Posted on 06/16/2007 5:23:09 AM PDT by Degaston
Hillary Clinton is on a roll now. Mitt Romney is going very strong. Unless some major trend changes this will be the matchup in November 2008. Will Mitt Romney have the strength in his loins and sinews to go the whole distance and win? Could he survive a no-holds-barred onslaught by the supporters of Hillary Clinton?
My preliminary prediction on the November 2008 outcome of Hillary v. Mitt.
Mitt solidly wins Alaska, Wyoming, Utah and Idaho. Mitt leans in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. Too close to call are Alabama, Indiana and South Carolina. Hillary leans in Montana, Iowa, North Carolina, Kansas, Arizona, Missouri, Tennessee, Virginia, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Georgia, Florida and Nevada. Hillary solidly wins Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, Arkansas, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland, DC, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachussetts, Vermont and Maine.
Mitt v. Hillary would mean another President Clinton.
If he wants to go against Hilary, he’ll need to change parties. He’s got no realistic shot at the nomination unless Guiliani steps down.
This joker not only has the cart well before the horse, the cart has no wheels and the horse isn’t harnessed up.
Poor Mitt Romney hasn’t a chance at the nomination. He is about to be as crushed and outdistanced as the hapless John McCain.
LOL! Dueling RINOs!
Yes, sad to say, that would be true. But for the life of me, I can’t figure out how someone figures Mitt is ahead in this thing. Did I miss like a bunch of polls?
Besides, isn’t Romney in third place behind a guy who hasn’t even officially entered the race?
“Too close to call are Alabama, Indiana and South Carolina.”
Ron Paul could probably beat Hillary in Alabama.
More likely I think he will be kicking Evan Bayh or Mark Warner’s arse in the VP debate. Fred Thompson will handily dispatch Hillary.
Romney is the only Republican with a realistic chance of beating Hillary in 2008.
Then I guess it looks like we get a democrat in the White House. Bummer.
Just see post #10. Some, (even here), don’t think the media would rip him up when the time comes or that he doesn’t have enough skeletons in the closet to let them succeed.
What do you base that on? His support for an assault weapons ban? Do you count on his liberal past to attract the RAT voters like Ghouliani is planning on?
Sorry, I can’t see how he could win.
“Too close to call are Alabama, Indiana and South Carolina.”
With Hillary running? This gent is smoking something illegal.
“loins and sinews”?
Just as I have always suspected, Hillary is a Freeper.
It's the magic underwear.
That’s a snide mormon slur.
You can’t win the Presidency by just appealing to the staunchest conservatives in your own party. You have to be able to appeal to both moderates *and* your own party.
Mitt is the only candidate who both: (a) appeals to moderates (as evidenced by his ability to win in Massachusetts), and (b) has a history of governing with policies that are in alignment with conservatives.
If you ignore for one minute the things coming out of the mouths of each of the top three *declared* candidates, and instead focus on how they actually governed while holding elected office, then Mitt is easily the most conservative of the bunch (Giuliani, McCain, and Romney).
BTW—Mitt *said* the right things to get elected Governor in Massachusetts, but governed in a manner that really pizzed off the social liberals up in that state. To me, that speaks volumes about his conservative credentials.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.