Subscribe
RSS
Mobile
So there you have it. Mitt Romney is now two for two. After narrowly winning in Iowa last week, the former Massachusetts governor followed up with a much stronger showing in New Hampshire on Tuesday night. Ron Paul finished second, and Jon Huntsman finished third. The exit polls were full of interesting information, but it's important to note that regardless of how the media and establishment Republicans spin the data, the race for the GOP nomination is far from over.
First, here's a summary of the results from the New Hampshire primary:
Mitt Romney: 95,699 (39%)
Ron Paul: 55,455 (23%)
Jon Huntsman: 40,903 (17%)
Newt Gingrich: 22,921 (9%)
Rick Santorum: 22,708 (9%)
Rick Perry: 1,709 (1%)
Now, before you can attach any trends to the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries, one must keep in mind that these are two very different states. They are both small, but the Iowa caucuses bring out the more conservative GOP voters, while New Hampshire is much more moderate. A conservative Republican in New Hampshire would probably be considered a moderate Democrat here in Texas.
A look at the exit polls from New Hampshire shows that "Romney was backed by 42 percent of New Hampshire conservatives, more than twice the share won by his nearest rival, Texas Rep. Ron Paul." Impressive? Yes. Unexpected? No. Keep in mind that Romney was the governor of a nearby state, the state is moderate and small, and he has a vacation home in the state. Romney was going to win. Period. And it is certainly a stretch to say that he now has some kind of coalition of conservatives and moderates behind him.
In the case of electability, Romney stood out from the pack:
By many measures, voters looking for a November winner said Romney was the way to go.
Given four choices, over one third said the key quality they sought in a candidate Tuesday was the ability to defeat Obama. Of those voters, 62 percent picked Romney, bettering the 48 percent he received from them in Iowa.
Regardless of whom they voted for, 56 percent in New Hampshire named Romney as the GOP contender with the best shot at victory in November.
These electability statistics are more valuable, because they are consistent with what we have been seeing for months. Romney is seen by GOP voters across the country (not just in New Hampshire) as the candidate who has the best chance of beating Barack Obama. That alone is a huge hurdle for other GOP contenders to overcome.
The Associated Press story paints a bleak picture of the results regarding Rick Santorum. When talking about Santorum, the news story reads, "The exit poll showed disappointments galore for Santorum, who had high hopes after his surprisingly strong Iowa finish."
Santorum won just small fractions of the votes of Catholics and working-class people, groups he has hoped to appeal to because of his own background.
He was only able to finish about even with Romney among New Hampshire voters considering themselves very conservative and with born-again or evangelical voters. He trailed both Romney and Paul among tea party backers.
I don't even know where to start. First, just the spin of the opening statement needs some addressing. By calling his finish in Iowa "surprisingly strong" indicates that it was a fluke. Iowa is much more conservative than New Hampshire, and Santorum invested all his time there. The surge that he experienced the last two weeks before the election was proof that a good showing in Iowa would NOT be a surprise.
But then we have the Iowa results. Did Santorum have "high hopes." Maybe... everybody wants to win, but let's look at reality. Jon Huntsman completely dismissed the Iowa caucuses to focus on New Hampshire. Mitt Romney is a local favorite. Ron Paul goes after independents, and New Hampshire is famous for its moderate, independent streak. In addition, it's practically impossible to use the momentum of a win (or near win) in Iowa into a strong showing in New Hampshire with only a week in between. That is simply not enough time. New Hampshire voters expect to see the candidates in their living rooms. If the candidate isn't there, it makes a big difference.
The fact is that Santorum did what he needed to do (almost). With Romney, Paul, and Huntsman leading the pack, the real story of the night was who was going to emerge as the top conservative. Santorum and Gingrich were neck and neck all night. THAT is the big story of the evening, because now the race moves to South Carolina, and that is where we will see if there is any momentum from his Iowa surge.
Santorum was top conservative in Iowa, and essentially tied in New Hampshire. In order for the race for the nomination to continue, he needs a win in South Carolina. If Romney goes three for three in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, it's done... game over.
The South Carolina primary will be held on January 21. Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum will be dumping everything they have into the state. Will voters respond? Will Romney wrap things up? These next three weeks will tell the story.
January 11, 2012 @ 9:55 am
Conservative?
What conservative?
I guess we have a difference of opinion on what a coservative is.
I feel we are having Romney rammed down our throats because “he’s the most electable” more like after the McCain loss its simply is his turn. He is at best a moderate and will NOT do what needs to be done and that is to start reducing the size of this out of control spend crazy government. And I’m talking about both sides not just the lunatic Democrats. We are now past 100% of GDP for debt and these imbaciles want to throw more on top. WE CANNOT CONTINUE ON THIS PATH. And there is no magic fix for this mess the President, and both Houses need to CUT heavily on entitlements and all together eliminate many government agencies get manufacturing back here and reform the rediculously complicated draconian tax code.
Until that happens we’re still speeding towards the cliff.
January 11, 2012 @ 8:50 pm
Well Frogman, the ACLU gave Romney a liberal rating of 0 and a rating of 18 for Dr Paul. Them’s conservative credentials enough for me! Paul was even voted MORE liberal than Obama.
January 12, 2012 @ 7:19 am
The so-called electability factor is being used as the excuse to give us another globalist. The truth is that Obama cannot win, no matter who they put up against him, unless all out cheating can pull it off for him. We are being manipulated once again, into reluctantly accepting a faux conservative to keep the status quo. We will end up with cosmetic ineffectual fixes that will keep our beloved country swirling down the toilet bowl slowly instead of Obama’s power flush into European style socialism.
January 11, 2012 @ 10:12 am
Frogman,
I am not being rude here, you dont have to vote for Gov Romney if you think another candidate has a better chance of defeating Obama. That is what an election process is all about. I form my own judgement as to who I think is best suited to defeat Obama in 2012 and it happens to align with “the establishment” this time around. However since we are in PA come Super Tuesday, Gov Romney may not be one of the candidate left standing, although I do hope he is. So we will be voting for whoever left we think will best defeat Obama. At the end of the day, Obama must go. We the People and this country cannot sustain 4 more Obama years.
What disgust me more is how the other candidates are cannabalising Gov Romney, eg Gov Perry having a ring tone of Gov Romney, “I like firing people” He said that Bain Cap picked the flesh of carcasses. What is wrong with that?? If a company has been mismanaged, and another company comes , invest THEIR MONEY in an attempt to salvage what can be had and uses the money to create new jobs, is this so wrong? What I consider wrong is when Govt, eg Obama takes/steals money from tax payers to pay back his bundlers, eg Solyndra. Then spents $4M taxpayers money in a lavish Hawaain vacation. You will never hear the outcry from the media.
These so called conservatives might as well join forces with Obama who in this downturn economy has already started a classwarfare
When is it that one has to be ashamed of being successful and making money. This simply shows that they do not under what captalisim is all about.
January 11, 2012 @ 11:12 am
pypypypy, Ironically your judgement of the best suited candidate not only aligns with the “establishment” GOP but it also aligns with the “establishment” DNC. Since the 2008 election liberal Democrats have been touting Romney as the “most formidable” candidate. Ever wonder why the keep promoting Romney as the one to run against? Did you happen to catch the little slip after the dabate the other night when ABC’s Democratic Strategist Donna Brazile summed up the debate by saying…
“Mitt Romney won tonight because no one touched him, and for Democrats, you know what? It was good news for us!”
George Stephanopoulos followed up by asking “Why’s that?”
Brazile responded ” Because we [democrats] believe that the weakest candidate is the candidate the Republicans are not attacking, and that’s Mitt Romney.”
But it shouldn’t be surprising that when your opponents [the dnc and msm] pick your candadite for them to run against, they pick the one they think will be the easiest to beat.
January 11, 2012 @ 11:44 am
Vinman,
After weighing up the pros and cons, he is my candidate. I hope I am right. There is no one in the GOP field that I personally feel I can win. Still by Super Tuesday comes, he may not one if the choices. So will have to choose the best one then. Then come Nov, will be voting Republican. Will not be voting for independant candidate. IMHO it would only ensure an Obama win. Wont put it pass him to pay for an independant to run to split votes. I cant stand the sight and sound of Obama, makes me want to puke everytime I hear or see him. Cant stand Mrs O either! Pity the general election is not today! Cant wait for him to be kicked out of the WH.
January 11, 2012 @ 12:23 pm
If you’ve checked out the records and you best align with the positions of Romney then that should be your man. If he’s the nominee against Obama I might vote for him in the general election.
But when I look at the records, I notice that with the exception of one, everyone on the stage finds government to be the answer to the problems. I’ve had my fill of status quo big government.
There is one guy refuting that the question to our problems is “what should the government do?” One guy is asking the question “does the government have a role in that?”. And the answers to that question are found in the U.S. Constitution.
One candidate is not just talking about limited government in the days leading into the primaries, but has a 40 year record proving he will stand for the principles he swore oath to uphold. For me, there are only two choices in the primary, more big government, or limited government. And there is only one limited government candidate running.
January 11, 2012 @ 1:32 pm
Vinman,
I personally dont think the change in our big govt is going to happen overnight. I think part of the reason why Obama’s approval is getting low is We The People is not going to stand or let him fundamentally change this country but I dont underestimate Obama. It isnt over until the fat lady sings.
My logic is, we need to get vote Obama out this year, then we gradually replace those in Congress and Senate who are only in there only for themselves. I think if my GOP candidate does become the 45th President I dont think he will be arrogrant like Obama. I think he is sincere in his expression of love and admiration for this country and wants to put this country back in the right path. Call it gut feeling. My gut feelings about Obama was not good last time and I was proven right. Of course I am not saying my gut feeling about my choice of GOP candidate is right
I do urge everyone to go out an vote, it is your right!
January 11, 2012 @ 10:19 am
In New Hampshire Evangelical Christians make up only 11%, where in South Carolina they are 45%. New Hampshire Democrats also are notorious for purposely crossing over to confuse the Republican primary there and elevate a weak sister like McCain in 2008. Luckily for us this time they wasted their votes on Huntsman who will now fade into his well earned oblivion. Look to see Santorum, Gingrich and Perry surge back in South Carolina but split the thinking Conservative Tea Party vote again unless the South Carolina voters wise up like in Iowa and rally around one Tea Party candidate to win the day over a better organized and funded Romney. Huntsman will get no cross-over help in South Carolina where the South wised up and abandoned the ideology of the Democrats years ago.
January 11, 2012 @ 10:33 am
I have a conservative friend who lives in New Hampshire and he has told me over the years of all the people that have moved into NH from Boston who are moderate to moderate left. That is why Romney won over Paul and that is why Huntsman came in 3rd because Romney and Huntsman both are moderate left. The MSM continue to hype Romney as the one to win over Obama. WHY? The MSM used the same tactics with McCain who did nothing to win over Obama 4 years ago. Come on people wake up and smell the coffee.
Oh yes, a lot of information coming out on eligibility and it isn’t just about Obama it now is asking about Romney but I doubt if many people have heard about that small constitutional issue!
January 12, 2012 @ 12:08 am
The alleged “eligibility question” concerning Mitt Romney has been well known since his father George Romney’s Presidential bid or hopes a long generation ago. I was an active Republican then, unlike at least one candidate this time whose alleged conservatism is such that he saw nothing amiss about being ultra-left Democratic Presidential candidate Al Gore’s Texas chair.
Whatever else Mitt Romney may or may not be, apart from being preferable to four more years of Obama, he was a U. S. citizen at birth because born to U. S. citizen parents, and there is not an iota of evidence linking him to any other citizenship under U. S. law. Not one of his opponents has openly questioned his Constitutional eligibility to be President, much less filed any suit or proceeding to resolve the issue. They know they would lose that.
Ronald Reagan, conservative first U. S. Senator from Texas since Redonstruction John Tower, Barry Goldwater, “Mr. Conservative” of his day and Presidential run, etc., understood certain things too many today do not, which is why they followed Reagan’s “eleventh commandment” against running down, and supported, Republicans from other, more liberal states, enabling and encouraging them to reciprocate. Either recruit, nominate, and elect someone you like, or, if you don’t do that, don’t help the Democrats by dividing and minimizing the support for whoever will be running against their candidate for President. Would you rather have Obama or whoever else he chooses for the next Supreme Court seat open, or anyone any Republican, including Romney, would likely appoint? It’s that simple. We’re stuck with two very liberal Supreme Court justices chosen by Obama instead of the more conservative choices McCain would have made because many hard-shell conservatives who call anyone not 100% in lockstep with them a leftistor a “RINO,” didn’t support McCain when he was our nominee and only chance to avoid having Obama. Look at the Ohio numbers, where the new voters Obama and the Democrats mobilized were actually outnumbered by the Bush voters who “went fishing” and didn’t vote for McCain. We’d have won the state if they had turned out for our nominee.
The Republican party in Massachussetts recruited Brown, the person they considered their best candidate, supported him, including getting him necessary independent votes, and elected him to Ted Kennedy’s former seat in the U. S. Senate, breaking the Democrats’ filibuster-proof majority. He had the active support of some more conservative Republicans. Immediately, the hard-shell folks who demand 100% agreement with them or brand you a “RINO” started doing the Democrats’ work and trying to get rid of him, of course without anybody who could get more votes as a Republican in Massachusetts, and, as a result, we stand to lose that crucial seat to Elizabeth Warren.
Like a huge number of other conservative Republicans, I might have preferred someone who isn’t in or near the current field to run against incumbent President Obama, somebody who, for openers, could have attracted a majority of Republican, and conservative (and other) Republican votes in the nomination process by now. “Generic Republican” out-polls most if not all of the actual or named potential candidates, but he’s not running and may not exist, or may be smart enough not to run.
The mainstream, the majority, of the Republican party is not defined by its hard-core “base” but by the candidate who can attract enough votes to actually win the Presidential nomination. That was McCain in 2008 and we’re in the mess we’re in now because we didn’t unite behind and elect him. It takes a lot of arrogrance, ignorance, and gall for people who claim to be key players in the Republican party to denigrate and dismiss the nominee of the Republican party as a Republican in Name Only (RINO).” Whoever wins the GOP nomination, the other Republicans have already produced Obama’s attack ads for him by their negative campaigning in the primary.
January 12, 2012 @ 3:26 am
Well said, Transaction7
January 11, 2012 @ 10:57 am
If Romney could not break 40% in NH, then where other than possibly MA could he do so? No one can possibly gain enough Delegates for a first ballot victory in Tampa before Mar 20th, so don’t start saying that the nomination contest is over. I think it will be decided in Tampa and not before.
January 11, 2012 @ 10:57 am
As an independent voter everyone of the GOP candidates leave me scratching my head and hearing them speak leaves a chill running down my back from fear of what they are actually saying and doing.
I was willing to stoop to support Cain or Bachman in a pinch, but the current “Frontrunners” are totally worthless to me. Beating Obama cannot be the only goal of the GOP, after winning, they must LEAD, REBUILD, AND GROW the country while shrinking the Federal Government. HELLO! Does anybody else realize this? The track records of the current “Frontrunners” is horrible.
January 11, 2012 @ 11:36 am
Romney being ‘more electable’ is a lie being foisted on us by the Republican establishment and the MSM. When are people going to wake up and start thinking for themselves?? I am sick of these lemmings buying everything they see and hear in the media.
If Romney should be our candidate (God forbid) I think it is possible many staunch conservatives will stay home, or vote for other candidates and not pick a President unless there is an independent or 3rd party on the ballot. Conservatives are FED UP with having these limp wristed, spineless JERKS crammed down our throats!
Does ANYONE listen to the debates?? Does ANYONE listen to any of the other candidates speak at Town Halls or other gatherings? Pulled up a speech on YouTube? Search online for voting records? All anyone need to is listen to Newt or Santorum to know who the ONLY conservatives are left in this race (sorry Ron Paul robots, he is to frighteningly naive on foreign policy to get elected).
We need STRENGTH, EXPERIENCE, and KNOWLEDGE of ALL the issues. We need a BULL DOG who will FIGHT for us, Someone who KNOWS THE CONSTITUTIONS and BELIEVES in the Constitution, and Romney Ain’t it!
January 11, 2012 @ 11:38 am
Beating Obama is not “the only goal of the GOP”, but if Obama is not beaten we are in deep stuff. Of the current candidates for the GOP nomination, I think Mitt Romney is the only one that can beat Obama in spite of what Donna Brazile said after the debate. Maybe that is a smoke screen, but I wouldn’t give two cents for Donna Brazile’s opinion. I am confident that Mitt Romney is very smart and conservative enough to not do something stupid. We need to maintain control of the House of Representatives and gain enough seats in the Senate to be able to put the reins on Romney if I am wrong about his conservatism.
January 11, 2012 @ 12:38 pm
Two candidates have had consistent support through out the entire cycle. Romney and Paul. Romney at just over 20% Paul at just under 20%. The rest of the candidates rise and fall in the “remainder”.
Two candidates have the finances and the established ground game to be in the hunt long term. Romney and Paul. Heck, they are the only two that even managed to get on the ballot in Virginia (Newts home state no less).
One of those two candidates has had the backing of the GOP establishment, voters who will in the long run vote for whoever becomes the Nominee, regardless. They are party loyalists.
The other candidate has had no establishment support and has been mostly ignored or dismissed by the MSM, yet he has been a consistent 2nd or 3rd in all the polls from the beginning and is currently holding the second highest delegate count. He has the votes of independents, libertarians, constitutionalists, anti war democrats, the far right fiscally conservative, more military support than all the other candidates combined and yes, some loons. His supporters will not loyally vote GOP. If he is not the Nominee most will go back to their many factions in 3rd party/independent votes.
Romney, if the Nominee pulls his 20-25% of establishment party loyalists and what ever he can garner from the “remainder”.
Paul, if the Nominee pulls his 20% of fringe voters plus the party loyalists, plus whatever he can garner of the “remainder”.
In an “Anyone But Obama” election this primary choice is easy. Only one brings the numbers from outside the ‘establishment” to beat Obama.
January 11, 2012 @ 11:48 am
Is it significant that Romney pulled 39%of the vote in NH and that means 61% of the vote was against him. Consider the top two in 2008 & 2012. In 2008 McCain & Romney pulled 68.7% of the vote. Two supposedly strong candidates. This year, Romney and Ron Paul (one strong and one not a chance) pulled only 62% of the vote. Hmmmm.
Romney, the GOP establishment candidate, another ”nice guy” like McCain, will NOT take it to Obama in the manner required to defeat the Chicago thug(s). He will not make Obama eat his own words, taken from his own statements. Obama’s own video clips followed by tough follow ups are alone almost enough to best him.
But a GOP “Nice Guy” will be sucker punched every day by the Chicago thug team.
I have to agree with Rush Limbaugh, this is the most critical presidential election in my lifetime (and I’m 75) if we are to keep anywhere near the country we cherish! We MUST get this dictator wannabe out of the White House.
January 11, 2012 @ 9:05 pm
Agree about Obama, your analysis of the voting resuls is not accurate. The remaining 61% was splint amoung several candidates. Many of those votes would have gone to Romney, if Paul and Gingrich had not been in the race and trashed Romney mercilessly.
As reflected by his 0 liberal rating by the ACLU, Romney is the most conservative man in the race.
January 11, 2012 @ 11:51 am
I think the ideal situation would be if all primaries were held on the same day. That way the nomination would not be decided until all the states got a chance to vote for the nomination. The majority of states’ voters are being disenfranchised in this way. Also, I wonder why the GOP approved some states’ early primaries and not others.
January 11, 2012 @ 11:55 am
I am OK with Romney as the Republican candidate if that is what ultimately happens for several reasons:
1. He has obvious business related talent which is critical to turning around our economy.
2. He has run a state which is the closest government executive position to the POTUS.
3. He has demonstrated a set of personal values that I find refreshing in a national political figure.
4. He is an exceptionally sophisticated person and has demonstrated leadership skills.
5. He appears to have potentially the broadest appeal of all Republican candidates.
6. He is a good speaker and communicator and has a Presidential persona.
7. He supports our traditional American capitalism system not the Obama socialist agenda.
There will never be the “perfect” candidate no matter who the Republicans put up for consideration because the Democrats and the MSM will “pick” on whomever is selected. The Democrats think that Romney will be easier to beat then whom…Santorum, Gingrich, Perry….? They are in for a big surprise come election time because Obama is going to lose, the question is how bad.
The important moves yet to be made to finalize the run up to the election are:
1. Select the Republican candidate.
2. Gather everyone (conservatives, moderates, etc.) behind the candidate.
3. Pick a running mate that broadens the appeal of the ticket (critical).
4. Start a broadbased Internet and media communications program supporting the ticket.
5. Send financial support to the RNC.
We need to rise above personal quirks or less important issues and keep in mind that the replacement of Obama is the first and most important goal of the elections this year.
January 11, 2012 @ 12:29 pm
One of the things people seem to be overlooking that has long term consequenses is the Supreme Court appointments that might be made.
Romney might ‘look’ presidential but when it comes to Court nominations I want a true conservative calling the shots!
No moderates for me, thank you!
January 11, 2012 @ 12:49 pm
A moderate/conservative Rebuplican in Massachusetts would most likely be a moderate/liberal Democrat in most Red States.
I prefer conservative constituionalists picks to the SCOTUS.
January 11, 2012 @ 1:04 pm
Cogent observation galex, I am tired of dancing to the tune of the Supremes and their court jesters.
January 12, 2012 @ 3:52 am
JDZ – You, sir, have nailed it.
I have every bit of confidence that most any of the candidates would pick good Supreme Court Justices.
I agree with your emphasis that the VP choice will be EXTREMELY important (note to Mitt, please no pandering or PC pick like Sarah Palin was meant to be)
A pendulum cannot swing instantly in the other direction, or it will break. We must elect someone in between where we are and where we need to be. This country is on the wrong track. We cannot hit the brakes and swerve hard right in one move. Someone like Mitt who is somewhere in the middle is a better first step, and, with the right VP (Christie?) can appeal to all to defeat O’Poser.
Also, I chuckle somewhat at the “insider” label thrown at him. Has he worked in Washington? Is he corrupt from that environment? Not exactly, but Paul, Gingrich and Santorum have a combined 53 years or so of Washingtonism in them. At least Perry and Huntsman have governed something (although Huntsman worked for O’Bummer) So who’s the insider? At this point I want someone who can turn this ship around, and it’s a lot tougher job than being a community organizer.
January 11, 2012 @ 3:24 pm
I just hope we don’t have a 3rd party candidate like “Donald Trump” stick his Nose into the Race. In my opinion he is a very Liberal person and associates with many liberal with money.
As to RNC… we need to Replace all the members of that group. They are not conservatives period. They do not want to follow the constitution and never have completely done so! Wo to vote for… well the good conservatives have all been left behind. Newt G talks the best line in my opinion, but he must stop attacking Mitt and the same for Mitt. It is Obama they must attack!
January 11, 2012 @ 4:49 pm
Perry appears to be dead in the water. IMO Romney’s statement that he liked being able to fire people who provide inadequate services made him appear to be a stronger candidate to many voters who are looking for a massive government workers’ shakeup.
As a candidate who is comfortable with firing he may be more successful than others in getting rid of the fat and cutting spending. What Bain did with low-performing companies perhaps Romney can do with stimulating our economy. I doubt if he would ever bailout poor performing companies.
January 11, 2012 @ 7:10 pm
Why are people swallowing the mantra that “Romney is electable” ”Romney is the only one who can beat Obama”? ”Romney is the candidate the Democrats fear.” We are being constantly reminded of this everywhere we turn in the media. Am I the only one who thinks the “media” in general is just a teensy bit liberal? Why are they so unanimous about this? And how successful have we been running “moderate” Republicans? Think McCain, think Dole…
This all reminds me of the old Uncle Remus story about Brer Rabbit and the tar baby. ”Skin me, boil me, drown me, but PLEASE don’t throw me in the briar patch!” Pretty good psychology, huh!
January 11, 2012 @ 8:57 pm
Romney was given a flat 0 in the ACLU’s liberal ratings. Dr Paul garnered an 18 besting Obama at 16! When the ACLU can’t find any liberal values in a candidate, that’s the man we need in the White House.
January 12, 2012 @ 5:27 am
Mr. Ryder: Let me get this straight; we are to believe the [ACLU] American Communist Leaning Union !
January 11, 2012 @ 10:50 pm
Romney’s conservativism is backed by his religion. No liberals in the Mormon Church. My only problem is he is pro military but did not encourage any of his sons to join the armed forces. Alot can be said about a hypocryt.
January 12, 2012 @ 7:51 am
I was thinking about how a few of our very own GOP candidates were attacking captalism to take the front runner down, saying he is a predator, a vulture capitalist. Then I looked at the housing sector. When home owners are not able to fulfill their mortgage obligations, banks step in to foreclose. It is a sad thing when homeowners are forced out of their homes either because they should not have been given a mortgage in the first place or perhaps they were laid off. The banks then resell, isnt this similar to what Bain Capital did? Those who over criticise when they are down in the polls simply have no idea what free market and captalism is all about, period
There is and always will be failure and successes in everyday of our lives, it makes us stronger when we learn from our mistakes. This disgusting attacks by our very own is probably good for Gov Romney, if he can withstand this, he would emerge stronger to take on Obama. Time will tell.
A note about Speaker Gingrich, he said he is capable of debating Obama. I am sure he can but he is also very good at sticking his foot in his foot, shoot first and ask questions later. As you all know after being challenged by a supporter in a townhall, he is back tracking now about how he was starting a class warfare when he attacked Bain and Romney. For a man who is so intelligent, he is not aware of that? Come on. He himself pointed out in one of the debates that Obama is starting a class warfare and then he goes and does it himself. I dont want a nominee who debates well then goes around sticking his foot in his mouth and negating all the good work he has done during his debate. This country cannot afford this kind of mistakes. Still if he winds up our nominee I will support him and I pray that he wins! I do agree with many who have said that Speaker Gingrich is revengeful.
I feel that if My candidate, Gov Romney ends up being the nominee the Speaker would have a hard time supporting him (he just as much said he cant support Dr Paul! I wonder whose side Speaker is with! ). If the Speaker ends up the nominee, Gov Romney would support him in a heartbeat like he did Sen McCain. I say this because I was very impressed with the speech Gov Romney gave during CPac after he decided to step down so that we can all start to coalesce around 2 candidates in order for us to make our decisions swiftly. To me this shows astute judgement and calculated move, ie no point wasting money on a long drawn out primary and tearing the party apart in the process.
On Gov Perry, he lost me when he said that I was heartless because I do agree that giving subsided tuition to children of illegal immigrants.
January 12, 2012 @ 7:08 pm
I’m still rooting for Perry. They all have baggage, and Perry seems to have the least.