Comments on: Why Romney Will (May) Win

By: kritt11

kritt11 — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:03:32 +0000

Without the evangelical's organization and turnout in the 2000 election, Al Gore would have convincingly defeated George Bush, and the course of history would have been irrevocably altered. That makes the religious right a force to be reckoned with. I don't believe the “left” hates religious Republicans- they just don't want to live in a theocracy.

By: JSpencer

JSpencer — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 05:19:05 +0000

DLS, the way in which you throw the word like “hatred” around suggests to me that you don't really know what it means. It certainly isn't relevant in the context you try to use it here. As for Ann Coulter? The only Ann Coulter I know has an endorsement that's about as valuable as GWB's, and her judgement is worth even less.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:18:26 +0000

Well, a far larger problem is leftist hatred of anyone religious who doesn't vote Democratic, but as far as the Religious Right is concerned, they aren't large or powerful enough to control the GOP, and their own, in fact rare, instances of intolerance or "closed society" behavior turns off other GOP voters. Huckabee's fine in a VP role and obviously does better, less-painful-to-hear press conferences than Dubya, but would not prevail as a Presidential candidate, even though on decency grounds he annihilates Clinton.

* * *

"The GOP is going to have trouble uniting behind the nominee, unless Hillary is the Dem's candidate" [also likely Ann Coulter's motive]

Don't worry, for once she is crowned, the media will revert to "St. Hillary" mode, Joan of Arc [trumpet fanfare] against the evil fundamentalist dunces with guns [ominous music]. "YOU WILL BE CON-FORM-AL-IZED"

By: slr38

slr38 — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:02:52 +0000

My friends who work for McCain tell me that McCain considers Huckabee to be a “useful idiot” and that he propped up Huckabee in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan only to try and take down Romney. I hope the evangelical “jesus hates you and loves me” crowd don't ruin the party trying to put a fool like Huckabee in the White House. They'll prove what the Dems have always said about their blind intollerance is right is trying to do so, lose the White House, and ruin the GOP. I'm starting to think we need a third party, the “Jesuscrats” who are all the fools that stand only for making sure a protestant gets elected, no matter how dumb he is.

Ann Coulter said yesterday in her column that after researching Romney's record in detail, the only thing she can see he's flip-flopped on is abortion, which is less than the rest of the candidates, and even then only in whether his views ought to legislated. She's thinks he's the guy for the GOP, and Coulter is as Bible-thumping a Christian as anyone I've ever seen.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:43:30 +0000

“Huckabee and Giuliani to remain in the race”

Huck's a candidate for VP to keep the GOP-assumed Religious Right votes coming (cannot or should not rely on Clinton's unelectability). But there's another problem, which the foregoing phrase implicates: Huck doesn't have much money. He may last through Feb 5 but not be able to buy much advertising or do much campaigning in Califormia, New York, and New Jersey, and for all the hype and hatred hurled at them, Huck and the Religious Right are far from being dominant or even significant in these states or in numerous others. For him to become VP he'll have to be literally “adopted” and sponsored, and there's no guarantee that would happen, certainly not from the establishment, the business community, or the GOP leadership.

By: kritt11

kritt11 — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:38:53 +0000

The only ones I have any respect for are McCain and Huckabee, because at least they are mostly campaigning as themselves.

Thompson might as well throw in the towel, because he's not going to win in South Carolina either.

The GOP is going to have trouble uniting behind the nominee, unless Hillary is the Dem's candidate- then they can just hope to get voters out who want to vote against her.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:15:02 +0000

Cosmo is close to the current polling information. And we'll see how Giuliani's strategy works. If dimwit college kids can cheer and roar for Bill Clinton, and show robotic-to-fanatical support for Hillary Clinton, then why can't Giulani actually do well in contemporary California, too, despite his undesireability to so many others who know better about him?

Currently McCain is leading on the GOP side. The order is: McCain (29%), Huckabee (20%), Romney (17%), Giuliani (13%), Thompson (9%), Paul (6%). On the Dem side, it's still Clinton with a good lead, though Obama has gained recently. The order is: (46%), Obama (31%), Edwards (13%).

Ideological placement of the candidates is in the latest information as well.

(Pew report — and when will comment options such as links, bold text, italics, blocks, become available?)

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?Re...

By: cosmoetica

cosmoetica — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:28:52 +0000

Although he's a sleaze maestro, I think Rudy's strategy of waiting out the little states and capitalizing in Fla. & the Super Tuesday states may look prescient. If he can win some of the big ticket states it may signal a shift from the decades old dances in Iowa & NH.

In order of GOP chances, I'd go w McCain, Rudy, Huck, then Romney. Even the shallowest R's tend to see thru him, and the Evangelicals will stay home if he gets the nom. At least Rudy can wave the 9/11 flag and McCain get the rabid pro-warriors. Romney- he's got Staples shoppers?

By: JSpencer

JSpencer — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:57:47 +0000

Kritt, you're right about many voters in Michigan having been taken in by Romney, but they were GOP voters, and desperate ones at that. In the general election Michigan will go with the democrat. I see McCain beating Romney overall; the man has the integrity Romney lacks, and this will become increasingly evident I think.

By: DLS

DLS — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:58:00 +0000

It's the GOP way this year. Nobody is rising, not McCain, not Romney. It's just that the others are sinking more deeply at the moment than they are.

By: DLS

DLS — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:56:48 +0000

Oh, didn't you know that he changed his story when he campaigned (if you can call it that) in South Carolina? Once there, he said that he would save the Southern economy.

The Dark Side is going to win this year. The (DC) Empire will strike back.

By: kritt11

kritt11 — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:49:07 +0000

Romney won't win South Carolina, or many other states in the South. His business background and message of economic recovery was more suitable in Michigan, where voters were taken in by his promises to do away with the new CAFE standards and bring manufacturing jobs back. He was pandering- on the issue–McCain at least was honest.

By: F_and_B

F_and_B — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:51:17 +0000

Good analysis of the Romney vs McCain battle. I would not have agreed a few weeks ago but it looks like Romney is gaining momentum. I don't agree with Romney-Huckabee… more likely that Romney would pick a relatively unknown but highly talented younger politician.

On the dark side, I still think it will be Hillary-Obama
(i.e. dark side from Star Wars, no racist anything intended – just want to make sure that's clear)