Image 01 Image 03

Super Tuesday the day after

Super Tuesday the day after

Because of a number of distractions, I couldn’t devote much time to yesterday’s primaries yesterday, but here’s my net assessment, followed by some links:

Mitt Romney is the luckiest politician in recent memory.  He barely eked out a victory in Ohio and thereby dominates the headlines, while losing almost every other key electoral state, Georgia, Tennessee and Oklahoma.   Add in his victories in Massachusetts (uncontested in reality) and Virginia (only Ron Paul on the ballot) and some smaller caucuses, and Romney retains the mantle of inevitability despite having a weak showing.  Rick Santorum actually had a good night, but no one noticed, in part because he went from clear frontrunner in Ohio to loser in Ohio.  Newt didn’t have a particularly good night anywhere except for Georgia, but still got plenty of prime air time on cable last night.  Add it all together, and I’m not sure anything changed.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Santo asking conservatives to pressure Newt to drop out? Conservatives?? Who does he think are ENDORSING NEWT?? From the Palins to Reagan’s entire team? The stuff this guy puts out is laughable at times.

    Say_What in reply to JDmyrm. | March 7, 2012 at 12:36 pm

    Yea, that is funny. Maybe I should call Rick’s HQ and urge him to get out for a real conservative:)

    Newt 2012 – Nothing’s changed my support for Newt

      AmandaFitz in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 4:17 pm

      All of my adult children (31, 30, & 28) are VERY LIBERAL. They went to top colleges and have multiple professional degrees and we disagree over everything about politics.

      However, just now my twenty-eight year old son, who has applied for jobs with lots of liberal organizations since he left law school, told me that he LIKED WHAT NEWT GINGRICH HAD TO SAY LAST NIGHT. It was the first time he’s listened to Newt and he said he’d vote for him if he won.

      He and his sisters voted for Obama in 2008. They all have said that they wouldn’t vote for Santorum under any circumstances, and they think Romney is a phony and they wouldn’t vote for him either. All of them do like what Ron Paul has to say, but wouldn’t vote for him.

      The notion that ANY of my LIBERAL kids would vote for Gingrich over Obama is telling- I never imagined it.

      I don’t think that Romney can beat Obama, but GINGRICH CAN.

        Say_What in reply to AmandaFitz. | March 7, 2012 at 5:22 pm

        Thanks for sharing that, it made my day. I have often thought that if only people would take an hour of their time and listen to Newt, especially young people, they might begin to understand that he is on their side and the most sincere person in the race.

        I put a link to Newt addressing young people at ORU on Feb 20th, you might enjoy it. What struck me about it was how these young people related to him so well, I was genuinely touched by it. He didn’t talk down to them and treated them with respect. It was a pleasure to watch – he must have been a great professor!

Two notes, Prof…

Sarah is reputed to have voted Newt…!!!!

Kucinech makes a might short measuring stick…

    Say_What in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    Palin needs to get out there and campaign for Newt.

      WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 4:37 pm

      If Palin does and Newt continues to lose, it will severely diminish her brand. Everyone has only so much capital to expend at any given moment, and she has been pretty savvy about knowing when to conserve and when to expend that reserve of relatively finite goodwill.

        Say_What in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 5:33 pm

        You do know Woodn that Romney’s unfavorable is at 49% with 23% very unfavorable at Rasmussen.

        Also, Woodn you do know don’t you that Romney needs well over the 40% average he’s been getting in order to secure the nomination before the convention?

        This is going all the way Woodn, so buckle up cause it’s going to be a bumpy ride:)

          WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 5:40 pm

          If you say so. While the results may not come for some time, a result of this being the first year delegates were handed out proportionally to this degree, nothing more, the outcome is CERTO!

          By the way, what are Newt’s negatives right now and how long have they been there? Just asking…

          WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 6:08 pm

          I don’t mind fact checking this stuff for you…

          Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney may be winning the Republican presidential race, although he appears to be making himself a little less popular in the process. A plurality of voters think it would be better for the GOP if a new candidate jumped in the race, but most Republicans don’t agree.

          Here are a couple others from Scott that you seem to have missed:
          1.) Obama, Romney Run Near Even When It Comes to Major Issues
          2.) 65% Now Expect Romney To Be The Republican Nominee

          And while we are talking about negatives, how’s Newt doing with all of that?
          3.) Romney Rebounds Among Conservatives, But GOP Contenders All Stay Underwater

          More Americans hold negative than positive views of Romney by a 10-point margin, Rick Santorum by 8 points, Ron Paul by 9 points and Newt Gingrich by a whopping 33 points.


          Hope Change in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 7:43 pm

          Hi Say_What – Romney derision is not an attractive selling point.\

          The Professor notes today: Campaign Tweet from December 29 which still applies:

          “I can’t honestly think of one Mitt supporter who’s tried a support-generating tactic other than derision this primary season”.

          Say_What — like you, my support for NEWt also continues undiminished.

          NEwt will win against Obama.

          NEwt will show us how to break up the corrupt Establishment New York – Washington, C.C. corridor of crony power.

          Think “HOOSIERS.” Remember how rough it was for the Coach? brilliantly portrayed by Gene Hackman – “COACH COMES TO INDIANA BASKETBALL AND THINGS AREN’T SO EASY”- “HOOSIERS” –

          I appreciate your steadfastness, Say_What and all NEwt supporters. I’m with you.

          If the American People are going to dig our way out of this mess, we are going to have to stand together. And at times, it is going to be rough. Thank you.

          Say_What in reply to Say_What. | March 8, 2012 at 7:17 am

          I like Woodn, he always gives me the opportunity to present the facts about Mitt and the inevitable landslide that never was – then I enjoy reading his defensive replies of Mitt – if anyone defines this political banter using the word derision, they need to grow a thicker skin.

          WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 8, 2012 at 11:52 am

          On the whole, that was a pretty fair comment. I will take it. Candidly, you all do a more than fair job holding your own. I only hope that, on whatever level, I keep up where I can. I know I can be an ass but I really do read almost everything everyone says here. I don’t tend to comment in other (non primary related) threads but I promise you there is far more in them that I find myself nodding my head in agreement to than there are things that make me “log in.” Cheers Say_What.

          Say_What in reply to Say_What. | March 8, 2012 at 12:31 pm

          Got to say Woodn, you are well informed and I appreciate that about you:) Plus you “get it” about political debate. That’s a quality I admire as an old street fighter.

          See ya on the battlefield! Don’t take any prisoners, cause I sure won’t:)

          WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 8, 2012 at 12:59 pm

          Lol, fair enough!

          From one scrapper to another, two words: BRING. IT. 😀

      WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 8, 2012 at 2:57 am

      Hope Change-
      Weird. That anyone would respond to the derisive, sarcastic, condescending, irrational, hopeless and increasingly delusional attacks on Romney, and his supporters here, with the same? As far as I can see, the only Romney supporter on here who even remotely engages in giving it back to any of you, in spades no less, is myself. Almost every other Romney supporter, (“troll,” whatever) has been perfectly polite and infinitely reasonable in spite of the abuse, in spite of the vitriolic rhetoric.

      Hope, you seem to think people’s opinions about Newt will be changed by a handful of speeches that have only been viewed by a handful of people and are as disliked as they are liked. You, and others, keep telling us Romney is a loser in spite of the fact that he has cleaned up in what, 11 of the last 15 contests? (Duh, winning!) That Newt is somehow going to win against Barack Obama but he has only won 2 contests TOTAL, can’t seem to even place second (let alone actually win) outside a limited section of the South and, in spite of Romney and Obama (apparently) being twins, the Jedi “Master Craftsman” can’t even beat the former in the primary?

      You want people to vote on emotion yet too many of us decry the Democrats for having done the exact same thing with Barack in 2008. You need to appeal to people’s minds. Here are some facts: Newt has less than a quarter of what Romney has earned in delegates. Only a handful of the remaining contests are winner-take-all. None of them look good for Newt. All of them look good for Mitt. The caucus season is largely behind us, now we roll into the primary-centric portion of this race. You know as well as I do neither Newt nor Rick have the national organization to compete nationally.

      At some point emotion will have to give way to reason. At some point you will (hopefully) realize that your primary goal is not to help your candidate win, but rather to make sure you stop the one candidate the majority of Republicans actually support and actually believe can beat Obama in the Fall.

      You want some of us to make a “support generating” appeal to you? We can’t do that. To paraphrase an alleged wise commenter here, only you can do that for yourself.

        Say_What in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 8, 2012 at 7:57 am

        Woodn – The writing is on the wall, this is going to the convention. For instance, Mitt has abandoned campaigning in Kansas, basically conceding it to Rick. Newt is doing well in his targeted southern states. The Conservatives know they don’t have to win all the delegates, just enough to stop Mitt before the convention. Rumor has it that a couple of RINOs are warming up in the bullpen. Daniels is the name most frequently mentioned because they believe he will be the most acceptable sub to appeal to conservatives. Don’t sound like even the RINOs have a lot of confidence left in Mitt’s success. Is seems to me Mitt’s people are the only ones who don’t like this Primary Process so far and want it to end.

          WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 8, 2012 at 12:00 pm

          Well, you are either going to be proved right or wrong. I would be willing to wage a gentleman’s bet with you (assuming, you are a male, please forgive me if you are not) that while the contest will go on for awhile longer, it will not make it to the convention.

          A couple other points:
          -I am pretty sure I read somewhere that Newt is not going to campaign in Kansas either.
          -I know the Hoosier State well and word on the street is when Daniels said he wasn’t going to run because of family issues, he really meant it.
          -The South will not be enough to stop Mitt. Not with as many proportional contests as there are, and all of the remaining winner-take-all states so heavily favoring Romney.
          -Even if the South were enough to stop Mitt, there is a very real possibility that the nomination would go to him anyways. I would not be so quick to wish for that outcome.

Also, Obama Loses in Demo Primary!

It’s only 15 counties, but that’s a start.

I absolutely agree that nothing changed and, like Napoleon, will take “luck” any day of the week.

Romney is still on pace to win this thing, sooner or later makes no matter, and by all appearances, no one else has a chance in hell of doing better or doing anything about it.

    1. Indeed, before promoting an officer to high rank, Napoleon supposedly asked whether the candidate had luck.

    Unfortunately, Barack Obama is also lucky.

    2. In view of Santorum’s attitude toward libertarians, my conscience is clear that in the general election:

    I’ll keep my fingers crossed and vote for Newt.

    I’ll hold my nose or wear a gas mask, and vote for Mitt.

    I won’t vote for Santorum.

      TomB in reply to gs. | March 7, 2012 at 1:09 pm

      I wouldn’t vote for Santorum either. In my opinion, long term, he would be worse for the small government cause than Obama would.

      I voted for Romney in the VA primary. I would like Newt if he didn’t say crazy things 10% of the time. If there didn’t seem to be so much animosity between them, I would want Newt as VP and Romney as Pres.

    Say_What in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    You do know Woodn that over 50% of Mitt’s delegates are not pledged, don’t you? You do know Woodn, that prior to Super Tuesday many RINOs on the internet were saying he is a sure thing, but now they are saying they are not so sure, don’t you? You do know Woodn, don’t you, that “landslide” Mitt only won Ohio by 1%?

    I just don’t want you to be the last to know that Mitt isn’t inevitable:)

      WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 6:19 pm

      Is that right? Huh. You clearly don’t know what you are talking about. I do know that. Either you aren’t reading any of the articles and results I have posted or your reading comprehension skills have severely suffered in the last day or so. I understand last night was hard on you, and I also understand you really want to salvage some kind of silver lining out of all of this but there just isn’t a whole lot of good news I can offer you.

      Opinions are one thing, blatant lies are another. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are getting what we call “bad gouge” in the Marine Corps. Take a moment, entertain for just a moment that you might be wrong, might be grasping at straws, look over some of the links I have posted, and then come back with something better than this crap.

I’m really feeling very conflicted about this. As much as I like Newt, it’s just getting very frustrating to see Romney peel off votes. I believe Romney needs to be defeated any way possible.

    Rosalie in reply to Scorpio51. | March 7, 2012 at 11:17 am

    If I’m not mistaken, Newt asked Santorum to get out shortly after Iowa. Many more primaries later, I think it looks very much like a two-man race, as many are saying.

      JohnInFlorida in reply to Rosalie. | March 7, 2012 at 11:30 am

      That’s true Rosalie, but the two may be ANY of the 3 … so it’ll be AWHILE before it’s just 2

    Say_What in reply to Scorpio51. | March 7, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    Right now Mitt has 178 “pledged” delegates, the others have a combined total of 179. The pledged delegates are the only firm ones. This will probably go to the convention. No one is going to get out at this point because delegates will give them leverage at the convention.

    This needs to play out all the way, that’s the thing that the trolls here don’t want to happen so they are going to try and demoralize you.

      Is that before or after the penalties are assessed for those states who held unapproved primaries or caucuses prior to Super Tuesday? (Florida, Michigan, etc…)

      WoodnWorld in reply to Say_What. | March 7, 2012 at 4:54 pm

      Right now Mitt has 178 “pledged” delegates, the others have a combined total of 179. The pledged delegates are the only firm ones.

      Where on Earth did you get those numbers? I don’t know what sources you are looking at but my sources say something different.

      Put another way, the stats you cited a dead wrong. CNN has him at 409 pledged, RCP at ~404 and the WSJ at ~415. It is nowhere near a close fight. Newt is about a quarter of where Romney is right now. I am truly sorry if this is demoralizing but wishing for a brokered convention just became extremely unlikely. Just sayin…

    Hope Change in reply to Scorpio51. | March 7, 2012 at 10:37 pm

    Hi Scorpio51 – You express considerable anguish. I am genuinely sympathetic. This primary, and the general election, are crossroads in American history.

    America has socialist fever and a Constitutional correction is the only cure. A thriving economy is the only cure. A rebalancing of the balance of power among the three CO-EQUAL branches of government is the only cure.

    I think what may be causing some of the anguish is, we don’t know if the American People are going to step up and take control and FIX THIS. As we can if we will– no one can stop us if we unite — but will we do it?

    Or will we let our beloved country devolve into petty tyranny, “rewarding their friends and punishing their enemies” with Americans’ tax dollars?

    And there is terrible anguish. and that’s all there is to it.

    No one can give you the assurances I think you would like to have. Can NEwt fix this? I say YES. I think we have by far the best chance with Newt.

    But do I have a note from God? I regret to say that I have not as yet been vouchsafed with a note from God.

    George Washington stood up the gargantuan British Empire. The British Empire that had “coerced” the Irish, the Scots and the Welsh, and expected to crush, crush, CRUSH the colonialists. Washington was in the field for 8 years with one week home. No one gave him the assurances he probably wanted.

    Solzhenitsyn was in the gulag, wasting away, when Ronald Reagan. against the strong opposition of the U.S. State Department, called the Soviet Union and “Evil Empire.” It shifted the morale in the Soviet Union. Freedom started to win.

    Freedom isn’t free. Freedom isn’t free. Freedom isn’t free. The INCREDIBLE freedoms we were HANDED as children in the United States. Every generation has to choose. Do we step up for our grandchildren? Or are we the losers who let FREEDOM slip away?

    Dear, dear Scorpio51, if you will watch “2012: VICTORY OR DEATH,” Newt’s speech from 2009, I think you will find some of the courage you are looking for.

    The courage is inside you. No one can do this for you. I’m with you, many of us here are with you, in virtual camaraderie, for what that’s worth. But the courage is something each of us must find inside ourself. Courage, Scorpi51 — think of the ones you love. We may never meet, but I am your friend in the love of freedom.

The GOP establishment is determined to nominate a candidate that can’t even win the support of their own party. How many more times do we have to listen the Rovian progressives who dominate at Fox News whine about how this is costing Romney the “independent” vote because of his having to take “extreme” stances to appease the “right wing nuts”? That very argument oozes with pending flip-flops. They are arguing that Romney should already be moving from left of center to far left!


Since this is a heavily pro-Newt crowd, let me ask in all seriousness:

How do you see Newt as realistically winning (either the primary or the general) when he only pulled in 15% in the crucial swing state of Ohio in a Republican primary?

    Ragspierre in reply to Will. | March 7, 2012 at 11:28 am

    People in a primary should vote for the person who they feel most reflects their values, IMNHO. For me, that would be Newt.

    “Strategic voting” is for the general.

      stevewhitemd in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2012 at 11:52 am

      No, I’m voting for who will be the best president, sorry.

      ‘Values’ and ‘policy’ are good, and I generally like my office holders to reflect the values I hold and the policies I endorse. I certainly vote for representatives and senators on that basis.

      But a president is different, and is best exemplified by the now-hoary admonition from Hillary’s 2008 campaign: who do you want to have answering the phone at 3 am?

      (It’s clear to me right now that when the phone rings, Obama rolls over and goes back to sleep.)

      What matters in a president is this: what do they do when they are confronted with the unexpected? Each of our presidents in living memory has had situations in which they had to respond to things that happened out of the clear blue sky.

      Bush 43 had 9/11.

      Clinton had Oklahoma City.

      Bush 41 had Kuwait.

      Reagan had Grenada, and Berlin.

      Carter had Iran.

      Ford had Nixon (okay, not clear blue-sky there).

      And so on.

      How do they respond? Do they understand the gravity of the situation? Can they rally their country? Can they explain it to the country? Can they get the country behind them?

      Can they lead?

      I do believe that Romney can do these things. I do believe that in a crisis, he would respond well. I’ve seen it in him in other (admittedly smaller) contexts. I think he gets it in a way that Obama NEVER could.

      I’m not sure about Newt. Newt is smart, personable and an idea-a-minute kind of guy. But when the heat was on as Speaker he made some big mistakes.

      Likewise, I can’t tell how Santorum would respond to a 3 am phone call.

      So for me, it’s Romney. I’ll trust a Republican House and Republican Senate to keep Romney from straying too far on matters of budget and social policy. But I want someone in the White House who can handle a crisis.

      Simply because, I’m certain we’ll have one.

        I’d rather have someone who is willing to stretch out of the narrow range of comfort, make a bad decision and be willing to own up to it (like Gingrich has, repeatedly) than to have someone who can’t recognize when he made a mistake, takes no ownership of that mistake, and says “well it’s different when I did it (like Romney on Massachusetts Health Care).

        I want someone who is going to take some chances, take all the ideas and then throw them against the wall to see what sticks. I can see Gingrich doing that. I can’t see Romney doing that.

        stevewhitemd in reply to stevewhitemd. | March 7, 2012 at 3:05 pm

        A follow-on posted as a reply:

        Since I’m getting a few thumbs-down for this one, I’d appreciate if those who dislike my comment would explain why. I’d like to learn something.

        Is it because I favor Romney? Okay, I can take that.

        But if you think my point about having a president who can handle an unexpected crisis, and handle such a crisis far better than Obama has done, is wrong, then I need to understand what you’re thinking.

        Perhaps the Newt and Rick supporters could point out to me the events in lives/works of these two candidates that would show that they can manage a crisis. I can see it in Romney, but I’d like to be educated.

        If the Pubs nominate either Newt or Rick I will vote for that nominee in the fall against Obama. So I’d like to be armed when asked about their abilities to manage the job.

          Terri in reply to stevewhitemd. | March 7, 2012 at 6:23 pm

          I am really trying to understand your logic regarding you not being able to know if Newt could handle a crisis? I think that Newt is pretty consistent, Romney on the other hand, would change his mind too many times to be able to make a decision at 3 am or he would make a different decision at 3:10.
          What is your opinion based on?

          Hope Change in reply to stevewhitemd. | March 7, 2012 at 9:15 pm

          Hi stevewhitemd —

          You’ve asked for a response. I can only speak for myself. My response is that your goal is too narrow. You say you want someone who would handle a crisis better.

          The first problem is that Romney will probably lose, just like Dole, McCain, H. W. Bush and Gerald Ford did. A totally wasted, golden opportunity.

          The second problem is that if Romney did win, Romney is not capable of fixing what is ALREADY broken.

          The Left are trying to destroy the prosperity and freedom of America. This has been going on at least since the end of World War I.

          America stands as a lighthouse of opportunity for the little guy who is not politically connected. You don’t have to “know somebody.” You don’t have to bring a gift to the local sheik and kiss his sleeve, or the union boss, baron or gang leader. You can just have an idea, work your idea, and there it is.

          Read The Noblest Triumph, by Tom Bethell. This book changed my thinking forever. He explains why some societies prosper and some are in poverty. it all revolves around fair, predictable, secure private-property rights. Fair play. Civic-mindedness in public officials. Rhe rule of law instead of petty thievery and petty tyranny.

          stevewhitemd, if you are interested to know why I and some other here support NEwt so much, please watch some of Newt’s speeches and find out for yourself.

          Politics as usual means the CARTEL of MONIED INTERESTS and CRONIES will continue to be parasites on our country. We need to break it up.

          WITH NEWT, WE WILL:
          Audit the Fed. Modernize the federal bureaucracy,
          – return manufacturing to the United States,
          – bring the billions in money off-shore home by changing corporate tax rules,
          – restore small banks by repealing Dodd-Frank,
          – help business by repealing Sarbanes-Oxley,
          – repeal Obamacare ON THE FIRST DAY (Newt 2012 CPAC tells you how),
          -restore the Doctor-Patent relationship as the heart of healthcare,
          – change heath insurance rules to make insurance portable, affordable,
          – change “pre-existing condition” rules,
          – return power to the people and the states through the 10th Amendment project Governor Perry is heading up,
          – have a commission on how to have the dollar as good as gold,
          – simplify the tax code,
          – make social security INHERITABLE for young Americans if they want an OPTIONAL personal account,
          – have an American Energy policy so that we depend on ourselves for energy and become a net EXPORTER of oil and natural gas,
          – return power over our schools to parents, teachers and local school boards,
          – use the $16 TRILLIONS of DOLLARS OF ROYALTIES from AMERICAN ENERGY to pay down the national debt,
          – give our children and grandchildren a free and debt-free society,
          AND MORE. There’s more.

          WE CAN HAVE THE FUTURE WE WANT. But you have to find out for yourself.

          We can do these things. WE can have that future. But you have to find out for yourself.

          Please, if you are interested, watch these speeches.

          With Newt’s leadership, we have a genuine chance to restore the U.S. Constitution.

          “2012: VICTORY OR DEATH ”


          Henry Hawkins in reply to stevewhitemd. | March 7, 2012 at 11:35 pm

          After 5-6 years of constantly running for president and many tens of millions of dollars spent advertising himself or dumping on his opposition, about 60-65% of GOP primary and caucus voters disagree with your assessment of Romney.
          People evaluate evidence differently.

    JohnInFlorida in reply to Will. | March 7, 2012 at 11:33 am

    Will, to become a Newt supporter, all you must do is ACTUALLY LISTEN TO THE CANDIDATES instead of what is SAID ABOUT the candidates. If you would do that, you’d get on board.

      Hope Change in reply to JohnInFlorida. | March 7, 2012 at 8:01 pm

      Hi JohnInFlorida — you are right. The way for any of us to decide if we support Newt is to listen to what NEWt is saying.


      To understand, watch “2012: VICTORY OR DEATH”


      NEwt is a brilliant visionary who has practical solutions that we, the American People, can use to restore our country to the Constitution. Newt’s plan IS BASED UPON the American People.

      Watch the very first speech on the AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM list. It’s a talk NEwt gave to a grassroots group in New Hampshire, all about the shifting paradigm caused by the new communications technologies, and the new global village that’s being created, and how we can use it to protect our FREEDOMS.


      IN “2012: VICTORY OR DEATH,” Newt explains what we mean by AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM.

      AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM means this is the only country in the history of the world to be founded upon the principle that YOU, THE INDIVIDUAL, receive sovereignty and your RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS from the CREATOR, not from a government, a king, a lord, a baron. secretariat, a committee or a bureaucrat. No one can take away your rights, because they are with you AT BIRTH. That is AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM.

      If you care about the future of your town, your family, your children, watch these speeches.

      You can help us restore our country. Go Newt!

    raven in reply to Will. | March 7, 2012 at 12:38 pm

    Refer above to Palin’s comments on why she voted for Newt. Who can say it better?

What a depressing night. As I posted here ( Romney, at this point, needs to have been found to be an active white supremacist, had an affair with Barney Frank or been found to be an android not to win the nomination. I just did the numbers, Newt (and Santorum) would need to win 2/3rd of the remaining delegates to win the nomination and Romney can lose more than half and still get to 1,144. It’s over. I love Newt and wish he were the nominee but I just dont see it, especially not after not even being able to carry Tennessee last night.

Now I just have to decide which third party to vote for in November. It will likely be the LP despite the fact that I hate their foreign policy. But, unlike Romney, at least they believe in something.

    You have to remember that a lot of what is upcoming is not going to be pleasant for Romney for a lot of reasons.

    The big one is that he can’t continue to spend money the way he has. The double-digit multipliers he’s been expending is eventually going to burn him out. He’s hoping he can win before that happens, but it doesn’t look like it.

    The second one is the remaining southern states (Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas and the big prize of Texas). Gingrich’s SuperPAC (Winning Our Future) has been running ads every two to three days in the Texas radio markets for MONTHS already laying the groundwork.

    The third thing to look at is where Romney is winning. Ohio is a prime example. If you look at the counties where Romney won (the high population centers) Obama won those counties in the 2008 cycle. Those counties are NOT going to vote Republican. It just isn’t going to happen. Hopefully the “unpledged” delegates will notice that before the convention and figure out exactly what to do with their votes.

      One can only hope. Though at this point a “victory” is getting Romney under 1144 at the convention so it will be brokered/contested. However, I dont see a brokered convention picking Newt or Santorum for that matter. If Romney is even close it will probably eventually swing to him through cheating and arm twisting by the establishment. Paul wont help matters when he swings delegates over to him either.

    Hope Change in reply to libertarian_neocon. | March 7, 2012 at 9:38 pm

    I know you support Newt, Libertarian_neocon. I appreciate the excellent article you wrote with the many excellent reasons.

    WE know NEwt shines a light on a path to a better tomorrow. We don’t see yet whether the American people will follow that path.

    Our job right now is to be steadfast in our purpose. Our purpose is to support freedom and prosperity in America. That doesn’t change, no matter what the political landscape of the moment.

    Find something that supports your love of the freedom of America and focus on it. Americans are tough, independent and wiley. Plus, God protects fools, children and the United States of America. This isn’t over and not even close to over.

    Think of Churchill: Never never never never give up.

    The forces of Potter want Pottersville. George Washington stood up to the British Empire. We have to be strong for our country.

StephenMonteith | March 7, 2012 at 11:36 am

I seem to recall a number of posts on this blog claiming that past wins by Romney were actually indications of weakness because he won them with less than half of the vote totals. So, if Gingrich doesn’t get half the vote in his home state, is that similarly a sign of weakness? Also, whose fault is it that only Romney and Paul were on the Virginia ballot?

Romney had a great night. He won sixty percent of the contests and put up serious fights in the others. Why? Because he’s actually competing in every state. The other candidates either couldn’t afford to campaign in every state, lack of broad appeal (is Gingrich EVER going to win a state outside the south?), or they simply weren’t popular enough to beat him in those states. Remember, in both Michigan and Ohio, Romney came from behind, overcoming a double-digit deficit in about a week’s time to win the vote.

He also beat expectations in Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Georgia, taking second place in all three states. He’s not a “regional candidate”, like some others are. And, remember, in South Carolina, he actually won more votes than John McCain won with in 2008. Romney can appeal to southern voters; anyone who doesn’t think last night was evidence of this is fooling themselves.

    StephenMonteith in reply to StephenMonteith. | March 7, 2012 at 11:38 am

    Romney wasn’t “lucky” last night. He’s been building up his organization, he’s been fundraising, and he’s been changing minds. The word you’re looking for, professor, is “prepared”.

      The only reason Romney remains competitive is his massive money advantage – which he uses to carpet bomb his opposition, with lies and half-truths no less.

      An advantage that would prove worthless against Obama’s even bigger pile of money and a fawning media.

        raven in reply to ThomasD. | March 7, 2012 at 12:45 pm

        Yes, pretty simple. He’s unsustainable.

        And have you heard his latest inspiring battle-cry following his stirring vow of yesterday never to say anything “outrageous” about the President…?

        Today he said president shouldn’t be held responsible for the high price of gas.

        Patton had nothing on Romney.

          Ragspierre in reply to raven. | March 7, 2012 at 12:51 pm

          Holy shades of John McAnus, Batman…”outrageous”…???

          Like, he’s a RADICAL Collectivist?

          Romney is past milk-sop, and charging toward limp.

      Hope Change in reply to StephenMonteith. | March 7, 2012 at 9:56 pm

      Hi StephenMonteith –

      Romney’s strategy, of being the biggest SOB in the Valley of the Shadow of Death, will not work in the fall, because that’s when the actual biggest SOB will be his opponent. You’re being played by the Goldman Sachs crowd and all their government playmates, who have benefited Goldman Sachs with your tax dollars. Hence the donations.

      Please, if you want to, review this outstanding article from PolitiJim on the true record of Newt versus Mitt. PolitiJim has done extensive research and he is doing the comparison using facts and statistics. This article from PoliticJim is worth review and study. ]

      For those of us who support NEwt, Mitt’s money and the fact that he’s been able to buy a big organization with it and that they’ve been planning this for — what, now? 7 years? is NOT a selling point. WE don’t think Romney understands what’s wrong with the economy, with the country.

      We don’t think Romney understands how to fix the economy. Romney had repudiated Reagan and Reagan’s methods.

      We think with Newt, the economy will start to turn around in 6 to 18 months from election night, when it’s clear Obama’s going home and Newt will soon set things right for American businesses to thrive again. OMG, imagine it! Devoutly to be wished!

      OTOH, Romney’s experience is in BREAKING THINGS UP.

      Newt’s experience is in uniting in government and balancing the budget and getting the GOP the majority in Congress for the first time in what, 40 years?

      That’s why your points about Romney aren’t relevant to those who support NEwt. With all due respect to Romney, Romney is politics as usual. That’s not enough.

        WoodnWorld in reply to Hope Change. | March 8, 2012 at 3:01 am

        SOB huh? Valley of the Shadow of Death? Lol, and you seriously wonder why some Romney supporters (ok, maybe just me) feel the need to respond with sarcasm and derision?

[quote]. We needed him as a marker against which to measure all others.[/quote]

We still have Pelosi, DWS, Sheila Jackson Lee, and so many others who are cut of the same cloth. Heck, the woman who beat him is just as far left, she’ll do.

Do conservatives really believe Santorum can win? That is the question I keep asking myself – he is an awful general election candidate. I have never heard someone speak well of him in public.

We have been enjoying a long, hard push by the “establishment” to get us to love Romney. So, I suspect that, a few weeks back, when Newt suggested that Rick Santorum drop out, he did not consider the possibility of a rebellious backlash. People are kind of – in that mood. Mr Santorum should take care with similar pronouncements.

In the meantime, we have been served up really disastrous moves, outrageous politically created events, and patently ridiculous statements from our current president. It is so bad that each and every one of the Republican possibilities appears perfectly suited as a replacement.

I am still pulling for Newt, but Obama is so perfectly awful that it is difficult to find fault anywhere else.

I for one am glad Kucinich is gone, dang nutbag just went around trying to impeach everyone, what a distraction!

Conservatives are going to cut off their noses to spite their faces, by sticking with “their guy”. Whether it be Newt or Santorum, it’s time to choose one or the other. If not, better get used to the RINO Left and their candidate (who couldn’t beat Mc Cain last time). It’s time for egos to get out of the way and both Santorum and Gingrich to think of the country as a whole, instead of themselves. Perry got out when he realized he wasn’t going to win the nomination and was splitting the Conservative vote. Time to take one for the team.

The degree to which people can delude themselves into believing that either Newt or Santorum can defeat Obama in the general election is simply astounding. One is a disgraced SotH with 3 wives (ie will get slaughtered on the women vote). The other is a Senator who suffered the worst incumbant defeat in the history of the Senate in a key swing state.

Face it people – Romney, as flawed as he is, really is the only one with any shot what-so-ever. I’ve been saying for months that pairing him with Rubio would create a very solid ticket for the general. It is time to bring this thing to a close and coalesce around Romney. The real fight hasnt even started yet.

    Hope Change in reply to Jaydee77. | March 7, 2012 at 10:02 pm

    Jaydee77, from my perspective, Newt is the only one who will decisively beat Obama this fall AND then we will restore the Constitution.

    So I agree that we need to united, but I also want to win this fall AND restore the Constitution, so my support for NEwt continues undiminished.

ThreeputtinIL | March 7, 2012 at 12:28 pm

When are people gonna stop trying to convince us Santorum or Romney are our only choice? I have total faith in Newt, he’s had this planned for a long time, and I can assure people that the Tea Party heads and Palin are in on it, thank god. Don’t tell me Newt only got in this race to sell books, read some of his proposals at and you’ll see he’s dead serious about getting into the WH. Sadly, people are such pack animals that when there’s more than 1 candidate, they get confused. And since we can no longer trust the Repub. Party Leaders and Spokesman (Fox News) they’ve been looking to Tea Party to guide them. Big mistake – they aren’t organized enough and haven’t figured out how to get behind 1 candidate and stay there. Still, money will get rid of 1 candidate soon. Probably Santorum, he is horrible at campainging & got very lucky this time around by all the anger and confusion in the party over who the ANTI-Romney should be. Ricky is the true candidate of luck, not Romney. Money is not luck, it is what it is and Romney is using it to buy the Presidency (and for 5 years of planning and organizing, this run has not gone anywhere near where Romney expected). Romney is gonna be out of luck in the GE, like many have said, he’s never had the conservative base, which makes winning the Independents moot since he’ll lose more votes than gain. He’s also using up a ton of dough just to win primaries. And small donations from the base and middle class for Rombo are nill. Where’s all the money gonna come from to beat Obama?

    Scorpio51 in reply to ThreeputtinIL. | March 7, 2012 at 3:22 pm

    ThreeputtinIL, Do you actually know for certain that Sarah Palin is behind Newt?

    Do you know for certain there is a “force” behind Newt?

    I am in some real need for assurance for someone who knows for certain that Newt will definitely get this rally.

      ThreeputtinIL in reply to Scorpio51. | March 8, 2012 at 1:20 am

      Scorpio51 – Do I have an absolute on this, NO. I’m sorry, I don’t have any inside info. from his campaign on this even though I did speak with one of the Campaign people in IL about the Palin/Gingrich connection- they saw alot of what I was seeing when you look back into their Tea Party past together. Really look into what Newt was doing with the resurrection of the Tea Party. I’m probably a bigger Palin fan than a Newt fan, only because I really didn’t start getting into politics until 2000. I really had no idea what Gingrich was about, other than very brief views from the 90’s of what others had said about him. I was in my early 20’s in college & oblivious to politics when Gingrich was literally bringing the Republican Revolution into the congress. Also, wasn’t even sure what political party I was in until my mid-twenties. So I knew little on him & lots on her cause of all the attention last race. Now I like to think I am much more informed ON BOTH than back then. Plus, I get a little obsessed with politics, the 9/11 attacks and the Bush/Gore race sucked me in. Did anybody but me actually read that Romney Play Book from McCain? Anyways, Gingrich and Palin have a very strong working realationship from helping bring in the Tea Party Movement in historic 2010 race. Unlike Romney who bought his Tea Party endorsements in that race (just gave big amts. of $ to contenders in States he needed endorsements from bigwigs to Win – like Nikki Haley, and many others) , they both endorsed, worked with, startegized with nominees and showed them how to win with common everyday citizens votes. They both knew how to tap the angry energy from disillusioned Repubs, Dems & libetarians. Unlike Santorum, who disavowed the Tea Party at the beginning, they GREW the Tea Party. It can’t be a coincidence that their views are almost always in synch. Listen to what she says, then listen to him, or do vice-versa, doesn’t matter, they both speak the same message – THE MESSAGE OF THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. I also think their plan is much bigger than this race. Even if Newt doesn’t win, he now has more delegates than Paul. We all know Paul is running to get the Libetarian Platform heard and get some POWER with the Repub. Establishment no matter what. Why can’t Newt do same for Tea Party with even more delegates than Paul, there should be more POWER. The Tea Party needs power. If Newt doesn’t win, a brokered convention with her on the ticket would be fine too, same platform with Newt in Admin. somewhere. Really think from her website & her fans, she’d have to be on the list of names at convention from people insisting alone. I think she wants Newt to pave the way of the Tea Party in 2012, with her in Admin. (HIGH UP), and then she’ll run the next time for Pres. They are still strengthening the Tea Party, and god willing, they will keep our country a Democratic Republic in the process. To me Palin and Newt are all about the Tea Party and it growing into a third party if necessary. Sorry this is so long, but couldn’t explain without some background on why I feel so strongly on this.

      ThreeputtinIL in reply to Scorpio51. | March 8, 2012 at 9:20 am

      Scorpio – Hey, looks like my thinking isn’t far off on Gingrich – Check this out today

      GO NEWT!!!!

    WoodnWorld in reply to ThreeputtinIL. | March 7, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    The answer to where is the money going to come from is actually very simple. Many people, myself included, have not donated a dime yet. The race is too volatile and why would we spend precious resources targeting our own in fratricidal efforts when we can insure that our investment goes towards the real threat? Watch, when Romney wins the primary, and he will, the coffers will be overflowing. Count on it.

    Let us also not forget that whatever money has been spent by his campaign and/or his SuperPAC has come exclusively from fundraising. I don’t think Romney has dipped into his pockets this time like he did the last race. That money comes from somewhere and is a testament to both his campaign staff and their being able to line those donors up.

    Since when is not being organized, and not being able to successfully raise campaign cash in an election an asset? Flipped, since when has being extremely organized, and being able to raise a lot of money in an election a liability? Let’s be honest, both Newt and Rick would trade Mitt places in a heartbeat if they could.

ThreeputtinIL | March 7, 2012 at 12:54 pm

OH, one other reason I prefer Newt to Rick, he actually knows how the electoral delegates are spread out, and knows exactly where he needs to win. If Rick got out he could do it too. Don’t know when this will happen but it will – soon. Ohio was Satorums death nail. Rick has many delegate problems other than Ohio, TN, IL, IN and VA. He can only win in popular votes in many states, and that means no matter what Romney gets all the delegates. That’s been his huge problem from the get go. Newt only had that problem in VA, and some of the non-binding caucas state. Santorum really could never truly win. They were counting on popularity & uprising from the voters in the end to win this for SAntorum, he could never win the acutual delegate count without being the only other Rombo competitor. Even if Newt got out, Rombo would destroy the only other guy (other than Paul) by huge infusions of negative ads in every state. Newt being in is what allowed Santorum to actually win some states cause Rombo was attacking Newt with the ads and ignoring Santorum. It’s now time to pile on Rick. Thus, Newt is free to actually talk about solutions instead of constant defense of Romney’s & SAnte’s lies. Newt would be out right now if he didn’t think there was a bigger plan that could win. By the way, it was a good night for Newt, compared to the polls the week before, he did better than Santorum by quite a stretch. He may not have won alot, but he said he didn’t need to win any but GA, and do well in other So. States. He picked up more than SAnte did last night in delegates, and that’s what will put him as #2 to Romney. I’m great with Super Tues. looking forward to how Sante cries & whines as he goes down the tubes, and Romney will have to keep putting huge sums of money in to win this Primary race. Rombo can’t outspend Obama, and everyone knows that, that’s why we know he will lose the GE as well as he won’t get enought of the base to vote for him. Me being one. Didn’t think I’d ever say 4 more years of Obambi is as bad as 4 years of Romney. Sadly, I vetted Rombo, and found he’s every bit as bad as Obama.

    Thanks for posting that! I too TOTALLY support Newt and will continue to do so until Newt is either the nominee or drops out
    I am not going to compromise my principles yet to help make Mr. Electable – Electable. If he is so electable why hasn’t he wrapped this thing up?
    I am so sick of these “holier than thou” people worried that Newt has been married twice before. I am sure Reagan wouldn’t have won if divorce was an issue. I mean cmon, Obama has only married once and so has Bill Clinton. What does that tell you?

    Hope Change in reply to ThreeputtinIL. | March 7, 2012 at 10:09 pm

    Wow, ThreeputtinIL – awesome wrap up. thank you! You are my Splendid Analyst of the day.

    I think I’ll read that again!

    Scorpio51 in reply to ThreeputtinIL. | March 8, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    Thanks for your logic and reason.

Newt and Santorum should enter a secret pact, that one or the other will drop out, depending on who is trailing, by a certain date.

If this keeps going and they keep splitting the anti-romney vote, we will surely end up with romney as candidate.

    Hope Change in reply to quiznilo. | March 7, 2012 at 10:48 pm

    Hello, quiznilo.

    Your analysis seems to be based on the idea that NEWt and Santorum are sort of more or less the same.

    That is true in the sense that the Grizzly bear and the koala bear are both called bears.

    When you need a grizzly, don’t elect a koala. Just don’t.

      ThreeputtinIL in reply to Hope Change. | March 7, 2012 at 11:53 pm

      Hope as always, I bow to you – all of you posts give me new info. and to also make LOL on the bears is awesome!!! Looking forward to more – also, I’d be on here all day to lots of bloggers for thanks on all the links & tips to VERIFY. People really need to do that more often. Wonder who said it? Oh yeah, that guy Newt was against in WH, Reagan. (Loved that spin). Well, the spin keeps us searching!!! Hopefully, when the spin ends they will find out what many are here saying, NEWT IS THE ONLY ONE TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY.

Romney has already lost to Obama, he just doesn’t know it.

Watching his “candidacy” unfold is like watching one of those Twlight Zone episodes about the guy stuck in a living nightmare of deja vu. In this case, it’s the story of the well-mannered and respectful moderate Republican attempting (with quiet but artless desperation) to prove to the media and the liberal overlords just how decent and smart and eminently moderate and non-Right Wing he is (“I’m not that crazy Newt Gingrich or Bible-thumping Rick Santorum or any flame-throwing Limbaugh extremist. I went to Harvard!”) so they in turn will give him a fair shake to the voters who will in turn perform in the only responsible and reasonable way they can.

The delusion is incalculable. In 2012, it seems truly inconceivable. This guy is a loser beyond the capacity of any scale we’ve got to measure.

    WoodnWorld in reply to raven. | March 7, 2012 at 4:20 pm

    Yes, and Newt has already lost to Romney, he just doesn’t know it. The difference between your statement and my modification raven is that the former is wishful thinking, an opinion backed only by other opinions, and the latter is backed by empirical evidence.

      raven in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 5:44 pm

      I’m talking about Romney losing to Obama.

      What’s Newt got to do with it?

        Terri in reply to raven. | March 7, 2012 at 6:32 pm

        Raven, no matter what you say, Wood ALWAYS turns it toward Newt.

          WoodnWorld in reply to Terri. | March 7, 2012 at 6:50 pm

          Weird. The thought that anyone would do that here… I just can’t imagine why anyone would “turn” a conversation towards Newt here in the comment section… with raven no less. I mean, it’s not like raven, or anyone else here does that everyday. It’s not like the comment section here hasn’t been a cheerleady echo chamber of all Newt, all the time propaganda. The nerve of some people.

        WoodnWorld in reply to raven. | March 7, 2012 at 6:37 pm

        Great question! Besides the fact that you did mention Newt in the post I responded to, and you have been saying for some time now that Newt is your candidate, your judgment re: Newt Gingrich over the last couple months seems to have been more than a little flawed. This begs the next question: Given your recent track record, why would anyone listen to your opinion re: the general election?

        Your “case” for Newt was never more than anything other than a string of opinions; your “case” against Romney (or for Obama?) is nothing more than the same. At no point in time have you, or anyone else for that matter, been able to make a case for Newt Gingrich that involved: facts, data, explanations on HOW he could/can win etc. Many people have asked, some have even begged for you and your to articulate some path the Newt might be able to take, some hidden strategy that they might have overlooked that would propel him to victory. We all know why you have been silent. The writing has been on the wall for at least a month, month and a half now.

        It is obvious that you are losing and in your frustration you have conveniently narrowed your parameters and are now suggesting that this really isn’t about Newt in the primary, but rather how you think Romney will do in the GE. You cite no sources to prove your “case,” demand others, myself included, provide sources to prove theirs, all while ignoring the growing mountain of evidence proving you wrong, and us right.

        I am absolutely not going to go back and forth with you like I did the other day. It’s an absolute waste of my time. Again, take the last word. You need it.

          raven in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 8:01 pm

          For all the talk about how Romney is marching inexorably toward the nomination, that it is only “a matter of time”, that resistance is futile, you take up a lot of space and show a lot of angst about Newt.

          If Newt is moot, why all the flop sweat?

          Hope Change in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 10:59 pm

          raven, I know! OMG. I know.

          If Romney is soooo great, electable and inevitable, why why why why why why why the time here? It’s purely because Romney is none of those things.

          Newt has solutions. Newt will win against Obama. The Establishment is terrified we will audit the Federal Reserve.

          IF and WHEN American People choose Newt, no one and nothing will stop this Renaissance.

          Imagine a future with plenty of energy, plenty of jobs, oil royalty revenues to pay off the national debt, the U.S. the biggest manufacturing country in the world AGAIN. We can have that future.

          WoodnWorld in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 8, 2012 at 3:13 am

          Why all the time here? Partly because as my primary forecasting and my internal political analysis is borne out to be the wisest, it is great fun to point out just how delusional some of you have become. Because, for all of the attacks and all of the crap I have seen posted on here about Romney, it is nice to know at least one person is turning the methods back on those who have employed it.

          Mostly, I come here because at some point in time this primary will end. This blog will either become a surrogate for Barack Obama, become anti-Romney central and continue (fruitlessly, I admit) working against the only candidate a majority of Republicans believe can win the primary and beat Obama, or it will not. I spend so much time here because at some point in time you all will have to start talking about something other than how much you “loathe” Mitt Romney, and how much he really needs to be “stopped.” Put another way, at some point in time this blog will go back to covering political content most of us agree with, rather than only a few of you.

    Hope Change in reply to raven. | March 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm

    HI raven, I knowwwwww! How can other people not see it?

      Hope Change in reply to Hope Change. | March 7, 2012 at 10:14 pm

      raven SAID:
      raven | March 7, 2012 at 1:21 pm
      Romney has already lost to Obama, he just doesn’t know it.

      Watching his “candidacy” unfold is like watching one of those Twlight Zone episodes about the guy stuck in a living nightmare of deja vu. In this case, it’s the story of the well-mannered and respectful moderate Republican attempting (with quiet but artless desperation) to prove to the media and the liberal overlords just how decent and smart and eminently moderate and non-Right Wing he is (“I’m not that crazy Newt Gingrich or Bible-thumping Rick Santorum or any flame-throwing Limbaugh extremist. I went to Harvard!”) so they in turn will give him a fair shake to the voters who will in turn perform in the only responsible and reasonable way they can.

      The delusion is incalculable. In 2012, it seems truly inconceivable. This guy is a loser beyond the capacity of any scale we’ve got to measure.


      Hope Change | March 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
      HI raven, I knowwwwww! How can other people not see it?

[…] » Super Tuesday the day after – Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion Mitt Romney is the luckiest politician in recent memory.  He barely eked out a victory in Ohio and thereby dominates the headlines, while losing almost every other key electoral state, Georgia, Tennessee and Oklahoma.   Add in his victories in Massachusetts (uncontested in reality) and Virginia (only Ron Paul on the ballot) and some smaller caucuses, and Romney retains the mantle of inevitability despite having a weak showing. […]

    Confutus in reply to EBL. | March 9, 2012 at 2:35 am

    What he said was “I think people recognize that the president can’t precisely set the price at the pump”. From the article at HotAir, “then Romney went on to point out many of the facts of Obama’s energy policies and noted their detrimental effects.” This completely contradicts the paraphrased version.

Can’t understand you Prof? Newt won Georgia, big deal! Lost Tennessee, Oklahoma, wasn’t even on the ballot in Virginia – where he has lived forever (not Georgia). Where are his strengths? Not in organization, required in a general, a long time lying politician, that’s what you call beating Obama? You Newt and Santorum babies need to get back to reality!

They say money talks and B S walks yet with all the money Romney spent in Ohio his campaign is still walking. It’s Amazing how weak a candidate he is.
It would be a grave error to make this man our standard bearer against Obama.

[…] does seem to be getting the breaks and The Daily Pundit is not pleased at all The GOP is hell-bent on nominating their weakest prexy […]

Super Tuesday Explodes Two Myths About the Tea Party

Pay particular attention to the second “myth.” It confirms some things I have been saying for months:
-First, the TEA Party is not a unified, monochromatic movement.
-Second, there are quite a few TEA party supporters who have either voted for, or will vote for Romney.
-Third, the TEA Party is not, in any way shape or form, a default vote for Gingrich.
-Fourth, quite a few TEA Party supporters despise Newt for a number of reasons.
-Fifth, and finally, the labels “TEA Party” and “Establishment” are ephemeral constructions.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    The first four revelations are of the ‘duh’ variety, not in question in the first place, each often alluded to in these comments. The fifth is a self-validating opinion provided as ‘evidence’.

    They are, however, entirely necessary propaganda to break down the considerable wall between the GOP Rino Squad and conservatives in and out of the GOP. Luckily, we prefer an opposition which thinks us stupid.

      WoodnWorld in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 7, 2012 at 6:45 pm

      No one said you are stupid, but do please keep telling yourself how brilliant you all actually are. Most importantly, please keep perpetuating the “considerable wall” narrative. It seems to be working wonders for the fringe. Take a look at any one of the exit polls from yesterday or before, and show me exactly where “Establishment” starts and “Grassroots” begins. Take your time Hank…

      I absolutely agree that the first four revelations are of the “duh” variety. In fact, could not agree more! What’s amazing is that I have had to argue them at all, what’s even more amazing is how many here have heatedly argued that they aren’t actually true or immediately self-apparent.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 7, 2012 at 11:38 pm

        At some point you’ll learn to look within rather than always without for the answers to these anomalies that baffle you so.

          WoodnWorld in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 8, 2012 at 2:25 am

          Who is baffled? Please. I thought we, you and I at least, agreed that this was elementary. Perhaps at some point you will turn to reason rather than emotion and explain to any one of us how Newt can actually win? How Newt’s, of all people right now, stubbornness does anything more than drag out the, yes, inevitable and aid and abet the Obama team.

    WoodnWorld in reply to ThreeputtinIL. | March 8, 2012 at 11:42 am

    Yes, I already read this one. If I am choking right now, it’s only on a little stifled laughter. Did you even read this or was it the first headline, the best link you could find to make a point? I ask because it’s not exactly a glowing endorsement for Newt and does not support him in the way I think many of his surrogates here wish it would. Seriuously, with “support” like this, who needs detractors?

    Where to begin? First and foremost, the Washington Post is not exactly the first place I turn to when I am looking for sage, conservative, political analysis. Cillizza is nowhere near as bad as some others over there that I can think of, but given the company they all keep that really isn’t saying much.

    That record has some within the party — mostly allies of former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum — urging Gingrich to drop from the race for the good of the party.

    Notice that did not read “allies of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.” You may have also noticed (more likely, not) that I have not called on Gingrich to drop out. While Romney supporters know full well how futile the “Master Craftsman” staying in is, we are perfectly happy with both Rick and Newt doing so, know full well that they, at least partially, divide one another’s votes and am are content picking them off piecemeal.

    Chris is not even the least bit circumspect when he alludes to Romney’s insurmountable delegate lead, the unlikelihood that Santorum will “wind up as the nominee” and the implication that Newt, by extension, is even less likely to do so.

    In fact, “if” (perhaps the single largest word in the English language) seems to be the operative word for Newt.

    If Gingrich can win in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana — and, to be clear, that’s a big “if” — he will have stockpiled enough delegates in the most reliably Republican region in the country to give himself a bit of bargaining power with the eventual nominee.

    Who do you think is more likely to carve off votes from Newt, Rick or Romney? Yup. Want to place any bets on who Newt’s biggest threat to victory is in the South?

    If he holds out and can score wins in the deep South over the next three weeks — not entirely out of the question — then Gingrich is in a position to cut a deal with Romney who will be looking for ways to consolidate support and close out the nomination by then.

    Whoa man. “Give himself bargaining power with the eventual nominee?” (Wonder who he is talking about there?) “Cut a deal with Romney?” That’s heady stuff there.

    Another few weeks in the race has the possibility to do Gingrich a world of good when it comes to his bargaining power when he ultimately decides to bow out. He’s smart to stay in.

    The more I read this article, the more I am convinced it actually does Mitt more favors than it does Newt. The longer Newt stays in it tamps Santorum’s impact. All of the contests down there are proportionally awarded. Even in Gingrich’s home state, Mitt picked up what, 13 delegates? Chew on that for awhile. Give it some time. Don’t choke on the implications.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to WoodnWorld. | March 8, 2012 at 12:18 pm

      It’s like this. you’re an identified troll. We throw you occasional posts knowing you’ll run off, look up and compile links, and write your little posts and for that while we’re rid of you and we can have a chuckle at your wild goose chase. Sort of like poking the monkey through the cage bars. Then you post your homework, which nobody reads. You can know this by the way you get neither likes or dislikes, because nobody read it. See?

        WoodnWorld in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 8, 2012 at 12:53 pm

        It’s like that huh? Lol, aren’t you so clever. *yawn* Absolutely. brilliant. Weren’t you the clown who told people just to ignore me? Who warned people not to feed the “troll?” For not reading what I am writing, you sure seem to be reading what I am writing… See?

        It’s weird though, and please don’t let me confuse your cute little narrative there with some facts, I really don’t mean to drop knowledge on you like this, but I seem to garner quite a few responses when I do post Hank. In fact, I often loosely measure the overall impact of anything I write by what percentage of any one of these threads is comprised by the aggregate of both my posts and the responses to them. Do a quick count here, just this thread, take your time… Yet another measure, in spite of your crib rocking ego masturbation, IS the number of downvotes I actually do receive.

        Believe me when I say if your intent is to rid yourselves of me for any length of time, me all “running off,” taking time “looking up links” etc. you are doing a horrible job. This stuff comes out hot and fast, most of the links I post here (a recent development btw) have already been read (sometimes two, three times already) and my rebuttals are on a five, ten minute tether at worst. Would that my schoolwork was as easily handled as a response to you, that my professors folded and rolled over as hard and as fast as many of you do here, that this was half the challenge academia was… Homework indeed!

        You act like being called a troll by someone like you and raven teh raver bothers me? You KNOW it makes me smile inside right? I mean it, truly and honestly. Every time you play that card I know you have exhausted whatever tiny little reserve of creativity you are currently drawing from.

        Tell me, am I still the troll if/when I post in non-primary related posts? Will I still be a troll when the primary season is over or will that event demote me to regular commenter status? Do you even know what an internet troll is or is that just something you picked up by loitering out in comment sections over the weeks and months?