Maine caucus win gives Romney new momentum
From Christian Science Monitor:
[QUOTE][URL="http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0211-romney-wins-maine-caucuses.jpg/11731454-1-eng-US/0211-romney-wins-maine-caucuses.jpg_full_600.jpg"][IMG]http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0211-romney-wins-maine-caucuses.jpg/11731454-1-eng-US/0211-romney-wins-maine-caucuses.jpg_full_380.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
[I]Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks at a caucus, Saturday, Feb. 11, 2012, in Portland, Maine[/I].
[COLOR="#696969"]Robert F. Bukaty/AP[/COLOR]
[B]Winning the Maine caucuses gives Mitt Romney a burst of momentum he hopes will carry him until the next major primaries in Arizona and Michigan, then Super Tuesday when 10 states hold elections[/B].
[I]By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer / February 11, 2012[/I]
Mitt Romney’s win in the Maine caucuses, announced Saturday evening, gives an added boost to what already was a good day for him. Earlier, he won the CPAC straw poll vote of conservative activists.
After losing three nominating contests to Rick Santorum earlier in the week – Minnesota, Missouri, and Colorado – Romney could claim (or perhaps reclaim) front-runner status even though none of the four state events were particularly relevant in the delegate count. And Maine is especially odd in that some precincts could keep on caucusing through February.
But the headlines will read a win for Romney – 39 percent for him and 36 percent for Ron Paul. Neither Rick Santorum, winner of the week’s earlier three contests, nor Newt Gingrich actively campaigned in Maine. Santorum won 18 percent of the vote, Gingrich 6 percent.
Although he came in a very close second to Romney, Paul had hoped to win for the first time since the nominating contests began in Iowa last month. He has focused on caucuses, where his band of enthusiastic libertarian supporters might be expected to do well.
But in Maine, regional New England neighbor of the state where Romney was governor, the state’s noted independence was not enough to carry the day for Paul. Still, the Texas congressman vows to continue.
"We're not going away," he told supporters when the results in Maine were announced. "We have the message America needs at this particular time."
The results there give Romney a burst of a momentum his campaign hopes will carry him until the next contests – major primaries in Arizona and Michigan on Feb. 28, then Super Tuesday on March 6 when 10 states will hold elections.
Romney holds clear leads in both Arizona and Michigan (his home state), according to recent polls. He also leads in most national polls pitting the four candidates against each other.
The one exception, announced Saturday, is a Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey showing a Santorum surge. In PPP’s latest national poll, Santorum has 38 percent compared to 23 percent for Romney, 17 percent for Gingrich, and 13 percent for Paul.
Gingrich’s continued presence in the race is a big plus for Romney, PPP finds. If the former House Speaker were to drop out, 58 of his supporters would move to Santorum and just 22 percent to Romney.
“It’s been an amazingly fast ascent to first place for Rick Santorum,” said Dean Debnam, president of PPP. “It’s important to keep in mind though that fewer than half of his voters are firmly committed to him. When he comes under attack in the coming days his lead could evaporate just as quickly as it was created.”
In the Conservative Political Action Conference straw poll Saturday, 38 percent voted for Romney, 31 percent for Santorum, 15 percent for Paul, and 12 percent for Gingrich. In a companion presidential straw poll of self-identified conservatives around the country, the results were much closer: 27 percent for Romney, 25 percent for Santorum, 20 percent for Gingrich, and 8 percent for Paul.[/QUOTE]
What You Missed While Not Watching the Arizona GOP Debate
[IMG]http://timeswampland.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/sl_debate6_0222_blog.jpg?w=600&h=400&crop=1[/IMG]
Jack Kurtz / ZUMAPRESS
[COLOR=#696969]Republican presidential candidates Ron Paul, left, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich stand together at the Republican presidential debate Feb. 22, 2012, in Mesa[/COLOR], Arizona.
[I]By Michael Scherer | @michaelscherer | February 23, 2012[/I]
[QUOTE][COLOR=#000000][B]0 minutes[/B]. Dry your eyes. It’s hard on all of us. But if you keep crying like this you won’t be able to see the 20th debate, perhaps the last of the primaries. We can do this together, learn to let go. But the sobbing must stop. James Earl Jones just said, “This is CNN.” John King is standing on the space stage. We have [URL="http://search.time.com/results.html?N=0&Nty=1&p=0&cmd=tags&srchCat=Full+Archive&Ntt=%22what+you+missed+while+not+watching%22&x=0&y=0"]so many memories[/URL]. Let’s make just a few more. King says this debate “could change everything.” Believe.
[B]1 minute[/B]. Montage. High desert mountains. Low political clichés. “Grand showdown.” “All over the map.” “Could take another turn.” “Fight to the finish.” Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum is the “late contender.” Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is the “Long Distance Runner.” Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is the “Determined Challenger.” Texas Representative Ron Paul is the “Delegate Hunter.” None of these words mean anything.
[B]
3 minutes[/B]. Montage ends with a quick aerial shot of the indoor arena from a helicopter, soaring over the Phoenix suburbs, which look just like every other suburb. Then back inside. The candidates come out. Lumbering Gingrich. Measured Romney. Goofy Santorum. Amiable Paul. Romney makes a show of applauding Paul, so the others join in. Like old times.
([B]MORE:[/B] [URL="http://swampland.time.com/2012/02/23/arizona-gop-debate-santorum-finds-himself-in-the-spotlight-and-on-the-defensive/"]Santorum Finds Himself in the Spotlight and On the Defensive[/URL])
[B]
4 minutes[/B]. Arizona State University’s symphonic choral group does the national anthem. Always loved the student groups the best. Much better than the B-grade show-tune types.
[B]
7 minutes[/B]. Self-introduction time. Paul is “defender of the Constitution.” Santorum will talk about “positive solutions.” Romney gets going on a long riff about “a secure future and a prosperous life.” But when he says Obama is bad, the crowd’s Pavlovian response takes over. They applaud, interrupting Romney, who concedes. “That’s good enough. As George Costanza would say, when they’re applauding, stop. Right?” Actually Jerry Seinfeld said that. Close enough.
[B]
8 minutes[/B]. Gingrich goes with some fresh, jarring images. “I’ve developed a program for American energy so no future President will ever bow to a Saudi king again,” he says. Vote Gingrich. Vote rude diplomacy. Also “$2.50 a gallon gasoline.”
[B]
9 minutes[/B]. Questions. This one from a guy named Gilbert, who worries about the U.S. debt being so high, which is an enormously bland question. Santorum has a stump speech answer. He will go after “means tested entitlement spending” but not defense. He goes on for a while.
[B]
11 minutes[/B]. Then King gets to the point: He asks Romney if Santorum is fooling the country with his fiscal conservative pitch. Seems that whole first question for Santorum was a set up. Romney drops debt-sized chunk of oppo. “Well I’m looking at his historic record, which voting for raising the debt ceiling five different times without voting for compensating cuts. Voting to keep in place Davis-Bacon. . . . Voting to fund Planned Parenthood, to expand the Department of Education.” He goes on. One thing Romney has is a real talent for memorization.
[B]
13 minutes[/B]. Santorum responds by pointing out that Romney would have voted to raise the debt ceiling too. But Romney’s entire political approach is to deny completely obvious facts like this in favor of focus-group-tested one liners. So Santorum catches on with a one-liner of his own. “Governor Romney raised $700 million in taxes and fees in Massachusetts,” he says. “I never voted to raise taxes.”
[B]
14 minutes[/B]. Romney doesn’t respond to the claim directly. But he does say “cut, cap and balance” a couple of times. He also says he intends to cut taxes for everyone who pays them, “including the top 1 percent,” which is an odd thing to emphasize, given his problems connecting with those not in his income bracket.
[B]
15 minutes[/B]. Gingrich gets a chance to talk. He promises “$2.50 gasoline” again, which is exactly the sort of political pander he would probably call “fundamentally dishonest” if one of his opponents offered it. Never mind though. Gingrich has a theme.
[B]
17 minutes[/B]. King asks Paul why he called Santorum “a fake.” “Because he’s a fake,” says Paul. So good. Paul goes on to point out that Santorum is now against a lot of the things he once supported, like the No Child Left Behind education law.
[B]
19 minutes[/B]. Santorum comes back with a bunch of facts about all the conservative ratings saying he is conservative in comparison to other members of Congress. “That’s always a cop-out when you compare yourself to the other members of Congress,” Paul hits back. “The American people are sick and tired of the members of Congress. They get about a 9% rating.” If Paul was only selling something people wanted to buy, he would have a good shot at winning.
([B]MORE[/B]: [URL="http://thepage.time.com/2012/02/22/grading-the-mesa-debate/"]Grading the Arizona Republican Debate[/URL])
[B]
21 minutes[/B]. King asks Romney what the deal was when he called himself “severely conservative” a couple of weeks ago. “Well, severe, strict,” says Romney, basically admitting it was a mistake. Of course he will not admit that he has not actually been a strict conservative, just that he doesn’t say it right when he tries.
[B]
22 minutes[/B]. Have we mentioned the chairs? This is different. Everyone is sitting down. Only Romney has kept his suit jacket buttoned. Good judgement there. He looks like he is ready. The rest look like they are reclining after a big meal.
[B]
25 minutes[/B]. Talk turns to earmarking. And it’s complicated. Santorum is against earmarks now, but he doesn’t apologize for voting for them before. Romney is against Santorum voting for earmarks before, but he isn’t against his work to get earmarks before. Gingrich is generally into earmarks. Paul, who hates all government spending, also defends earmarks. The candidates flesh these positions out for 8 minutes. Real confusing. At one point, Romney says after Santorum talks for a while, “I didn’t follow all of that, but I can tell you this.” It is a near perfect transition sentence. But what follows is also pretty unintelligible.
[B]30 minutes[/B]. Here is a typical exchange: “Attached to a bill? Attached to a bill?” asks Romney. “As part of the bill. Congressman Paul…” says Santorum. “And the President can’t veto it?” asks Romney. “He can veto the bill,” says Santorum. “The whole bill, but he can’t veto the earmark?” asks Romney. “Well, we tried to do that, by the way. I supported a line-item veto,” says Santorum. “That’s what I support. That’s what I support,” says Romney. “Hold on. Hold on,” says Santorum. Democracy in action.
[B]34 minutes[/B]. From earmarks to bailouts. Santorum says he is against all bailouts, and that Romney opposed the auto bailout but supported the bailout of Wall Street in 2008. Romney gets all huffy. “Nice, nice try,” he says. An inferior transition sentence. Then he explains at length his auto-non-bailout position. He says he wasn’t just bailing out Wall Street by supporting TARP, but trying to bail out all banks. And he pulls out more oppo on Santorum. “Now, Senator you voted in favor of the bail out of the airline industry after 9/11,” he says. “I think that was the right thing to do. It was an emergency.” This is an odd attack, since it is actually a compliment.
[B]39 minutes[/B]. Santorum can’t let Romney get away with the compliment-attack. “As Governor Romney well knows, that the American government shut down the airline industry after 9/11,” Santorum begins. But pretty soon Romney is interrupting. “I agree with you,” he says. “I agree.” All confusing. Like two gladiators blowing deadly kisses.
([B]MORE:[/B] [URL="http://swampland.time.com/2012/02/21/in-the-national-spotlight-santorum-doesnt-shy-away-from-social-issues/"]In the National Spotlight, Santorum Doesn’t Shy Away from Social Issues[/URL])
[B]
41 minutes[/B]. Gingrich says Obama is bad and Chrysler is now a foreign company. Paul says government involvement in pretty much anything is always bad.
[B]
42 minutes[/B]. Our first commercial break. How you holding up? Maybe these aerial shots of Mesa, Arizona, which looks like a dun-colored office park, will help.
[B]46 minutes[/B]. We’re back. A question about birth control, which sparks boos from the crowd. So Gingrich steps in. “But I just want to point out, you did not once in the 2008 campaign, not once did anybody in the elite media ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide. Okay?” Okay. It is not true that Obama [URL="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1849483,00.html"]voted[/URL] in favor of infanticide. And it is not true that the elite media [URL="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1849483,00.html"]ignored[/URL] the charge that he did.
[B]47 minutes[/B]. Romney pivots away from contraception to religious freedom, and condemns Obama for “most recently requiring the Catholic Church to provide for its employees and its various enterprises health care insurance that would include birth control, sterilization and the morning-after pill. Unbelievable.” This is a good line, as long as you don’t go back to Dec. 8, 2005, when Romney himself [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/romney-and-plan-b-the-santorum-and-gingrich-claims/2012/02/07/gIQATG6VxQ_blog.html"]was quoted[/URL] saying, ““My own view is that every hospital should provide to rape victims information about emergency contraception, or emergency contraception itself.” Unbelievable, you say? Believe it.
[B]49 minutes[/B]. Santorum returns to contraception, which he has previously said he would speak out against as President. By definition, contraception prevents pregnancy, but Santorum suggests it does the opposite, by encouraging teen sexuality. “What we’re seeing is a problem in our culture with respect to children being raised by children, children being raised out of wedlock, and the impact on society economically,” he says. So vote Santorum, and prevent pregnancy with less contraception. Or something like that.
[B]51 minutes[/B]. Paul, who is a doctor, doesn’t buy Santorum’s logic. “Along the line of the pills creating immorality, I don’t see it that way,” he says. “I think the immorality creates the problem of wanting to use the pills. So you don’t blame the pills.” He has a point.
[B]53 minutes[/B]. More talk of contraception. Romney again denies that Massachusetts ever wanted to force Catholic hospitals to be involved in emergency contraception, even though that was [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/romney-and-plan-b-the-santorum-and-gingrich-claims/2012/02/07/gIQATG6VxQ_blog.html"]his position[/URL] at the time. Gingrich points this fact out, and then goes on to suggest that any government involvement in issues like contraception is always a “move towards tyranny.” The crowd likes this line.
[B]55 minutes[/B]. The whole debate is really becoming difficult to follow, and not just because of all the emotion surrounding the potential end of the GOP debates. Santorum says, “I opposed Title X funding. I’ve always opposed Title X funding,” which provides federal support for family planning clinics like Planned Parenthood. But in 2006, [URL="http://youtu.be/9MBO9tNNejo"]Santorum said[/URL], “I support, you know, Title X.” Really. It’s okay if you want to give up. Or cry. Start now.
[B]59 minutes[/B]. Romney points out that Santorum said something different back in 2006. “I think I was making it clear that, while I have a personal more objection to it; even though I don’t support it, that I voted for bills that included it,” says Santorum, as if this makes anything clear.
[B]60 minutes[/B]. To recap the first hour. Most of the candidates both hate earmarks and like earmarks. Romney hates restrictions on Catholic hospitals, but once supported them. Santorum hates federal family planning funding, though he once supported it but only because he supported the bills that included it. Gingrich will deliver $2.50 gas. Now we can begin the next hour.
[B]61 minutes[/B]. Santorum and Romney are squabbling about RomneyCare and whether it led to ObamaCare. Romney pulls out a zinger: “The reason we have Obama Care is because the Senator you supported over Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter, the pro-choice Senator of Pennsylvania that you supported and endorsed in a race over Pat Toomey, he voted for Obama Care. If you had not supported him, if we had said, no to Arlen Specter, we would not have Obama Care. So don’t look at me. Take a look in the mirror.” Again, good memorization. Romney also says he is against ObamaCare because it cuts a private, add-on program for Medicare.
([B]MORE:[/B] [URL="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2105690,00.html"]Mitt Romney: The Once and Future Front Runner Looks Beyond Florida[/URL])
[B]62 minutes[/B]. Santorum shoots back by pointing out that RomneyCare required hundreds of millions of dollars in additional federal subsidies to work, which is true. Then Santorum delivers a zinger of his own, saying Romney’s boasts of balancing the budget on the state level don’t mean anything, since governors have no choice, which is true. “Don’t go around bragging about something you have to do,” he says. “Michael Dukakis balanced the budget for 10 years, does that make him qualified to be President of the United States? I don’t think so.” Applause. Santorum then defends his support of Specter, for complicated reasons connected with the Supreme Court and the Senate Judiciary Committee, even though Santorum has previously told voters that he regrets supporting Specter. Abandon all hope any who want this to make sense.
[B]65 minutes[/B]. Question about immigration. Everyone wants a strong border. Then there is a crowd shot of Rick Perry in the audience. He still looks handsome. Without a microphone, he has more gravitas. Gingrich reiterates his desire for a double fence on the southern border. Romney calls Arizona’s tough immigration laws “a model,” and promises to drop the lawsuits to throw the laws out on constitutional grounds. Santorum also says he wants more enforcement.
[B]72 minutes[/B]. King quotes Republican rising star, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, as saying the immigration rhetoric in the GOP has been “harsh, intolerable, inexcusable.” He asks Gingrich to respond, and Gingrich dodges. “Is there somebody somewhere who’s done that? “ he says. “Sure.”
[B]
74 minutes[/B]. Another commercial break. It has gone dark outside, so no more aerial shots.
[B]80 minutes[/B]. We’re back. Each candidate is asked to describe himself in one word. Paul says “Consistent,” which is true. Santorum says, “Courage,” which is strange, because he has spent the night explaining away uncourageous positions. Romney says “Resolute,” which is also strange for basically the same reason. And Gingrich says “Cheerful,” which is nearly a perfect response, because it means, “You are all a bunch of clowns, and I put up with you.”
[B]81 minutes[/B]. Foreign policy time. Romney is not going to give a position on more women on the front lines of the military. Though he does say he wants to grow the size of the military dramatically, and that Obama is terrible for a number of reasons. Gingrich also won’t bite on women in the military, though he does call Obama “the most dangerous President on national security grounds in American history.” Paul says he wants fewer wars, especially the ones with the U.S. on offense. Santorum reiterates his concern about women in the infantry, and says he would not just defer to military leaders.
[B]90 minutes[/B]. All the candidates agree that Iran is really dangerous, must not get a nuclear weapon, and is run by crazy people. Except for Paul, who appeals to his colleagues: “If they are so determined to go to war, the only thing I plead with you for, if this is the case, is do it properly. Ask the people and ask the Congress for a declaration of war. This is war and people are going to die. And you have got to get a declaration of war.” This is unlikely to happen.
[B]100 minutes[/B]. Santorum gets a question about his past support for No Child Left Behind, which he now opposes. Santorum says he supported the bill for the worst political reasons, without believing in what he did at the time. “I have to admit, I voted for that. It was against the principles I believed in, but, you know, when you’re part of the team, sometimes you take one for the team, for the leader, and I made a mistake,” he says. The crowd boos. “Courage” Santorum.
([B]MORE:[/B] [URL="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2103758,00.html?iid=pw-sl"]The Passion of Rick Santorum[/URL])
[B]103 minutes[/B]. Romney and Gingrich like local school control and choice. They don’t like teachers unions. Paul basically agrees, except he wants the federal government out of the school business completely.
[B]
108 minutes[/B]. One more break.
[B]111 minutes[/B]. Final question. What is the biggest misconception about you? Paul says it’s the media’s notion that he can’t win. Gingrich doesn’t answer the question. He just talks about how ready he is to solve big problems. Romney also dodges, and goes into his stump speech about restoring America’s promise. King points out that this is not a response to the question. Romney gets testy, “You know, you get to ask the questions want, I get to give the answers I want. Fair enough?” This is jarring and off message. Doesn’t feel restorative. Santorum says people don’t understand that he can beat Barack Obama.
[B]
116 minutes[/B]. That’s it. We’re done. And we may never return. It’s been 20 debates. A long wild ride. We made it. Let the tears flow.[/QUOTE]
Mitt Romney ridicules Rick Santorum for ‘taking one for the team’
From The Washington Post:
[QUOTE]Posted at 12:32 PM ET, 02/23/2012
[I]By Sandhya Somashekhar[/I]
PHOENIX — Mitt Romney hammered rival Rick Santorum on Thursday over his performance in Wednesday's Republican presidential debate, ridiculing the former Pennsylvania senator for his attempts to explain why he repeatedly voted against his conscience while in Congress.
“We saw Senator Santorum explain most of the night why he did or voted for things he disagreed with,” Romney said during an appearance before a meeting of the Associated Builders and Contractors. “And he talked about this as taking one for the team. I wonder what team he was taking it for. My team is the American people.”
Romney assailed Santorum for voting for legislation in support of Planned Parenthood and the No Child Left Behind education law, and against right-to-work labor laws. He criticized him for voting five times to raise the nation's debt limit without achieving compensating cuts. And he attacked Santorum for voting for earmarks including the infamous “bridge to nowhere.”
During Wednesday night’s debate, Santorum explained the legislation that provided funding to Planned Parenthood was part of a broader bill he supported, and that had he tried to compensate for his actions by introducing legislation in support of abstinence education. His votes to raise the debt ceiling, he said, took place at a time when the deficit was not such a major concern, and he said he abandoned his support for earmarks when it became clear they were being abused.
On No Child Left Behind, Santorum said his vote was a mistake. "It was against the principles I believed in, but, you know, when you're part of the team, sometimes you take one for the team," he said.
Romney is doubling down on his attacks against Santorum as the crucial Michigan primary approaches Tuesday. The two men were virtually tied in recent polls in the state, and a loss by Romney would be particularly devastating, because he was born and raised in Michigan and his father served as governor. Arizona also holds its primary Tuesday, but Romney holds a sizable lead in polls here.
Romney's remarks Thursday also focused on President Obama and his relationship with labor unions, a key issue for Michiganders. Romney sharply criticized the president, saying he "bows" to organized labor because of its role in supporting his presidential campaign, and has dragged his feet on their behalf on initiatives that would spur the economy, such as free-trade agreements. Obama prefers to "brush aside the principles of free enterprise and fair play and instead tilt the entire playing field in our economy towards the people who financed his campaign," Romney said. "That kind of crony capitalism we have not seen in this country to the extent that we're seeing it in this administration, I don't think in history."[/QUOTE]
Re: Could Rick Santorum put Newt Gingrich in the rearview mirror Tuesday?
Four more hours until the primaries in Arizona and Michigan start.
There's talks about what future will hold for Mitt Romney if he lost the Michigan's contest, even just by a narrow margin.
I doubt that though. Don't know what the heck the Republican Party is trying to show, but it gave people [at least myself] the impression that they are lost, don't know who to pick to represent their party in the next coming election in 2012.
They are not willing to rally behind Romney. But everytime when someone else broke away from the pack, to give Romney some serious contending... that person had fallen flat on their face in the next national broadcasted debate. Santorum was no exception. His debate was mediocre if not a disaster [with the announcement that politics is a Team Sport].
I think Governnor Romney will get all the delegates in Arizona and win the votes in [his home state] Michigan as well.
Not only Michigan is important because it's his "Home" State, it's President Obama Home State also!
The high stakes primary: why Michigan matters
From Christian Science Monitor:
[QUOTE][URL="http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0228-romney-santorum-mich/11871492-1-eng-US/0228-romney-santorum-mich_full_600.jpg"][IMG]http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0228-romney-santorum-mich/11871492-1-eng-US/0228-romney-santorum-mich_full_380.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
[I]Republican presidential candidates, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, left, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney talk following a Republican presidential debate last week in Mesa, Ariz[/I].
[COLOR="#696969"]Nick Oza/AP Photo/The Arizona Republic[/COLOR]
[B]Given that Michigan awards delegates proportionately, the winner of the primary could earn fewer delegates than the loser. Even so, the contest is a must-win for Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.[/B]
[I]By Amanda Paulson, Staff writer / February 28, 2012 [/I]
If the polls are any indication, tonight's Michigan primary could be very close. While Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have been duking it out there for weeks, neither one is likely to win by a wide margin.
And given how Michigan apportions delegates, they may both emerge with about the same numbers (the winner could even receive fewer delegates than the loser).
So why does the Michigan primary matter?
Mitt Romney gaffes: 9 times the button-down candidate should have buttoned up
The reality is that both Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum have a lot at stake – and a lot to lose – with Tuesday's contest.
Fair or not, the media is likely to place disproportionate weight on the outcome – especially since Arizona and Michigan are the first contests held since Santorum won Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri three weeks ago – and the loser in Michigan is likely to face increased scrutiny on a host of issues.
If Romney wins both states (Arizona will almost certainly vote for him), then it's going to be tougher for Santorum to claim he's the serious contender for the nomination that he claims to be.
Santorum has been struggling in recent weeks, and delivered a lackluster debate performance in Arizona last week. His decision to stake all his bets on social issues seems to be backfiring among some voters, and raising questions about whether he can appeal to women, and to more moderate Republicans and independents.
Also, all the contests he has won so far (except Missouri, whose primary didn't count and where no other candidates campaigned) have been caucuses. Caucuses, where far fewer voters turn out and those who do tend to be the most enthusiastic and represent the most extreme parts of the party, play to Santorum's strengths. But he badly needs to demonstrate that he can win in a straight primary, as well.
Santorum has had trouble appealing to party leaders, whose support he needs to secure in a race this close, and especially given his deficiencies in money, staffing, and organization compared with Romney. And a Michigan win could be pivotal to helping him make his case.
In writing about Santorum's almost total lack of endorsements, even after his big wins in Colorado and Minnesota, the Washington Post's Jonathon Bernstein wrote that:
"... Endorsements are also bets that a particular candidate will do well (it’s rare for there to be any incentive to back a likely loser), and they’re bets made by people with inside information. Senators, governors and members of the House either know each of the serious presidential candidates personally or, at most, are at just one remove from them. The governors of Michigan and Arizona probably have someone they trust who has worked with Rick Santorum and has strong opinions about him. And what they’re hearing, apparently, isn’t anything good for Santorum."
Losing both contests Tuesday may reaffirm in many of those leaders' minds that Santorum's earlier wins were a fluke, and he can't go much farther.
On the other hand, a loss for Romney in his home state will also be a big blow.
Even though he (like Santorum) has sought to temper expectations about his performance there, Michigan is a state that until recently seemed almost certain to go to Romney.
Romney was born and raised in Michigan, and his father was governor there. Losing would raise questions – yet again – about why Romney is having so much trouble delivering victories in states (like Colorado) that on the surface should have been his, despite all his money and organization advantages.
There would be more questions about why Romney struggles in particular in the Midwest, where he has yet to win a state and which may be particularly pivotal in the general election. And about whether he is unable to connect to blue-collar, lower-income voters – a population that may be pivotal in November.
Yet again, his inevitability as nominee would be questioned (look for more talk of a brokered convention), the lack of enthusiasm he generates will be highlighted, and his lack of appeal to more conservative voters will be an issue.
Even with a loss in Michigan, it's not hard to envision Romney still winning the nomination – especially if he can go on to a better performance on Super Tuesday next week. But it will be yet another blow in an already rough month, and could further cripple him in the general election.
Questions about both Romney and Santorum will remain no matter how they perform on Tuesday – but a victory in Michigan, even a narrow one, could go a long way toward giving each of their campaigns a much-needed boost.[/QUOTE]
What's the Matter With Arizona?
From The Nation:
[QUOTE][I]Victoria M. DeFrancesco Soto on February 28, 2012 - 8:22 AM ET[/I]
Nothing. My home state does not suffer from a fundamental political or societal flaw. There are a number of things that I do not like about Arizona, namely S.B. 1070, tent city Joe Arpaio and finger-wagging Jan Brewer. But to understand Arizona and that nothing’s the matter with it, you have to understand its Western personality, one that is volatile and quirky. It is a personality that is forged by an inheritance of populist politics and idiosyncratic political leaders.
One hundred years ago this month, Arizona was the last state in the continental United States to gain statehood. While the political machines in New York, Baltimore and Chicago were grinding out back-room deals, Arizona was only beginning to think about statehood. As Tom Schaller points out in his book, Whistling Past Dixie, the later incorporation of the Mountain West states meant a later start to political development in this region. As a result, states west of the Mississippi do not have deep partisan roots that anchor their political systems.
Politics in the West has been and continues to be candidate-centered. The same state that elected Barry Goldwater to the Senate is the same state that in 1974 elected Raúl Castro, Arizona’s first Latino governor. Arizona is also a state where in 2002 and 2006 voters simultaneously elected Democrat Janet Napolitano as governor and Republican Jan Brewer as secretary of state.
A thin party structure is complemented by a strong tradition of direct democracy—referendums, initiatives and recalls. For example, in 1996 Arizona became the first state to pass a medical marijuana proposition and in 1988 became the second state to approve a recall of their governor, though Governor Mecham ended up being impeached before the election. The five states with the highest number of initiatives have all been in the West. Until Scott Walker’s recall effort, the previous three recalls were all in the West.
Recently Western states have engaged in what political scientist Caroline Tolbert refers to as new progressivism. In the 1990s Western states once again looked to progressivism to provide citizens further control of their government, such as with term limits, public financing of political campaigns or voter approval of tax limits. These measures have wrested greater control from partisan and governmental institutions. And to further curb partisan influence in politics, in 2000 Arizona voters approved Proposition 106 that established an independent redistricting commission.
Western states have their own personalities. Arizona’s brand of cowboy politics is largely unbridled by partisan institutions and a republican form of government. For better or for worse, it is a system that allows for greater political volatility. Arizona’s political system allows for S.B. 1070, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Jan Brewer. However, it also allows for a system where Russell Pearce, the architect of S.B. 1070, can be recalled and the 2010 redistricting map can be drawn more competitively—much to the public annoyance of the governor. And lastly, Arizona is a state that preferences the will of the electorate and with each electoral cycle that electorate becomes increasingly more Latino.[/QUOTE]
Re: What's the Matter With Arizona?
Rick Santorum is speaking like he won the race. Just imagine what a speech it would be if he actually did win. :)
Re: What's the Matter With Arizona?
The introduction speech governor Mitt Romney's wife'd given was more like a victory speech for the nomination than just Michigan. :)
Vry short and appropriate, confident victory speech, preparing him for the match against president Obama.
3 things to watch on Super Tuesday
From CNN:
[QUOTE][B]3 things to watch on Super Tuesday[/B]
By John Helton, CNN
[I]updated 2:06 PM EST, Tue March 6, 2012[/I]
CNN LIVE: Tune in to the CNN Election Center tonight at 7 p.m. for live coverage of the Super Tuesday primaries and follow real-time results on CNNPolitics.com, on the CNN apps and on the CNN mobile web site. Follow CNN Politics on Facebook and on Twitter at #cnnelections.
(CNN) -- It's not as super as it has been in previous elections with more states involved, but 10 states have their say Tuesday in one of the most volatile Republican presidential races in generations.
Here are three things to watch for:
Romney's big day. He's been the off-and-on frontrunner throughout the race, but a big Super Tuesday could begin an end game toward a sometimes hesitant base coalescing behind former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
Romney should win his home state of Massachusetts, neighboring Vermont and Virginia, where he and Ron Paul are the only two candidates on the ballot. His campaign thinks he can win in Idaho with its heavy Mormon population and possibly in North Dakota. That leaves Ohio and Tennessee, where polls show former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum leading just a week ago.
If Romney can win in Ohio, a bellwether for the general election, and Tennessee, which would help dispel the notion that he can't win in the South, it would be a big boost in overcoming a balky base and propel him to a huge lead in the delegate race.
Turnout. It's the biggest dance yet for Republicans, so the number of people who show up at the polls could be an indication of how energized Republicans are now and what that might mean for the fall.
While there have been spikes in turnout in some states -- South Carolina was energized to turn out a win for Newt Gingrich in January that helped blunt Romney's early momentum -- overall it's down nearly 10% from 2008.
There are many factors that influence turnout -- local races on the same ballot, weather, polling that suggests the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Watch states such as Ohio and Tennessee for a better indication of how energized Republicans are.
How is your Super Tuesday? What issues are you voting on?
Anyone leaving the race? No.
Even if Romney doesn't win in Ohio and/or Tennessee, he'll be able to take the podium tonight and point to wins in other states. Expect Santorum to also declare victory and emphasize that he was outspent by Romney in the states he lost to him.
Newt Gingrich will get a big win in Georgia, which he represented in the House of Representatives, and is already looking ahead to next week's contests in Alabama and Mississippi to keep his campaign going.
And Ron Paul could finally win his first contest of the 2012 battle for the Republican nomination in one of the caucus states. Even if he doesn't score a victory, he'll pick up some delegates, and his passionate core following and low-budget campaign will keep him in the race as long as he wants.[/QUOTE]
Romney to win Ohio, CBS News projects
From CBS:
[QUOTE][IMG]http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2012/03/06/Super_Tuesday_Romney_Wife_140807929_620x350.jpg[/IMG]
[I]Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney and his wife Ann attend a Super Tuesday Republican primary elections evening in Boston, Massaschusetts, March 6, 2012[/I].
[COLOR="#696969"](Credit: EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)[/COLOR]
[I]March 6, 2012 11:27 PM[/I]
Updated: 1:09 a.m. ET
[I]By Lucy Madison[/I]
CBS News projects that Mitt Romney will win Ohio's key primary contest Tuesday, after a neck-and-neck race with rival Rick Santorum to eke out a victory in the pivotal battleground state.
With 96 percent reporting in Ohio, Romney has 38 percent support to Santorum's 37 percent. Newt Gingrich is in third place with 15 percent and Ron Paul follows with 9 percent.
CBS News projects Mitt Romney will also win primaries in Virginia, Massachusetts and Vermont, as well as the Idaho caucuses. CBS News projects Rick Santorum will win primaries in Tennessee and Oklahoma, and in the North Dakota caucuses. In Georgia, CBS News projects Newt Gingrich will clinch his first primary victory since South Carolina's January 21 primary contest.
According to current CBS News projections, Ron Paul did not win any contests on Tuesday, but he did finish second in four states: Vermont, Idaho, North Dakota and Virginia.
There are also caucuses in Alaska. Results are expected later this evening.
With voters in ten states selecting their choice to be the Republican presidential nominee and 419 delegates up for grabs, Super Tuesday could be a make-or-break night for the remaining Republican presidential candidates.
In remarks to reporters following the Ohio call for Romney, his campaign spokesman Ryan Williams said the campaign was "pleased" to have "gained the trust of Ohio voters."
"Nearly a week ago Governor Romney was behind in some polls by double digits. But Ohio voters responded to his pro-jobs and pro-growth message, and rallied behind him the days before the primary and helped push him to victory tonight," Williams said.
Speaking out of Boston before his victory was projected in the Buckeye State, Romney stayed positive that his campaign was "going to get more" wins under its belt by the end of the night, and that by his count, the delegate situation "looks good."
"Tonight, we're -- we're doing some counting. We're counting up the delegates for the convention, and it looks good. And we're counting down the days until November, and that looks even better," Romney told an enthusiastic crowd. With almost all precincts reporting in Massachusetts, Romney, who served as the state's governor between 2003 and 2007, was ahead overwhelmingly, with 257,174 votes (72 percent).
In his remarks, Romney went on to accuse President Obama of being "unresponsive" to the wishes of the American people, and blasted him for allegedly operating "by command instead of by consensus."
"President Obama seems to believe he's unchecked by the Constitution," Romney said. "He's unresponsive to the will of our people. He operates by command instead of by consensus. In a second term, he'd be unrestrained by the demands of re-election. And if there's one thing we cannot afford is four years of Barack Obama with no one to answer to."
Super Tuesday results by state: Alaska | Georgia | Idaho | Massachusetts | North Dakota | Ohio | Oklahoma | Tennessee | Vermont | Virginia
A win in Ohio would have been considered a huge boon for either Romney or Santorum on Super Tuesday. For Romney, the victory could signal a return to the so-called inevitability of his candidacy; for Santorum, it would have proven his ability to win in a crucial swing state with a large, diverse population.
Polls showed the two candidates neck-and-neck in the past several weeks, although the most recent surveys trended toward Romney.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Romney and his super PAC outspent Santorum four-to-one in Ohio, with Romney and his super PAC spending just over $4 million on TV and radio ads in the state, and Santorum and his super PAC spending $968,000.
Speaking to supporters in Ohio, Santorum called Tuesday a "big night" for his campaign -- but emphasized that he was "up against enormous odds."
"This was a big night tonight, lots of states. We're going to win a few, we're going to lose a few, but as it looks right now, we're going to get at least a couple of gold medals and a whole passel full of silver medals," he said. "We went up against enormous odds, not just here in the state of Ohio, where -- who knows how much we were outspent -- but in every state. There wasn't a single state in the list that I just gave you where I spent more money than the people I was able to defeat to win that state. In every case, we overcame the odds."
According to exit polls, the economy is the top issue for voters in the primary states today, while the ability to defeat President Obama is candidate the quality that matters most to voters.
In both Tennessee and Oklahoma, Santorum did well among the nearly 75 percent of primary voters who identified as evangelical Christians, according to exit polls. He did particularly well among those voters who said it mattered "a great deal" to them that the candidate share their religious beliefs.
In Tennessee, with 89 percent reporting, Santorum led Romney with 191,420 (37 percent) votes to 142,848 (28 percent) votes. In Oklahoma, with nearly all precincts reporting, Santorum bested Romney with 93,744 votes (34 percent) to 77,724 votes (28 percent).
In Georgia, which he represented in Congress for 20 years, Gingrich was ahead with 414,896 votes (46 percent) with nearly all precincts reporting. Romney came in second with 224,361 votes, or 26 percent. Santorum followed, with 171,346 votes, or 20 percent.
Exit polls out of Georgia showed Gingrich winning among men, women, and white evangelical voters. He also led among very conservative voters and those who said the economy was their top issue.
Gingrich's victory in Georgia could give the candidate a much-needed boost in momentum after a string of losses in recent nominating contests.
[video]http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7401179n[/video][/QUOTE]
