presumption that a Republican, any Republican, would have won the General Election. (and I think any one of them, from day one, could have.)

      But, and this is the very important point that the petulant so willingly ignore, a GOP Prez can be enticed to veto statist legislation, or abandon his own misguided appeasement efforts – A Democrat will never. A GOP nominee to the Supreme Court will be more conservative than a Democrat nominee.

      While arguing against concept of the lessor of evils may seem noble in a classroom, or with comment sections of blogs, in the real world most people recognize that the lessor provides more chance of actually avoiding evil. A bullet to the head may sound virtuous in a bull session, but in reality, I would rather be tossed into a frozen tundra with at least some chance of survival.

        WoodnWorld in reply to bains. | March 14, 2012 at 8:30 am

        But, and this is the very important point that the petulant so willingly ignore, a GOP Prez can be enticed to veto statist legislation, or abandon his own misguided appeasement efforts – A Democrat will never. A GOP nominee to the Supreme Court will be more conservative than a Democrat nominee.

        I absolutely agree with this. We can threaten/corral/cajole/manipulate/manage a Republican (if we have to). A Democrat? Not so much.

        There is only one other thing I would like to add to this: Let’s assume for a moment everyone here is entirely right about Romney, that he is shapeshifter, flip flopper for political expediency, whatever, wouldn’t his willingness to please make him more “manageable,” more responsive etc. rather than less?

    Karl Rogue in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 8:02 pm

    Dream on bot

      Jaydee77 in reply to Karl Rogue. | March 13, 2012 at 8:11 pm

      Why should I dream on when I actually did the thing referenced in my earlier post? I voted for Romney. Suck it down haters.

      And to all the whiners who say they will not vote for Romney come November – YOU WILL BE THE REASON WHY OBAMA GETS FOUR MORE YEARS.

        WarEagle82 in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 8:14 pm

        No, the idiots who voted for the guy who couldn’t beat the guy who couldn’t beat Obama in 2008 will be largely responsible for the unfolding debacle in November…

          Awing1 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 8:23 pm

          I seem to remember a good president we had some time ago. The election cycle before he became president, he lost his party’s nomination to a man who went on to lose to Jimmy Carter in the general election. What was that guys name again? Man, my memory must be really bad …

          WarEagle82 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 8:25 pm

          Your memory is selective. Reagan was a very good, two-term governor with a very consistent conservative record to run on. The major problem is that Romney can’t claim these simple facts.

          Want to offer any more lame, ill-conceived comparisons between Reagan and Romney?

          Awing1 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 8:34 pm

          How is that relevant to the point I’m making? If you’re going to criticize Romney for losing to McCain, you have to also criticize Reagan for losing to Ford. You can make general attacks all you want on Romney, that doesn’t save the logical deficiencies of your original attack.

          WarEagle82 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 9:30 pm

          If you are so blinded that you cannot see the problems with your analogy then so be it. The elitist GOP establishment backed Ford over Reagan. The elitist GOP establish is backing Romney over anyone and everyone else.

          Romney is a failed governor and a failed candidate and yet the GOP establishment is backing him. But if you want to support him, you go right ahead. Obama has been planning to run against Romney for 4 years. I am sure Romney is Obama’s choice too…

          Awing1 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 9:38 pm

          Sorry I called you out for making a ridiculous argument. You mad bro?

          WarEagle82 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 9:53 pm

          Right, you compared Romney to Reagan and I made the ridiculous argument…

          Like I said, take your head out of that dark place.

          Awing1 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 10:02 pm

          You made the argument that someone who lost a primary to a candidate that then went on to lose the general is dumb. I provided an example of when that wasn’t the case, and you took that as me arguing that Romney is the second coming of Reagan. You apparently don’t understand how analogies work. Good luck with life.

          Awing1 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 10:04 pm

          *voting for someone that

          WarEagle82 in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 10:06 pm

          If you were worth 140 characters, I’d tweet a response…

          IrateNate in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 10:22 pm

          you guys done yet? anyone who does not support whomever is foisted upon us is, by default, simply supporting Obama.

          You do realize that three Supreme Court justices will be turning 80 during the next president’s term. I can’t imagine you would not wish to do everything in your power to prevent Obama from making these lifetime appointments.

          There is little doubt that Romney will get the nod. And I doubt he can win, because of the lack of any coordinated support. This is why Democrats win elections – at least those idiots stick together. We have people who say they just won’t vote, if their guy doesn’t win; we have people who say they’ll just write-in somebody else.

          Regardless of your “strong dislike” towards this potato-headed RINO, you should do all you can to see that your vote goes towards removing King Barack, not helping him hold his throne.

          Not voting is a waste of a vote, and a write-in vote is a waste of time. We (and I mean America) might not win in November, but we don’t even stand a chance unless we join forces.

        Browndog in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 8:24 pm

        “Where ya gonna go?”

        …says the plantation owner to the slaves..

        …says Obama to the Congressional Black caucus

        ….says the GOP establishment to the non-Romney’s

        shut up and eat your peas..

          WoodnWorld in reply to Browndog. | March 13, 2012 at 8:35 pm

          Forget peas, for some reason I am really craving grits and biscuits right now…

          Not to thrilled with the “Where you going to go?” argument. If the establishment thinks they can treat the conservative base and Tea party the way the Democrat’s have been treating Blacks, they have another thing coming.

          The Whig party came and went, the same thing can happen to the GOP. If they keep it up, its going to make the party base that much more determined to make sure the GOP is irrelevant in this current generation.

          bains in reply to Browndog. | March 13, 2012 at 10:29 pm

          @McCoy2k

          Not to thrilled with the “Where you going to go?” argument. If the establishment thinks they can treat the conservative base and Tea party the way the Democrat’s have been treating Blacks, they have another thing coming.

          Part of the problem is that the conservative base is expecting instantaneous change; yet they ignore all the incremental changes the Tea Party has already effected. Squishy Repubs have already been removed from local, state, and federal congresses – and many more are threatened. Orin Hatch is starting to sound less like Ted Kennedy’s long lost brother and more like Mike Lee. Dick Lugar may loose his seat.

          Today I read a comment that I think accurately reflects where the Tea Party is today. They went and protested – they have been there and done that (which the MSM seems to place, when lefties do it, so much import). They have moved on to arenas where their voice has so much more tangible effect. Anecdotally, for the past two congressional cycles, I have maneuvered myself as a delegate for the regional nominating conference. As long as we are intruding into the normal political processes, we will be heard. And over time, we will affect positive change – over time, folks like Boehner and McConnell will not be as sanguine in their business as usual behaviors.

          And Presidents such as Bush 1 and 2, or Romney, or Santorum, or Gingrich, will have to answer to their base, irrespective of the flaws all have.

        WoodnWorld in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 8:33 pm

        Jaydee,

        WarEagle82 | March 13, 2012 at 7:29 pm
        However, I will NOT be voting for Romney in any event should he somehow become the nominee. I am just simply done with the LoTE argument.

        “This message has been brought to you by the Democratic National Committee.”

        gary gulrud | March 13, 2012 at 7:52 pm
        I’m also a no-go for McBain. Doesn’t matter who he picks for VP.

        ^—- “I’m Barack Obama and I approve these messages.”

        While I totally agree with you people who hate Romney more than they hate Obama will have no room to complain IF Barack wins, every indicator out there is showing that they are part of an extreme minority of the conservative population. Bottom line: let them pout. They will either come around, or they won’t!

          WarEagle82 in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 13, 2012 at 9:34 pm

          OMG! Romney IS the GOP Obama! Romney doesn’t believe anything Romney says. But somehow, you do?

          Take your head out of that dark place and think for one bloody second! I hate Romney and Obama equally because both will destroy this nation.

          You know that Romney is lying his butt off, pretending to be a conservative when he has done most of what Obama has done to the US. But somehow, Mitt Romney, the progressive, independent, anti-Reagan is gonna save us from another progressive?

          Whatever you are taking is quite potent. I hope you don’t have a random test in the next 30 days…

          WoodnWorld in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 13, 2012 at 9:44 pm

          Cute. Let’s hope they don’t test for judgment, clarity or foresight because after tonight I am almost guaranteed to pop positive. Don’t worry about the Newtbots, I think they are all good…

        Karl Rogue in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 10:01 pm

        Rombot mandate and abortion lovers coming in 3rd in both states. Suck it down, bot

    Terri in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 11:04 pm

    Sorry, I just can’t myself. LMAO ROFL I was always told, don’t count your chickens before they hatch!

    heimdall in reply to Jaydee77. | March 13, 2012 at 11:40 pm

    “Jaydee77 | March 13, 2012 at 7:23 pm

    +1 Romney in MS

    Suck it down haters.”

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAAA HAAA LOL ROTFLMAO!!!!111!!!one!!

    Suck it Romneybots!

[…] we will witness the Alabama and Mississippi primary results roll in. Whatever happens in Alabama and Mississippi, (Romney win/wins in the South, Gingrich comes back a […]

“Conservative” S.E. Cupp

unplugged

Short video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k72kdU7Tpc0

    S.E. was just full of derogatory comments about Newt, lumping him in with Bill Clinton. But she somehow forgot that factual support is required for her argument that Newt was a terrible person and could not be trusted because he is smart.

    The only thing nice that I can say is that she is a pretty lady to see but not to hear.

Saw Matt Drudge put that on that banner at around 7:30 CST. He then woke up and realized this thing is nowhere near over.

So far (at 9:50 est) it is looking good for Santorum. This could change but it is holding at least for now. Looks like Rick is getting biscuits and the big piece of chicken!

If Gingrich loses both tonight, will the Newt-backers here admit he should drop out? Or do you think he should stay in (and, if so, why)? A genuine question….

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Will. | March 13, 2012 at 10:04 pm

    He should stay in and says he is planning to do so.
    Together, Newt and Rick increase the NON-Romney vote and increase the conservative message going out.
    Then they can go to the convention with delegates enough to make the RINOs allow a conservative candidate….

    (that’s my best guess of the plan). I’m betting Sarah Palin figures in this somehow…

      Scorpio51 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 14, 2012 at 8:14 am

      I think you are right Uncle Samuel. Sarah Palin does figure into the equasion.

      Otherwise, why would Obama make a video targeting her? That is who they are afraid of. Also, Obama has been pushing back against Newt’s drilling issue. Sec. Chu has now said they won’t raise the gas prices.

    WarEagle82 in reply to Will. | March 13, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    Since Paul and Romney are going to both lose, I’ll let you know what I think about about Newt dropping out right after Romney does…

    strawberrygirl in reply to Will. | March 13, 2012 at 10:35 pm

    Rick is not polling well in pa and lost his last statewide race by 18-19 points. Gotta win at home where they know you! If newt drops out his pac money will support Romney and rick wont have Gingrich to buffer him. Politijim’s santorum vetting has been fascinating. While I’m glad Romney didn’t win, I’m not thrilled about santorum

At risk of offending Santorum supporters, in full disclosure Newt is my candidate and I feel the best to take on Obama.

But if Santorum ends up being the nominee, I might have to recourse to the democratic battle-cry of “socially conservative America is destroying the country”, but its because of their single issue voting pattern, not their beliefs.

    WarEagle82 in reply to JDmyrm. | March 13, 2012 at 10:12 pm

    Lord knows, Newt is no “social conservative.”

    But “socially conservative America” is the only thing saving America.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 10:21 pm

      Newt has become a social conservative – in fact he has always been pro-life.
      He had a real change of heart, repented and become a convinced Christian. Long story – I’ve known him for many years, and know about his family and why he ran away from home to marry so young.

        WarEagle82 in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 13, 2012 at 10:30 pm

        Romney is lying to us and he knows we know he is lying. Newt probably believes most of the stuff he is telling us today but he won’t believe it next week.

        Romney has been on both sides of every issue most of his life. Newt has been on either side of the issue when it was convenient for Newt.

        I don’t know if Newt is a social conservative or not right now, and I doubt he will be in November 2012. I just don’t trust the guy. I wish I did, but I don’t…

          Terri in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 10:43 pm

          Why don’t you trust Newt?

          Why do you think Santorum is so trustworthy because he CLAIMS to be a good Christian man?

          Hope Change in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 11:25 pm

          Hi WarEagle82 — I appreciate what you are writing tonight. I feel the same way as you do on many topics, for example and in particular, Ronald Reagan.

          I agree with so much of what you say that I just can’t fathom that we disagree about Newt.

          You have your own point of view. I know that and we each have to make our own decision. And I really, really, really appreciate how you care about our country.

          WarEagle82, part of the reason I comment is to have a feeling of shared community as an American, with others who I know share our love of our country and our freedoms. And people like Reagan.

          And you’re one of the people I share that with. I think we have a lot of goals in common. thanks for your defense of Reagan tonight.

        DINORightMarie in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 13, 2012 at 11:52 pm

        I wish that more people had your insight. Thanks for sharing that personal note. I pray Newt will prevail. 🙂

      JDmyrm in reply to WarEagle82. | March 13, 2012 at 11:00 pm

      I have to disagree, they will elect someone who won’t win in the general, has nothing to his name except he’s socially conservative and he sat on an intel committee really? Then Obama will be re-elected and what has socially conservative america gained? Nothing but the proud thumping on their chests of how good a fight they made.

      Heck, I’m not sure _I_ could support someone who would force a raped woman to carry a child. But luckily for you, national security is a higher priority than social issues (unlike most of santo’s support – speculating here) so I could still vote him over Obama.

      Not advocating the democratic line, just advocating for ‘economy, judges, nat’l defense’. Notice, abortion is not on my list. And no, Santo’s plan does not fill me with any confidence in two of the above three.

As the combined conservative vote is beating the Romney vote, Romney needs to drop out and let Gingrich and Santorum have at it. Let’s see which of the two can unite the party. Romney’s had six years and at least $200 million to do it and failed. I’ve heard comparatively few Gingrich or Santorum supporters say they wouldn’t support the other candidate — nothing next to those who vow never to vote for Romney.

    Terri in reply to raven. | March 13, 2012 at 10:15 pm

    Well, I for one do not know which I would back if Newt were to drop out. I am still confused on Santorum and Romney. 🙁

      WarEagle82 in reply to Terri. | March 13, 2012 at 10:22 pm

      Well, they both have GREAT hair. But you can’t decide between a conservative and a leftist? Seriously?

      Hope Change in reply to Terri. | March 13, 2012 at 11:37 pm

      Hi Terri – Newt’s not dropping out.

      Newt said so again at the Alabama GOP Forum yesterday. Newt said that he is not convinced either Romney or Santorum could beat Obama, and that he staying in this race.

      Of course, the MSM and the Establishment want you to think it can’t be done. They are sooooo wanting someone Obama can beat! Of course! But IMO, if NEwt is the nominee, NEwt will win this fall.

      Did you have a chance to read the email that Randy Evans, of the Gingrich campaign, wrote, that went out today? I put a copy of it in the tip line here at LI. Read it. I really don’t think you need to worry about your second choice. I think you’re going to get your first choice.

      And Terri, also, btw, thanks for all the great things you put in the tip line. I appreciate the information.

        Scorpio51 in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 8:50 am

        Thanks HopeChange for posting the email in the Tip Line. I am encouraged that Newt will fight on. I noticed that he looks very tired. I hope he can get some rest in between personal appearances.

    Milwaukee in reply to raven. | March 13, 2012 at 11:17 pm

    If Romney were President, he might foist the likes of another Souter on the Supreme Court. Remember him? Put forward by Sununu, who is a big Romney fan. “Moderate” Republicans would support any nominee Romney put forward. Those same Senators might oppose the vast majority of Obama nominees. Thus, having Obama as President might save us from a bad Supreme Court nominee.

    Since RomneyCare is the model for 0bamaCare, how is Romney going to run against 0bamaCare? Say, oh, that was only for our one state? No, that isn’t going to fly in the general election.

    Santorum is a big government guy who can’t carry his own state. He doesn’t know how to shrink the Federal Government. The government needs to be shrunk. Besides, Santorum is a “get-along-to-go-along” guy. Where is the character on that? He wouldn’t stand up to superiors he disagreed with, in the name of party unity. That smacks of a lack of character to me.

    Didn’t FDR say that “sometimes worse is better”? Like right after the stock market crashed and before he, with his inane economic restrictions, plunged the US into the Great Depression? The countries of Europe were out of that depression long before we were, because of his stupid economic policies. Or was it some other socialist-progressive-liberal-Marxist-Democrat who said “sometimes worse is better”?

Are the people of Mississippi THAT confused?

I understand those idiots in Tuscaloosa voting for Romney but I always thought Mississippi had a bit more sense…

Raquel Pinkbullet | March 13, 2012 at 10:24 pm

Obama = Romney. Either one of them winning means the same thing, more tax, more spend, more gun restrictions, amnesty for illegals, more power for the EPA, far left SCOTUS judges.

ABR 2012.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Raquel Pinkbullet. | March 13, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    ObamaRomneycare….socialized medicine that will ruin the economy, raise taxes, raise cost of medicine, raise premiums, lower quality of care.

    So who benefits – the people who live high-risk lifestyles…whose care costs soooo much….Obama and friends.

    JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to Raquel Pinkbullet. | March 14, 2012 at 1:44 am

    I’m not a Mitt supporter.
    However, (and it might be just talk) Mitt is the one Repub candidate speaking out against amnesty.
    Newt is for it. Perry was for it. I don’t know Ron Paul or Rick Santorum’s position but they are not vocal in terms of pushing back against amnesty.

Raquel Pinkbullet | March 13, 2012 at 10:25 pm

Actually, even worse for Mittens is placing 3rd (!) in both states. We’re on the verge of that happening as well.

Of course the Mittbots will whine and sputter about “delegates” but the fact remains: Romney is not even in the top 2 in the deep south, despite being proclaimed “Son of the South” by rabid Mittbot Drudge earlier this afternoon…LMAO

Our best bet for a conservative nominee at this point is a brokered convention; and that scenario looks more likely after tonight.

Anybody but Romney.

    WoodnWorld in reply to Raquel Pinkbullet. | March 14, 2012 at 8:51 am

    I don’t think “likely” here means what you think it means. Tonight made a brokered convention even LESS likely. In the normal order of things, there is no way Romney should have been as competitive in just those two states as he was last night. IF Newt had stepped out Mitt would have taken a thrashing tonight. The former didn’t, the latter thanks him for it.

    So what was the rough final score after Romney playing an
    “away” week, the week that was supposed to be the lynchpin to Gingrich and/or the not-Romney’s strategy?

    Romney ~53 delegates (not including Hawaii and American Samoa), Rick ~63 and Newt at ~23.

    What’s more, please believe me when I say the next couple weeks are not going to be anywhere as favorable as this last one was…

Someone please wake me up when this is all over…

[…] would ask ladies to consider this about the current GOP line-up for President: The likely nominee, Mitt Romney, was quite befuddled when ABC debate host George Stephanopoulos asked about states banning […]

Santorum?!?! My prediction is that by the end of this primary, the momentum will all be in Newt’s direction because of some big thing. I can’t give up.

    ncmont in reply to ncmont. | March 13, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    on Newt

      Terri in reply to ncmont. | March 13, 2012 at 10:57 pm

      I am with you! Right now, I just can’t stomach having to vote for Santorum or Romney! However, whoever gets the nod at the end I will vote for.

        ncmont in reply to Terri. | March 13, 2012 at 11:19 pm

        I’ve been praying so hard for Newt. One thing that really gets me is taht Santorum is the kind of moralizer that really turns people off to Christianity. Like when he says, “things aren’t going to be okay.” No-one wants to hear that from their leaders.

        Newt on the other hand, with his story about redemption and seeking God for forgiveness is the thing that draws people to Christ. I know this because it happened in my own life. I’m convinced that the peoploe voting for Santorum, are for the large part, the types of Christians who despise others for not living up to their holier-than-thou standards.

        We’ll see, this isn’t over by a long shot.

          Terri in reply to ncmont. | March 14, 2012 at 7:34 am

          I have been thinking about your comment since last night….

          I wanted to shed alittle light on the Evangelical Christian way of thinking or at least my own sisters prospective. To give a brief history… I married my highschool boyfriend… we had a child…. and we got a divorce. I remarried and have been married to the same wonderful man for 23 years and counting…. MY own sister tells me that I will never go to heaven because of that. I am committing a sin because I remarried (I am now committing adultery) and that I am hell bound. She also says my husband is hell bound because he is living in fornication since I had been married before, even though he hadn’t and in Gods eyes I am still married (to the first one) Now, if my first husband was to die, then all is good for both of us. I am sorry, but I do not agree with this way of thinking. I think God is a fair and just God and would not want me nor my child to live in a situation that was dangerous to both of us. I am sorry if I have offended anyone that was not the point, I just wanted to clarify the way some EC seem to see things and with Santorum being all holier than though, that could explain why he gets the majority of those votes, although, God Himself doesn’t propose to judge a man until he is dead. So why should they?

          WoodnWorld in reply to ncmont. | March 14, 2012 at 8:54 am

          Terri, we may not see eye to eye on some things but I want you to know I deeply respect a great deal of what you post.

huskers-for-palin | March 13, 2012 at 10:48 pm

Hey Mittbots…the “Spockian eyebrow” is now raised.

Raquel Pinkbullet | March 13, 2012 at 10:52 pm

They’ve called it for Santorum in Mississippi.

Rabid Mittbot Drudge hardest hit!

“Son of South” Mittens 3rd in both!!!

So the South rises again—on behalf of a candidate who lost his Senate seat by almost 20 points.

I’ll say this much for the Republican Party: they won’t break your heart the same way twice. Give them credit for originality.

Sour grapes, you say? Not all that much. I’m too inured to this kind of thing for sour grapes.

Santorum needs to work on his messaging and speeches, but that should be an easy fix. I could support him.

Serious question for those of us who are Gingrich supporters or leaning Gingrich.

Is it time for him to call it quits? Seeing Newt take on Obama and the media would be a dream, but I can’t see a path to victory over BOTH Santorum and Romney at this point.

    conservativegram in reply to Since1776. | March 13, 2012 at 11:29 pm

    “Serious question for those of us who are Gingrich supporters or leaning Gingrich. Is it time for him to call it quits?”
    H-E-double hockey sticks NO!
    Just watch this http://electad.com/videos/newt-gingrich-participates-in-alabama-presidential-forum-march-12-2012/
    Santorum needs to work on more than his messaging and speeches. I would appreciate it if he would just start telling the truth. Interesting–this morning I posted a link to a June 26, 2006 article on Santorum and now the page doesn’t come up and I can’t even get a cached page. Needless to say, it wasn’t a very flattering article. I have many more like it though.

    Hope Change in reply to Since1776. | March 13, 2012 at 11:54 pm

    Serious question for those who support General Patton: Isn’t it time to call it quits?

    With all due respect, Since1776, have you seen Newt’s speech at the Alabama GOP Forum?

    Have you seen Newt’s short video explaining to Obama what a drilling rig looks like?

    Newt is in this. Newt is staying in, and IMO, Newt will be the nominee. And if Newt is the nominee, Newt will win this fall. Thank God. Because then we’re going to reform Washington, D.C.

    Here’s a serious question for those Santorum supporters: Have you read the PolitiJim posts linked above? That would give a person some serious things to seriously think about for a serious minute.

    Santorum’s “ideas” are what he reads at night on Newt.org.

    Here’s what a Santorum presidency would look like, a Twilight Zone episode. A guy gets transported into the past and thinks he’s going to be rich because he knows all the inventions of the 20th century,BUT HE DOESN’T KNOW HOW THEY WORK! Start at 39:00
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-l5m0eH-J8 “OF LATE I THINK OF CLIFFORDVILLE”

    “Mr. Santorum Feathersmith says,’It’s self-starting motor. I’ve just told you what it is, now go build it!'”

Raquel Pinkbullet | March 13, 2012 at 11:03 pm

Newt giving inspiring speech….

Meanwhile in the Beltway: A lot of kitchen sinks are missing from Establishment Rinos.

How can this be, this should not be happening! All day long and for the past week, the mainstream media was telling me that it would be close but Romney would win! Didn’t the voters in Mississippi and Alabama get the message? But the exit polls!

This does show that money can’t buy everything

    huskers-for-palin in reply to Neo. | March 13, 2012 at 11:13 pm

    This does show that money can’t buy everything.

    —————-

    Except lots of attack ads.

I’m really disappointed.

Santorum cannot beat Obama, and neither can Romney. Both men seem to have a whiney, vicious side that doesn’t bode well for the election.

Obama will hammer Romney over being part of the 1%, Bain, and have his surrogates paint him as part of the “cult” that is Mormonism (not my opinion).

Santorum will be painted as a big spending Republican a la George Bush, a CRAZED Catholic who would deny birth control to women and whose religion would have women “barefoot and pregnant.”

If the only choice that’s left to us, by the time Texas has our primary on May 29, is Santorum or Romney, the vote is going to be really suppressed- a bad sign for the November election.

    quiznilo in reply to AmandaFitz. | March 13, 2012 at 11:31 pm

    I disagree, I don’t believe Santorum’s social conservatism disqualifies him or is a losing strategy. On economic issues, we could run a turnip against Obama and have an excellent chance of winning.

    In Ricky’s defense, fwiw, you do not go against your president when you’re in the Senate when he is of the same party. Representatives are given a bit more latitude to show independence, but not much. In a way, Santorum’s senate record is a testament to big-government-loving Bush.

    I do agree that he is not the strong fiscal conservative that we desperately need at the moment. Obama is looking to distract us from economic issues. He wants to run on social issues.

    Fear of what the mainstream media would say about our candidate should not influence our decision. The media is out to destroy whoever we select. All of them are eminently electable compared to what we have now.

      quiznilo in reply to quiznilo. | March 13, 2012 at 11:33 pm

      My last sentence means that Obama is a very weak candidate at the moment, not at all what the media is attempting to portray him as.

      wodiej in reply to quiznilo. | March 14, 2012 at 7:51 am

      thin resume. Gingrich is much better. Santorum does not have good verbal skills either which is imperative.

    Hope Change in reply to AmandaFitz. | March 14, 2012 at 12:09 am

    Hi AmandaFitz – as Conservativegram linked, watch the speech at the Alabama Forum. Just watch this http://electad.com/videos/newt-gingrich-participates-in-alabama-presidential-forum-march-12-2012/

    Newt says, straight up, that he is in this race all the way because he does not believe either Santorum or Romney can beat Obama.

    Then, AmandaFitz, more to reassure you and make you feel better, I hope!

    Here is the email that went out today from the NEwt campaign.

    I left a copy of this at the tip line here at LI. I WROTE: If you like Newt, take heart. Remember, in 1994, virtually nobody thought it was possible for the Republicans to take the House. If we’re going to do all the work of electing someone, is HAS to be someone who KNOWS HOW TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND IS TOUGH ENOUGH TO STICK WITH IT. It’s not enough to beat Obama. We have to decisively change Washington, D.C.

    A letter from the Newt Gingrich campaign:


    [letter starts]
    An Historical Nomination Process Underway
by Randy Evans, Senior Advisor and Martin Baker, National Political Dir.

    Notwithstanding the conventional wisdom that dominates the news media, Newt Gingrich is well positioned to win the GOP nomination and here’s why.

    Today’s contests in Alabama, American Samoa, Hawaii, and Mississippi are big, but it’s still early. Louisiana, on March 24th, will actually be “halftime” in the race for the GOP nomination.

    Heading into Louisiana, states with delegates totaling 1,141 will have decided – just short of the 1,144 needed for the nomination. It will be Louisiana that moves the process past the halfway mark with 34 states accounting for 1,187 delegates having been voted.

    Yet by halftime, the process will be far from over. Just look at the math.

    One half of the 1,144 delegates needed for the nomination is 572. To date, according to the RNC and factoring in results from Kansas and Wyoming on Saturday, Mitt Romney has only 350 bound delegates.

    Between, now and Louisiana, there are only 170 total bound delegates available – and that count includes Missouri whose delegates, while bound, will actually be elected at conventions later this spring.

    Even if Romney could get 100% of the available bound delegates before Louisiana (which he cannot), he would still be well short of 572.

    Instead, with the proportional allocations that apply, Mitt Romney’s more likely 57 additional delegates would only put him at 407 total delegates (35.6%) – well short of the 572 needed to be halfway to the magic number.

    With a steady 35% of delegates and no change in sight, the fact that Romney advisers have undoubtedly told him is that he can no longer force his nomination. Mathematically, the numbers are just not there.

    Instead, with 4 candidates remaining, the GOP nomination now moves into unchartered waters with history in the making.

    The sequencing and pace of the second half favors Newt. When this process started, Newt’s team had two goals: block an early Romney nomination; and plan for a sequenced and paced second half.

    Newt stopped Romney in South Carolina and subsequently weathered a multi-million dollar barrage of attacks in Florida, surviving to win in Georgia on Super Tuesday.
    Starting with Louisiana, there is the second half and the sequence is important.

    After Louisiana on March 24th, there are primaries on April 3rd in the District of Columbia (winner take all without Santorum on the ballot); Maryland (a favorable state); and Wisconsin (Callista Gingrich’s home state).

    Then, the process slows – permitting all of the candidates to work the states, not just the one with money.

    On April 24th, more than four weeks after Louisiana, Senator Santorum faces a ‘must win’ in Pennsylvania (whose delegates remain unbound regardless of outcome) with other big contests that day in Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island and delegate rich New York (95).

    Two weeks later, on May 8th, there are more southern primaries in North Carolina and West Virginia along with Indiana. On May 15, there are primaries in Nebraska and Oregon.

    Then, the delegate rich 3-week dash that could decide the nomination begins with more southern primaries in Arkansas and Kentucky on May 22nd. They lead into Texas (155 delegates) on May 29th.

    After 2 weeks of southern primaries, the process then turns on June 5th to California (172 delegates), New Jersey (50), New Mexico and South Dakota. California and New Jersey alone represent almost 20% of the delegates needed for the nomination.

    In total, the states in this final 3 week stretch have 509 total delegates – or almost half of what is needed for the nomination. The final primary (Utah) is not for three weeks afterwards on June 26.

    So here is the bottom-line reality: this nomination will not be decided until the fourth quarter – and that is not until June. It also means that the candidate who closes strongest in this race is going to win.

    It is a long way until June 26th. Republicans indeed get to be a part of history, not more of the same.

    So buckle up. This race is not going to be won or lost over backroom deals or endless and mind-numbing discussions in the media over delegate counts.

    This race is going to be decided by a big debate – a big choice – among GOP primary voters about the future of the Republican Party; what it stands for, and which candidate has the most compelling vision and most credibility to carry forward a conservative governing agenda.

    That is the debate Newt is going to win, and with it, the nomination and the election. [end letter]

    So you see, AmandaFitz, all is actually going very well. Not perfectly, I agree. I would love to see Newt’s number higher. Of course! But this is actually pretty good.

    And btw, to receive emails like that one, you can sign up at newt.org and newtsnetwork.com if you like.

      retire05 in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 12:17 am

      A brokered convention is the only [very slim] chance Newt Gingrich has. But he made a lot of enemies along the way, many of them Texas conservatives.

        Terri in reply to retire05. | March 14, 2012 at 6:55 am

        Enemies? Oh Yeah, Newt has a few….

        George H. W. Bush
        Barbara Bush
        Tom Ridge
        Chris Christie
        Kelly Ayotte
        Nikki Haley
        Tim Pawlenty
        Haley Barbour
        Jon Huntsman
        Mark Kirk
        John McCain
        Tom Coburn
        Joe Scarborough
        Susan Molinari
        Ann Coulter
        Charles Krauthammer
        Bill Kristol
        David Brooks
        Peggy Noonan
        George Will
        Peter King
        Glenn Beck
        Brit Hume
        Jonah Goldberg
        Roy Blunt
        Scott Brown
        Orrin Hatch
        Lisa Murkowski
        Rob Portman
        John Thune
        Bob McDonnell
        Dan Quayle
        Bob Dole
        Norm Coleman
        John Danforth
        Elizabeth Dole
        Judd Gregg
        John Sununu
        Gordon Smith
        Jim Talent
        David Frum
        John Sununu Jr
        Dennis Hastert
        Rick Lazio
        James Baker
        Robert Bork
        John Bolton
        Dick Armey

        Newt would shake it up on BOTH sides, and that is EXACTLY what we need.

          wodiej in reply to Terri. | March 14, 2012 at 7:49 am

          I would consider GW being my enemy a good thing not bad.

          Terri in reply to Terri. | March 14, 2012 at 8:46 am

          wodiej I agree, they still blame Newt for his “Read my lips No new taxes” comment and when Newt wouldn’t go along with his raising taxes and Bush lost the election they blamed Newt.

    retire05 in reply to AmandaFitz. | March 14, 2012 at 12:13 am

    I don’t agree with you about Texas. Every Republican [conservative] I know is hyped, if not about the candidates themselves, about defeating Obama. Texans took a barf bag into the voting booth with them last time, but they still voted for McCain.

    This primary is probably now going to a brokered convention since none of the candidates will have enough delegats to win by then. Texas, with its 155 delegates, is proportional, just as is Louisiana. Romney will take California, but so what, in the general the Loonafornians will cast their vote for Obama.

      heimdall in reply to retire05. | March 14, 2012 at 12:25 am

      California is not WTA like Florida, it is like South Carolina and is divided up by congressional district. So Romney will not take all of California, unfortunately for him…

        WoodnWorld in reply to heimdall. | March 14, 2012 at 8:59 am

        Sincerely, take a look at any interactive graphic of where Mitt Romney’s fundraising is actually coming from, take a look at all of California and ask yourself how much of Cali you think he is going to “lose”…

I’m having trouble understanding how a guy who lost his last Senate election by such a huge margin thinks he has something to offer. So he is a devout Catholic, (isn’t Newt?), and a stable marriage. When has Santorum contributed to shrinking an oppressive government? Never. Where are Santorums plans for lessening the cost of gas? He is too often caught off guard, and while he might say something important, it takes him several tries to get it straight.

You heard it hear first: Romney is planning on getting the Republican nomination, and then leaving to be 0bama’s new Vice-President. 0bama figures only Romney can get 0bamaCare to work. Sadly for us, he will.

Get your new glasses now, and teeth tended too. Soon those will be luxuries beyond your budget. (Record your glasses prescription, so you can buy news ones on the internet.)

    Terri in reply to Milwaukee. | March 13, 2012 at 11:39 pm

    Ya know, a few years ago I would have said that is madness. However, right now…. I wouldn’t doubt it.

    Milwaukee in reply to Milwaukee. | March 14, 2012 at 12:26 am

    Whoops, wrong cause. Romney doesn’t get the Repub nomination, he loses it at a brokered convention. Then he bolts the party to be 0bama’s new VP, with an eye at being prez the following 8 years.

    Where can we see daylight between Romney and 0bama? Anywhere? How can Romney possibly campaign against 0bamaCare? He can’t.

    Don’t forget, you heard it here first. Much to my dismay.

    Scorpio51 in reply to Milwaukee. | March 14, 2012 at 9:04 am

    Milwaukee said: “You heard it hear first: Romney is planning on getting the Republican nomination, and then leaving to be 0bama’s new Vice-President. 0bama figures only Romney can get 0bamaCare to work. Sadly for us, he will.”

    This wouldn’t surprise me one bit. Mitt is a Democrat and would fit right in with Obama.

BurkeanBadger | March 13, 2012 at 11:35 pm

Alas, tonight’s results are disappointing and a constant reminder of just how stubborn and ornery a lot of conservatives and tea partiers are. One can see it in the exit polls: A large plurality of voters acknowledged they think Romney is the most likely to beat Obama. But, many of them still refused to vote for him. There’s a compliment and a criticism here.

The compliment is that unlike our friends in the other party, Republicans are fiercely independent minded and won’t tow the line for their party’s leadership. That’s a strong character point even if it is maddeningly frustrating in a high stakes Presidential election.

The criticism is that too many of them are letting their justified anger and revulsion with Washington, the party establishment, the media, etc. get the best of them. I still don’t think most Santorum voters have truly envisioned a Santorum nomination. It remains too absurd to fathom (indeed one poll has 80% of Republicans believing Romney will be the nominee). Furthermore, a brokered convention would be an utter catastrophe. Yet even if they realize both of these fairly obvious points, they still feel the need to express all their pent up rage in the form of a primary vote. The are better, more constructive methods. But they simply cannot understand this.

Here’s the bottom line: Gingrich is finished. It’s time for him to go and if he won’t, it’s time for Sheldon Adelson to close his wallet. Gingrich now knows he won’t win the nomination (hence his suggestion of a “discussion” 60 days before the convention). Staying in the race at this point serves no purpose other than to antagonize Romney (which I think is Newt’s main goal) and to try to posture for influence at the convention. Fair enough, but if he stays in, he should be honest that the above are his only goals. If he doesn’t, he will make a complete fool of himself by staying in.

Regardless of whether Gingrich stays in, Romney can now safely ignore him. It’s time to focus his massive firepower on Mr. Sweater Vest. Carpet bomb into the stone age. It’s become quite clear that many tea partiers will never be won over by Romney under any circumstances. Given that, the only way to win is ugly. He has the money and the material (Santorum has said and done many bizarre things in his political career). If Mitt went “nuclear” on Newt, I want him to go “hydrogen bomb” on little Ricky.

To those who accuse me of advocating forcing Romney on Republican voters, I say: You’re right. The anti-Romney resistance was productive and healthy for a vibrant democratic discourse…to a point. But that’s over now. Playtime is over. The GOP voters have indulged in enough cake and candy. It’s time for them to swallow a nice big Brussels sprout named Mitt…even if we have to hold their nose and jam it down their throat.

    Raquel Pinkbullet in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:00 am

    Anyway, here’s what I see. Mittens is a candidate who “fails to inspire.” Visions of a former Paul Tsongas voter and Planned Parenthood supporter won’t exactly blast them out of bed in the morning. The confederacy of weasels that is the GOP establishment couldn’t even find a moderate with an engaging personality to run. They settled on a robotic bore. It’s the old Dole/McCain/Bush 41 thing again: Without energizing one’s base, it doesn’t matter if you can get a few extra percentage points from “swing” voters (even assuming it’s true that those extra few points are achievable, which is probably not true anyway, because if you aren’t inspirational, you aren’t inspirational, period, meaning you don’t inspire the squishy middle either).
    the key to victory won’t be whether Republicans can win in Democratic territory but whether Obama can, once again, win in Republican territory. In that vein, the election will come down to whether the Republican nominee can hold three mildly GOP-leaning states: Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. If the Republican nominee wins these (and if other states go according to form), then Obama would have to sweep New Hampshire, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania to win, which he won’t do. Mittens would provide the GOP with the greatest electoral advantages, the in the Northeast and on the West Coast. But none of the states in those regions, except New Hampshire, would be up for grabs in a close race. Instead, Romney would merely succeed in helping the party lose the likes of California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, by more respectable margins.
    Romney is a corny businessman of narrow learning and culture wouldn’t be so deadly if he harbored conservative convictions. But he doesn’t. He has been taught how to play a semi-conservative Republican on TV, but his deepest instincts remain liberal. Hence, his dogged pride in Romneycare, legislation that Barack Obama himself would have fathered had he governed Mass.
    Almost two years after energy from the Tea Party swept Republicans back into congressional power, a politician who embodies the antithesis of that spirit stands on the verge of victory. This is regress, not progress, and the GOP will pay a severe price for the bargain of “electability” that it entails.

    A party that chooses power over principle will lose both.

      BurkeanBadger in reply to Raquel Pinkbullet. | March 14, 2012 at 12:07 am

      Yeah, yeah. Eat your Brussels Sprout!!

        Raquel Pinkbullet in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:12 am

        And you wonder why everyone hates Mittbots?

        WoodnWorld in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 9:06 am

        Props. Your longer post just above this is my vote for comment of the night.

        I would do well to take a page from your book too Burkean. I think you are either more “civilized” more “polished” or just a nicer person than I am but, in any case, I find myself liking your approach more than my own more than I am comfortable admitting.

    heimdall in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:15 am

    Wow, I have never read a more infuriating post. So we now elect people based on what the ruling class overlords state we need? And your advocating that it be shoved down our throats? You and your other Mittbot brainwashed idiots are NO DIFFERENT FROM OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS. The peasants have had their fun, but now it is time to go back to the fields. Who are you to say anything on what the republican party does, seriously?

    If you want to have something or someone shoved down your throat, you already have a party. Go join the democrats you autocratic loving trash.

    retire05 in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:26 am

    The race is not only starting to get bloody. And just what do you think when Santorum/Gingrich point out how Romney went against the Massachusetts Supreme Court to issue marriage licenses to gay couples under a little known/little used MA law that says the governor could issue marriage licenses once a year?

    The MASC ordered the decision back to the state legislature, and Romney usurpted that decision.

    With Romney as POTUS, at least some of Obama’s henchmen would be secure in their jobs (like Douglas Foy and John Holdren) since they worked for Romney first.

    Hope Change in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:27 am

    The ill-named BurkeanBadger said: “It’s time for them to swallow a nice big Brussels sprout named Mitt…even if we have to hold their nose and jam it down their throat.”

    Oh. Nice. Some violent imagery. Hmm. Like OWS.

    Hey, ill-named BurkeanBadger, who says YOU get to force your fellow citizens to choose YOUR candidate? Based on what? Money is the only thing he has that could suggest that kind of power.

    “Burkean” how? You claim to admire Burke? You might want to read Reflections on the Revolution in France.

    As an American, I imagine you like getting to choose for yourself. Me, too. So get this straight. Not you, not Obama, not the com-intern, not Romney, not all the moneyed interests on Wall Street, not the MSM gets to tell us what do do.

    And the preferences of your fellow American citizens are delusion? Your contemptuous attitude makes your credibility vanish. It’s always the Romney supporters who think “We’ll force you” amounts to political discourse.

      WoodnWorld in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 9:12 am

      Ah yes, quivering righteous indignation that someone (other than you or one of your own, of course) would have the temerity to use rhetorical license and/or muscular imagery to make their point. Pot meets kettle.

    Scorpio51 in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 9:11 am

    I think Newt’s “60 day” discussion would be very interesting and you never know what might come out in that discussion.

    Maybe Rick and Mitt should be very afraid for that to happen.

“The criticism is that too many of them are letting their justified anger and revulsion with Washington, the party establishment, the media, etc. get the best of them.”

go away mittbot

    BurkeanBadger in reply to newrouter. | March 13, 2012 at 11:50 pm

    Yep, I’m a Mittbot. Not ashamed to say it.

      Raquel Pinkbullet in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:13 am

      Moby along now Mittbot….

      Hope Change in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 12:33 am

      I do have a question for the NEwt supporters.

      Would a genuine supporter of Romney come here and be so intentionally offensive?

      I think “BurkeanBadger” is actually a supporter of Obama.

      Why would a Romney supporter make his alleged preferred candidate look like such a creep?

      And then happily say he’s a “Romneybot”?

      Let’s watch more closely. Would a true Romney supporter do this?

        Raquel Pinkbullet in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 12:46 am

        Most Mittbots are just like that, this is what Mittens own adviser said:

        Another Romney adviser was more derisive of the Anybody But Mitt Republicans.

        “They like preachers,” the adviser said of the tea party demographic. “If you take them to a tent meeting they’ll get whipped into a frenzy. That’s how people like Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich get women to fall into bed with them.”
        http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AC7D3B54-3A1A-4401-9CBA-87DAB16C3C15

        Called us Conservative women whores. So no surprise hearing that vitriol from Mittbots.

        WoodnWorld in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 9:17 am

        Oh my. Hope engages in a little pensive navel-gazing and deduces that Burkean is not actually a Rombot, but an Obamabot in disguise. To borrow from a recent post, no, you really can’t make this stuff up.

Gingrich Advisers Highlight Half Time Strategy, Path to the Nomination

http://www.newt.org/news/baker-evans-strategy-memo/

    BurkeanBadger in reply to NewtCerto. | March 14, 2012 at 12:12 am

    Pure delusion. I am sure this is just spin, that Gingrich doesn’t actually believe it. But still…

    I have a feeling that when Mitt takes the stage in Tampa, right in between saying “I” and “accept your nomination”, Newt.org will issue a press release insisting that it is still not over!

    Time to eat your Brussels sprout!

      Scorpio51 in reply to BurkeanBadger. | March 14, 2012 at 9:16 am

      No brussel sprouts for me. I will never compromise myself again like I did in 2008 in having to vote for McCain.

      McCain screwed all the conservatives by caving to Obama and Mitt is no different.

      Mitt said again in Missouri yesterday…”Obama is a nice man, but just in over his head.” Yeah, that’s really a winning strategy Mitt. I would expect my nominee to talk a little tougher than that.

I don’t think Romney really expected to win. It would have been nice, but Huckabee beat him four years ago, with the same kind of appeal to religious conservatives that Santorum is making. A strong anti-Mormon prejudice can’t be discounted in the Bible Belt, and a Northeast-style moderate Republican would have a struggle in any case. He’ll collect his share of the delegates and if he wins Hawaii and American Samoa, probably still come out ahead tomorrow morning.

    Raquel Pinkbullet in reply to Confutus. | March 14, 2012 at 12:21 am

    Stop with this “Mormon prejudice bs.” People in the South didn’t vote for Mittens because he has ZERO core convictions and is a Mass liberal.

      OK, so that explains why “Not-Romney” but how are we explaining away the fact that Santorum (whose small government credentials are pretty weak) is still hanging around? If the south was supposed to be Newt’s strategy he blew it.
      I’m not a Romney fan by any stretch of the imagination but Santorum seems like a Social Conservative/Neo-Con mixed bag at best and in an economic election that’s the last thing we need. Additionally he has a tendancy to go off on tangents that are a mixture of socratic thinking and a bit of sophism, the down side to this is B.O. will lasso him into making bad soundbytes in debates. Regardless of how well founded his critique of secularism and moral realtivism (more accuarately: emotivism) is it doesn’t play well with voters.
      So that leaves us with Paul (whose problems are too deep to digress into here) and Newt, whose got baggage everywhere. (FWIW, my hope was that Newt could deflect that baggage rendering less damaging. Additionally since Obama is good at smoke and mirrors the election was already going to be focused on the Republican candidate anyway, so a canidate with baggage isn’t that much of a drag in this cycle, however Newt seems less and less likely as time goes on.)

      I didn’t say and don’t mean to suggest that anti-Mormon prejudice is the only or even the most important factor in Romney’s third place showing. But when I read of southerners reporting their neighbors as saying “I’ll never vote for a Mormon”, then I suspect that it’s real and influences the vote.

      WoodnWorld in reply to Raquel Pinkbullet. | March 14, 2012 at 9:26 am

      Raquel Pinkbullet | March 14, 2012 at 12:21 am
      Stop with this “Mormon prejudice bs.” People in the South didn’t vote for Mittens because he has ZERO core convictions and is a Mass liberal.

      Uh huh. All of those self-identified evangelical Christians flocked out to vote against Mitt Romney because of their deeply-held political convictions. That whole “Mormonism is a cult” thing that is so often thrown around in “political” discussions has nothing to do with how or why they voted. Seems legit.

    Scorpio51 in reply to Confutus. | March 14, 2012 at 9:20 am

    Stop with the Mormon prejudice. You don’t know that for a fact. Conservatives recognize someone with no core convictions and willing to say anything just to get the vote.

      WoodnWorld in reply to Scorpio51. | March 14, 2012 at 9:33 am

      I agree. Stop with the anti-Mormon prejudice.

      The only thing preventing it from being “proven” now is that so many of the commenters here, and so many voters in America have learned that openly admitting their bigotry in public and outside their normal circles just isn’t cool and, as such, they have learned to cloak their thinly-veiled hatred for Mormons in purely “political” language.

theduchessofkitty | March 14, 2012 at 12:25 am

Two words, to keep in mind until August: “brokered convention.”

It doesn’t seem too far-fetched at this point…

And, Professor – the Honey Badger. YEsssssss.

I’m a great fan of the writing of Laurens van der Post, of Dutch ancestry, 5th generation South Africa.

Van der Post writes of the love of his beloved Kalahari Bushman people for the Honey Badger.

The Honey Badger, among its other legendary virtues, is fearless, intelligent, calm, CHEERFUL (well, why not?), does not attack peaceful animals, is powerfully built, has the fear and respect of the other animals, including the hyenas, and has long powerful claws to protect itself and tear open sealed and hidden recesses.

The Honey Badger often works closely with a Honey Bird, who will spot a cache of bees and come and sing to the Honey Badger to come, come, the honey is here.

Then, the honey badger digs a hole in the anthill or tree, or wherever the bees are with the honey.

And then, the Honey Badger backs up to the anthill and releases bodily fumes into the anthill.

And the bees faint. And then the Honey Badger takes some honey and shares it with the Honey Bird. He has also been known to share the honey with the humans, such as the Bushman people, who hold the Honey Badger in reverent respect for his noble persona and his ability to bring some sweetness to a hard and difficult world.

So yeah, the Honey Badger had a pretty good night. Certainly, good enough.

And lastly, LOVE, LOVE LOVE The Leningrad Cowboys. Oh please. Soooo great. I came late to the “Sweet Home Alabama” party and the Leningrad Cowboys already existed when I began to listen to the song.

Talk about international love! It’s hard to feel duly hopeless about life and the future of the human race when such cool things are happening.

Thanks.

    Terri in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 7:12 am

    Ummmmmmm being from the South. There is TRULY only ONE Sweet Home Alabama and that is by Lynyrd Skynyrd
    http://youtu.be/ye5BuYf8q4o hehehehehhe

    WoodnWorld in reply to Hope Change. | March 14, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Is there anything you cannot, or will not compare Newt Gingrich to? At a certain point, with so much of this weakly-disguised propaganda, my eyes start to glaze over, my pulse slows, and my brain starts to shut down.

    Hope, you are either being paid very well, or you genuinely believe this crap. Being an open shill for Newt is one thing, buying some of the mess you make here is another altogether.

      MerryCarol in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 14, 2012 at 2:27 pm

      Woody – My eyes were glazing over as well, with the birds singing and the bees busily buzzing and… zzz

      Then, I got to the really exciting part where Hope raises her voice and reverently recites to the congregation, “Then, the [Newt] backs up to the anthill and releases bodily fumes into the anthill”…

      Ah, thank you SO MUCH for waking me up with that wonderfully hilarious visual!

      Hope, I must say, when it comes to sincerity and piety, no one can hold a candle to you. (Well, at least according to you — a point which you have made repeatedly and has not been lost among all of us who read your posts.)

      Note to Repliers: Don’t jump to conclusions or ask me to express my opinion about where Newt stands in my book at this stage of the game. And don’t ask whether or not I support Ricky over Mittens, or vice versa, at this stage of the game. (You may bully and curse at me Tammy-nator-style — that’s always amusing.)

      Regardless, the Professor has deemed that my opinions are trolling.

      https://legalinsurrection.com/2012/02/off-topic/

      With Good-Humored Tea-Partying Love,
      MerryCarol

      Hope Change in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 14, 2012 at 5:35 pm

      Sooooo interesting. Disparagement and condescension. So attractive! So appealing!

      Hello, hello, to all the (purported) Romney supporters:

      and yet, HERE you are. You, who seem to bring only criticism. You, who apparently disdain your fellow citizens. You, who say Romney is so good and so sure to win. HERE you are.

      Newt is like a man setting up the forms for creating a road through a blocked mountain pass. Newt’s team is like surveyors. Explorers. Engineers. Specialists. They’re establishing the plan: how we will move the rocks and get through.

      Newt is helping The People to envision the dramatically better life we can have if we make this new road. This really new road.

      AMERICAN ENERGY. Oil royalties that could pay off the national debt in a generation. Reasonable regulations.

      We will require the federal government to be accountable. To be smaller. To reduce spending. To be transparent. And COMMON SENSE will be the first requirement before anyone can be hired to work for a federal agency.

      We The People have the energy to move the rocks. The power is in THE PEOPLE. As the rewards of building this road become clear, we The People will create that road in this election. We will do the impossible and that will make us mighty.

      And then we will reform Washington, D.C. and get our liberties again. And with liberty comes prosperity..

      The MSM and the Romney supporters and the Republican Establishment and the Left (but I repeat myself) stand around repeating that it can’t be done, all the while watching Newt and Newt’s team make steady progress.

      And, of course, you’re part of the nay-sayer chorus, and THAT’S what YOU’RE doing HERE.

      But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends: There are always nay-sayers. Even Copernicus had nay-sayers IIRC.

      Did people think the Americans would win the Revolutionary War? Look at the odds they were up against. George Washington had to struggle, and also many courageous Americans. PAUL REVERE’S RIDE 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1El-guPeEo

      Then there was the WWII. It was by no means clear to the Allies that they would win WWII. Americans who came before us fought and some died, with no guarantee that they would prevail in the end. They had courage in the face of uncertainty.

      Their sacrifices, and the sacrifices of others through the centuries, for FREEDOM, gave us the remarkable prosperous and free life we have had so far.

      http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/reagan-d-day.htm

      RONALD REAGAN: “These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war.”

      And then the nightmarish Cold War years. Reagan was criticized, but said his plan was, “We win, they lose.” Reagan was, repeatedly, told it couldn’t be done, but he kept going forward anyway. “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtYdjbpBk6A

      And now it’s our turn. And WE ARE KEEPING OUR FREEDOMS. And that is why I support Newt.

      http://electad.com/topics/newt-gingrich-speeches/

        WoodnWorld in reply to Hope Change. | March 15, 2012 at 11:45 am

        Yeah, here we are. Scrolling through 3/4 of the post… I got to “Newt is like” (an Arctic polar bear explorer, or something) and I tuned out, again.

        You act as though anything even closely resembling respect has ever been extended to Romney supporters here. What’s amazing is that you whine about it too.

        WoodnWorld in reply to Hope Change. | March 15, 2012 at 12:06 pm

        That is, you whine when some of us use your own methods against you.

        Speaking of which, since you like posting campaign propaganda up verbatim, I thought you might get a kick out of this. It’s just one of the many, many emails I get from all of the campaigns:

        Did you hear that Mitt Romney won last night?

        Probably not.

        While Rick Santorum was taking his victory lap after Alabama and Mississippi, Mitt was winning the nomination battle by gaining at least 41 delegates to Santorum’s 35 for the day.

        Yet again, yesterday’s results increased Mitt’s delegate lead while his opponents moved closer to their date of mathematical elimination. Mitt now has twice the number of delegates and over one million more votes than Rick Santorum in the GOP primary contests to date.

        Here’s some delegate math that is hard to swallow for Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich:

        -Newt Gingrich is 373 delegates behind Mitt Romney. And Rick Santorum is 255 delegates behind Mitt Romney. That means both Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich will have to start netting an impossible number of delegates to catch up and overtake Mitt’s lead.

        -Of the remaining delegates, Rick Santorum must win 69% to reach 1,144 delegates. Those prospects look nearly impossible when you consider he has only won 26% of the delegates awarded to date.

        -Mitt has received more votes and more delegates in the Southern states than any other candidate. And that’s without including Virginia, where both Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich failed to qualify for the ballot.

        Over the last few weeks, Mitt has expanded his delegate lead, pushing him closer to the nomination.

        Mitt remains focused on the most pressing issue of this election — defeating Barack Obama and restoring America’s promise.

        Thanks for standing with Mitt.

        Rich Beeson
        Political Director

        There was also little graphic in there showing how since Super Tuesday, Mitt has won 80 delegates, Rick won 70 and Republican Jesus, General Patton/George Washington/Ronald Reagan reincarnate has only won, I kid you not, 24. I think it is telling that after Mississippi and Alabama, Romney’s campaign only found it necessary to give Newt a passing mention.

        Newt may be giving speeches, and he may have a million plans, but increasingly it looks as though no one is listening.

Ron Paul <5% praise the lord.

When Rand Paul becomes the new Scott Brown of the Romney campaign, only then will we See What Condition My Condition Is In.
Gutterball
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz2ET5K6zY0

NC Mountain Girl | March 14, 2012 at 10:10 am

Romney won the caucuses in Hawaii. His supporters aren’t being quick to mention that with 5.06 percent of the population, Hawaii is almost as Mormon as Arizona and ranks ahead of Montana, Oregon, Colorado and Washington State.

Isn’t it marvelous that the MSM,Drudge, etc had Romney winning both AL and MS and suddenly the voters stopped them in their wishful thinking tracks! Voters (1), MSM (0).

[…] All Respect, Newt: It’s Time Posted on March 14, 2012 7:57 am by Bill Quick » Alabama and Mississippi Primary Results – Le·gal In·sur·rec&middo… 10:45 – Fox calls Mississippi for […]

Subject me to Leningrad Cowboys again, Professor, and I will have no choice but to take you off the Good Lawyer list.
When the day for the Modified Shakespearean Option comes, YOU WILL NOT BE PROTECTED!

Henry Hawkins | March 14, 2012 at 3:03 pm

I’ m огорченный, но ковбои Ленинград всасывают.

    Hope Change in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 14, 2012 at 9:39 pm

    Hi Henry Hawkins — I did google translate and this is what I got:

    огорченный, но ковбои Ленинград всасывают = sorry, but Leningrad Cowboys suck

    hahahahahaha! I love it. Вы можете быть правильной.

    But when I imagine what the Leningrad Cowboys looked like to those who ran the Kremlin!

    I realize they’re from Finland. But Russia would LOVE to rule Finland. And they don’t.

    The worst nightmare of the totalitarian state–the yearning for freedom breaking loose with some US-American Southern Rock & Velvet-Underground-meets-Project-Runway fashion sensibility anti-authoritarianism. Ha!

    It’s difficult to feel the requisite pre-socialist hopelessness about life when there’s all this insane creativity. So even if the Leningrad Cowboys suck, они являются удивительными.

The most important thing is to stop Obama. The second most important thing is to stop Romney.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend