OT – Who will run for President on the Republican side?

[markmax33]

Here is a Fox report on how Santorum dropping out affects the race. This is from a real news source:

http://youtu.be/jfPuyYeZ4Cc

The facts are:

1. All (or almost all) of Santorum’s bound delegates are still bound to vote for him in the first round of voting at the RNC. They can’t vote for Romney.

2. His unbound delegate in the Caucus states will almost all go to Ron Paul since Paul was the strongest in all of the Caucus states and Paul’s people are setup as alternates and Santorum’s people will likely give up and stop caring if they had spots to begin with.

3. If Romney doesn’t get to 1144 all of his delegates become unbound on the second round of voting and all bets are off. It would have been nice for Santorum to carry Pennsylvania and another state or 2 before he dropped out.

This race is not over yet. Anyone who tells you it is over is really just guessing and might be right 65% of the time. Texas and Calfornia still matter. Paul has millions of dollars ready for those states and should be able to affect the voting percentages drastically. He didn’t spend any money in VA and lost by 18% to Romney in a one-on-one battle.

[Anonymous]

The only way Romney can beat Obama on the economy is if he convinces voters that he is the better choice for the middle class – not something he is in a good position to do.

Americans have never been too keen on electing a “businessman” to be president. It has a certain appeal, but most people never go for it.

Of course Romney is not a pure businessman – he’s got experience as governor. But that experience probably hurts his chances more than helps.

“Romneycare was great for Massachusetts, but terrible for America, and here’s why…”

“Sure, I’ve fired a lot of people. It’s good for job creation…”

I said it before on this site: We are going to see the most bizarre doublespeak in American history from the Romney campaign / Murdoch propaganda machine.

The Daily Show will have no shortage of material.

I’ll bet Romney’s campaign managers are carefully reading 1984, looking for ways to refine the message.

[all]

[quote=markmax33] He didn’t spend any money in VA and lost by 18% to Romney in a one-on-one battle.[/quote]

For the sake of completeness, how much did Romney spend in VA?

[Coronita]

[quote=pri_dk]The only way Romney can beat Obama on the economy is if he convinces voters that he is the better choice for the middle class – not something he is in a good position to do.

Americans have never been too keen on electing a “businessman” to be president. It has a certain appeal, but most people never go for it.

Of course Romney is not a pure businessman – he’s got experience as governor. But that experience probably hurts his chances more than helps.

“Romneycare was great for Massachusetts, but terrible for America, and here’s why…”

“Sure, I’ve fired a lot of people. It’s good for job creation…”

I said it before on this site: We are going to see the most bizarre doublespeak in American history from the Romney campaign / Murdoch propaganda machine.

The Daily Show will have no shortage of material.

I’ll bet Romney’s campaign managers are carefully reading 1984, looking for ways to refine the message.[/quote]

I would agree. Short of something of a disaster in the current economy, Obama will win over Romney. I’d say if the economy goes to the crapper, Obama’s got a big problem then, because people are gonna wonder where did all the spending go. Things like the GSA wates are going to be blown out of proportion. I know it’s probably overblown. But it really doesn’t set the mood right.

For your reference….

If the economy craters, the GOP is going to plaster these and every other dirt they dug up on every attack add possible about “big government waste”.

It’s really not Obama’s fault imho. But perception will be reality.

[markmax33]

[quote=captcha][quote=markmax33] He didn’t spend any money in VA and lost by 18% to Romney in a one-on-one battle.[/quote]

For the sake of completeness, how much did Romney spend in VA?[/quote]

Romney got millions of dollars of air time in VA. I don’t know what he actually spent but you better include free airtime in that calculation. Paul probably got 1/10th of it. Paul’s money goes much further when he spends it and actually campaigns there. Paul spent 1 night in VA because it was a winner take all delegate state. 41-59% was the breakdown. When Paul tries he can easily narrow the margin like he did in the caucus states. He has a shot at Texas I’m sure.

[all]

[quote=markmax33]When Paul tries he can easily narrow the margin like he did in the caucus states.[/quote]

Why isn’t he trying all the time? Is he saving the energy for 2016?

[all]

[quote=flu]
Anyway, for the rest of the folks… Any takers on Romney versus Obama.
[/quote]

I try to imagine the world in which Romney captured 2008 GOP nomination/presidency. What difference does it make for a random person (assuming the person’s last name is not Khadafi, Gaddafi, or some other variant of the same name)?

Why do people say that Romney is a weak candidate? Because he does not cause delirium in the audience when he speaks? And why is Obama vulnerable incumbent? TSA is still where it was 4 years ago. So are Guantanamo, Bush tax cuts, oil rigs, Jamie Dimon, troops in Afghanistan, etc. How would things change if Romney wins? Or looses?

[an]

[quote=flu]I would agree. Short of something of a disaster in the current economy, Obama will win over Romney. I’d say if the economy goes to the crapper, Obama’s got a big problem then, because people are gonna wonder where did all the spending go. Things like the GSA wates are going to be blown out of proportion. I know it’s probably overblown. But it really doesn’t set the mood right.

For your reference….

If the economy craters, the GOP is going to plaster these and every other dirt they dug up on every attack add possible about “big government waste”.

It’s really not Obama’s fault imho. But perception will be reality.[/quote]
Totally agree. Which is why I actually am hoping Obama would win.

[Anonymous]

[quote=flu]Things like the GSA wates are going to be blown out of proportion. I know it’s probably overblown. But it really doesn’t set the mood right.

For your reference….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JcQcn6-bIs%5B/quote%5D

I saw the GSA thing on the Daily Show. I’m so desensitized to this stuff already that it didn’t really surprise me, and I don’t have the energy to feel any outrage.

Plus the GSA stuff is a drop in the bucket compared to what waste goes on in defense.

Think Vegas is extravagant? Here’s a local defense contractor that sent their whole company on a trip to the Cayman Islands a few years back:

http://www.integrity-apps.com/aboutus/news_detail.php?id=76

I know someone that works there and she says she spends much of her day surfing the net because there isn’t much do to.

Yup, that’s your tax dollar also.

[markmax33]

[quote=captcha][quote=markmax33]When Paul tries he can easily narrow the margin like he did in the caucus states.[/quote]

Why isn’t he trying all the time? Is he saving the energy for 2016?[/quote]

He couldn’t try in all of the states because he didn’t have goldman sachs sending him money. Ironically he was 2nd in fundraising on the GOP side without the help from the banks.

Paul knew he could win the caucus states and win the unbound delegates and that was his strategy. He let the other guys duke it out in the other states. Virginia was a bit of an anomoly because Gingrich and Santorum didn’t get the 10k signatures required. Still VA was in the middle of all of the other caucus states and to focus on that states would have taken too much effort. Ron Paul will most likely win the following states by delegate count:

Iowa
Wisconsin
Washington
Alaska
Maine
Colorado
Nevada
Wyoming
Missouri (already has most delegates from all counties, just needs to win state caucus)

Just to put in perspective – Mitt Romney finished 3rd in North Dakota in the straw poll. He won the most delegate in the state. The feeling is that the state GOP party rigged the ballots at the state convention by pre-printing them with a slate of Romney delegates and forcing write-ins for the rest. That could happen in other state convetions I guess. I gaurentee those state GOP chairs get fired if they do it and Paul supporter gets put in for the next election as has happenned in several states this election cycle such as Iowa and Maine.

Paul probably stands to win 400+ delegates from the caucus states if things play out well. Santorum has 200 bound that can’t vote for Romney and Gingrich has 140 bound that can’t for for Romney. Paul or Gingrich would still need to carry a few states including Texas to prevent Romney from getting to 1144, but it is not a mathmatical assurance. The anti-Romney camp has about 800 delegates already – Romney has about 556 delegates. If Paul were to carry Texas it would put the anti-Ronmey count at 950 and several of the other states are proportional primaries so if it is Paul VS Romney – the anti-Romney camp will likely get to 1144.

[Anonymous]

I think mm33 and bg have a secret bet to see who can come up with the most elaborate rationalizations.

[markmax33]

[quote=pri_dk]I think mm33 and bg have a secret bet to see who can come up with the most elaborate rationalizations.[/quote]

Sorry but it is fact. The numbers don’t lie. If you weren’t lazy you could figure it out yourself.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=flu]Anyway, for the rest of the folks… Any takers on Romney versus Obama.

I was saying Obama is going to win for the past few months with the precondition that the economy holds up they that is was…Well guess what? My prediction now is that if the stock market continues to tank the way it is up to the election, he ain’t going to make a second term.[/quote]
I feel that the unemployment rate matters a heckuva lot more to your typical voter than the stock market. Most of the folks like flu who watch the market closely aren’t going to vote for Obama anyways. I’ll grant if the Dow tanks another 10-20% by election day it’s not good for Obama, but that’s more of a symptom of overall economic weakness than a cause.

Romney’s two huge problems are the main problems the National Republican Party faces: Women and Latino voters. Both were actively alienated in the primary process. I’m not convinced Romney can carry more than 45% of either of these two large blocs, and that makes the electoral math pretty challenging for Romney. There are only so many white males making over $200K a year in swing states, which is one of the few groups Romney totally dominates.

Obviously it’s far from over, but at this moment in time Obama has the inside track. Still, if someone gave me 3:2 odds on Romney, I’d probably take that bet. But since it’s baseball season I’ll use this analogy: It’s the end of the 2nd inning, and the score is Obama 2, Romney 1, with a lot of game left to play.

[Coronita]

Romney versus Obama (not that there was any doubt)…Well, at least for most of us.

[Author]

Posts