Image 01 Image 03

Romney has trouble distinguishing “frontrunner” from “weak frontrunner”

Romney has trouble distinguishing “frontrunner” from “weak frontrunner”

Mitt Romney is a weak frontrunner, anyone who thinks otherwise is not being realistic.

But he is the frontrunner.

Yet Romney seems not to be able to distinguish the two. And that is part of the reason why he is a “weak” frontrunner.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Once again, why are we picking the candidate that can win the blue states in the primaries? Most of them will swing dem in the general. Pick a candidate that shores up the base and work to win all the Red states. Why do we keep doing this to ourselves, macain, dole… this makes no sense

I don’t think the distinction matters to Mitt. He’s been running since when, 2006? His low numbers are not a name recognition issue. Republicans know him, and aren’t excited. He was stuck at or under 25% for all of last year, and every time an alternative cropped up they immediately bolted past Romney.

What kind of plan will get you the nomination with support so tepid? Well, you hope the opposition splits its vote, and if someone does break out you carpet bomb them. Eventually, you’ll limp over the finish line with the nomination. Sad to say, it seems to be working (although I doubt anyone in the Romney camp thought for an instant the question would still be undecided at this point).

The problem with this plan (or one problem at least) is that limping over the finish line may get you the nomination, but it won’t win the general election. Mitt won’t be able to outspend Obama. He can’t distinguish himself on Global Warming, Healthcare, guns, reducing government spending or other key Republican issues. Basically, he’s counting on Obama being so unpopular that even a lawn gnome could win. The question is, can Romney beat a lawn gnome? I have my doubts.

Hell, Romney can’t distinguish the difference between left and right, so why would he catch on to anything that Newt has to say?

He is double the second placeholder, and has more delegates than all the other candidates combined. Yeah, we’re the ones being unrealistic.

You’re confusing strong with having already won.

NC Mountain Girl | March 12, 2012 at 4:36 pm

My personal favorite is the argument now up at PJ Media that Romney will close to so called gender gap because of the great appeal of his wife, Ann. The author seems immune to irony as she cites Teresa Heinz Kerry as an example of how a spouse can hurt a candidacy. Ann Romney did her husband no favor with her “I don’t consider myself rich” comment. While Ann Romney was trying to make the valid point that other things matter more than money, they way she did it was as tone deaf as her husband.

    Karl Rogue in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | March 12, 2012 at 5:13 pm

    They don’t call it the stupid party for nothing.

    9thDistrictNeighbor in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | March 12, 2012 at 6:44 pm

    I find her creepy. The two times I have heard her, she is the opening act for some Romney speech after a primary (when I can’t get to the remote quickly enough). She seems to be charged with reciting every person in state “X” that has supported the campaign during the previous five days. I find Mittens creepy, too, so this isn’t trying to bust on her.

    It’s like saying that women liked Dewey because of his mustache, and we know how that one worked out.

Romney can’t decide which side of an issue he’s on, so I wouldn’t expect him to know about being a “weak” candidate.

He thinks RomneyCare is a good idea and even recommended it to Obama. Yet, he can’t seem to figure out why he’s a “weak” candidate.


For the guy in third place to claim that the frontrunner is weak is somewhere in the neigborhood of ironic and disgenuous. His claim ought to be discounted for the self-interest factor, but as long as Gingrich is still in the race, he can keep saying things like this and be believed.

    WoodnWorld in reply to Confutus. | March 12, 2012 at 7:04 pm

    I know I would rather be “weak” winner than a “strong” loser any day of the week. They know they can’t win. They just want to try their hardest to make sure Mitt doesn’t win. That’s not going so well though is it?

    I say let them have whatever desperate little life rafts they can find and let them cling to whatever argument they think compensates for their being so completely off the mark in the last few months. It’s not going to change anything. Certo!

The environmentalists love Romney too. One of Romney’s biggest backers is Julian Robertson who has donated 1.3 million dollars to his campaign and he is “confident Romney is lying to the public when he campaigns against climate action as the “Soros agenda,” and will “do the right thing” if elected.”–romney-both-right-a-left-say-hell-flip-back-to-the-green-side

Sigh. tell me again why Republicans are set to elect a guy who is the father of Obamacare and the darling of the environmentalists? Trust me, a guy who donates $1.3 million expects something in return for his money.

[…] in response to a post at Legal Insurrection about Governor Romney's response to the criticism that he's a "weak frontrunner." The lawn gnome […]

Romnuts seem to be obsessively obeying establishment Republican dogma (ERD) requiring they waste everyone else’s energy publicly denying the validity of the Syphilitic Camel theory in the 2012 election (SCT-’12), which, in the case of candidate Romney might make sense. According to the theory anyone else (other than Romney) running against O, including the camel itself, will be a shoo-in – but Romnuts don’t care. They believe their guy has supermagical powers, or something, that they prefer over anyone else who could actually win the presidency hands down. Strange people.

I used to wonder about Paulbots, but now it seems Romnuts live in a stranger world, yet.

    BurkeanBadger in reply to 49erDweet. | March 12, 2012 at 11:39 pm

    Hmmm, and the Newtbots are convinced that despite dozens of polls consistently showing the contrary, their beloved candidate poses a much more serious threat to Obama because he will somehow corral the President into an anachronistic style of lengthy debates where his own rhetorical brilliance will humiliate Obama, leaving the latter completely stunned, babbling incoherently; where Newt’s overall magnanimity will neutralize a slavishly biased media and convince independents that their deep seated skepticism (if not outright irritation) with Newt is all absurd, that he truly is the savior of America…nay humanity; that they will embrace the extreme honor of presenting the Presidency to him on a golden, jewel encrusted platter.


Rudy Guiliani’s opinion:

Uncle Samuel | March 12, 2012 at 6:22 pm

Live stream of Birmingham Gingrich/Santorum GOP debate beginning at 6:30pm EST:

The problem here is that there is a significant difference between delegate count and support.

Romney just does not get it.

Please, who’s not being realistic here Professor Jacobson? If any other candidate had even the *slightest* chance of eclipsing the frontrunner, I would say maybe the weak meme might have some merit. They don’t. It doesn’t.

There seems to be a bit of semantic argument going around on this issue. Romney is a weak frontrunner. I don’t think that I read any comment saying that his lead isn’t significant or that he is barely the frontrunner; it’s Romney himself who is weak. He is a terrible choice to run against Obama.

If he ends up being the nominee, and if he ends up being elected President, it will be because the economy defeats Obama. Romney cannot beat Obama. 15% of the electorate voicing their frustration against the administration that has left them stranded can (and hopefully will) beat Obama.

Mitt Romney is a weak frontrunner, anyone who thinks otherwise is not being realistic.


But to argue than any other candidate would be “strong” is also not being realistic. Romney is weak only in the sense that there are plenty of voters that would prefer someone else. And yet, each of those someone elses are even weaker in that they have not garnered the delegate count that Romney has.

As I have argued since before the first primary, back when Perry, Cain, Bachmann, and Huntsman were still in the race, all our candidates had significant flaws – and they still do. To try and plant some kind of moral victory by declaring Romney a “weak” frontrunner necessarily ignores the fact that Santorum is a “weak” chaser, and Gingrich is a “weak” also ran.

Said differently, the ire this site (and many others) has held towards Romney is misplaced. For it is not Romney that is to blame for his “weak” frontrunner position, but all those who have voted for him. In fact, that ire could be best directed at the candidate you chose to invest in, for it is he/she that has proven to be even weaker than Romney at convincing folks to support their campaign.

Just being realistic…

I will be voting for Romney in tomorrows Mississippi primary.

Its hard to get a feel for how it will go. But, suffice to say I have seen absolutely zero Romney signs over the past two weeks while its about an even split between Newt and Santorum.

Here is a new video on Newt’s website that should be of interest.

Romney sounds like an airline pilot giving an announcement, “Right now we are climbing to 32 thousand feet and we’ll be over the great plains of Nebraska for the next 2 hours. Weather in Colorado is becoming windy but spring like hot air should bring us into a nice glide towards the Denver airport.”

The captain has turned off the seatbelt sign so feel free to walk about and you know, dont hide out in the restroom too long or hehe we might have to smoke ya out, LOL. And heres a big 10-20 for those US marshalls in row 23.