Posted on 09/27/2007 11:14:28 PM PDT by Doofer
It's no secret former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's strategy for winning the Republican nomination hinges on racking up early wins in both Iowa and New Hampshire. But two recently released polls indicate Mr. Romney may be losing his grip on the Granite State, despite years of familiarity from nearby Boston TV coverage.
A Rasmussen Reports survey released last Tuesday showed Mr. Romney's lead over Rudy Giuliani dwindling over the course of the last month from 12 points to just three points. A survey by CNN and WMUR TV released yesterday indicated a similar downward trend: the 15-point lead Mr. Romney held over Mr. Giuliani in July is now down to a single point. Overall, Mr. Romney's lead in the RealClearPolitics Average for New Hampshire has slipped to 4%, its lowest level since the end of May.
Should Mr. Romney be worried? Yes. Is it time to hit the panic button? Not quite. The linchpin of his strategy is a win in Iowa, and right now the big lead he's built up in the Hawkeye State over the summer appears to be holding. Since winning the Ames straw poll at the beginning of August, Mr. Romney has extended his lead in the RealClearPolitics Average in Iowa by more than five points, now holding a 15.4% lead over his nearest competitor, Rudy Giuliani.
Conventional wisdom says that a win in Iowa will provide a bounce heading into New Hampshire. But one need look no further than the 2000 Republican primary -- when George Bush won the Iowa caucuses only to be trounced by John McCain by 18 points the following week in New Hampshire -- to see that's not always the case.
One factor working in Romney's favor this year is that a sizable majority of Independents -- the largest voting bloc in the state and eligible to vote in either primary -- appear to be leaning toward participating in the Democratic primary, which would lessen the chances of an Independent-fueled upset like Mr. McCain's.
But unlike President Bush, who rebounded from the loss in New Hampshire eight years ago with a hard fought victory in South Carolina, Mr. Romney has no such firewall to fall back on. He's currently running a distant fourth in South Carolina and 16 points off the pace in Florida, two states that will set the tone for the heap of delegates up for grabs on February 5th.
On the other hand, the addition of Michigan to the early primary schedule is a boon for Mr. Romney, who was born in Detroit and is the son of a former Michigan governor. But the benefit of a win by the Wolverine State's favorite son could be short lived if Mr. Romney suffers a defeat in New Hampshire.
Recent experience suggests that wins in Iowa and New Hampshire don’t mean as much as they used to.
Are people actually getting hip to the reality that if Romney is the nominee he simply won’t win?
“...Mr. Romney may be losing his grip on the Granite State, despite years of familiarity from nearby Boston TV coverage...”
Unlike neighboring Massacommiechusetts, the people of New Hampshire are not idiots.
Familiarity with the Romnoid breeds contempt.
Maybe its because Romney expanded his HillaryCARE to HezbollahCARE.
;OD
I'm from Michigan. And I cannot understand where this title of "Wolverine State's favorite son" comes from. It just doesn't seem to fit, in my opinion.
There are the usual three factions in the NH GOP (Fis-cons, so-cons, and liberdopians), but the fis-cons and liberdopians predominate while so-cons are almost nonexistent. I understand that this is unusual at a national level.
For Mitt to prevail, he needs a substantial so-con vote (which is unavailable here, and nationally has to be based on the fact that he has a pretty family), AND he has to sell the fis-cons on the premise that his obvious management skills translate into political skill.
I think Mitt has hit his high-water mark, and it's all downhill from here.
If he's still in the race next summer, town will be overrun with Secret Service and newsies - Sarko was bad enough, that will be ridiculous.
Like they say, Money can’t buy happiness....
I don’t know who said it, but some time ago I heard someone say that, “Those who say money can’t buy happiness don’t know where to shop.”
1) Mr. Romney is a prominent member of a religious cult that believes that “the Bible is full of errors”, that the ludicrous Book of Mormon has supplanted the Bible and is “god’s” latest revelation to mankind, that their so-called leader/president speaks new/divine revelation from “god”, that Jesus Christ is Satan’s brother, that “god” was once a man and that men, by following the doctrines and dictates of Mormonism can become “gods” ruling over their own planets, propagating these new worlds by having sex with the wives they have married here on earth. Holy underwear, that Jesus Christ came to America, that the Indians were Jews, that the virgin birth was the direct result of “god” having sex with Mary. Anyone who believes this space-cadet theology shows a lack of discernment at the core of their being. I do not care how many Olympics this guy has “saved” and run well, or experience he has had as governor.
It is also vitally important to note that in order to obtain the high position Mr. Romney currently holds within the cult he has had to take an oath to the “church”; swearing his allegiance to Mormonism and it’s leadership and to doing everything within his power to establish the Mormon "kingdom of god" upon the earth. This fact alone disqualifies him from holding the office of President of the United States because his allegiance lies elsewhere.
Recently, Mormonism has sought legitimacy by claiming to be “Christian”, and following the Jesus of the Bible, but this is a very recent phenomena in it's history. Fortunately, it’s current president/leader has admitted that Mormons do not in point of fact follow the traditional Christ of the Bible, or of biblical Christianity::
The current president of the Mormon Church, Gordon B. Hinckley, made a very telling comment about Jesus Christ in a talk in Geneva, Switzerland, June 6, 1998. The Deseret News reported:
In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints "do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times.
He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages." (Deseret News, Church News section, Salt Lake City, Utah, week ending June 20, 1998, p. 7)
President. Hinckley, the leader of Mormonism, was being totally honest and told the truth; Mormons do not worship the traditional Jesus Christ who is described in the Bible, the Holy Word of God. They worship a false christ as proclaimed and taught by Joseph Smith, who, according to Hinckley “knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages"... if you believe that, there is a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.
It should be noted that, from its inception Mormonism has been deemed a cult and NEVER been recognized as being a part of “Christianity or Christendom because it’s core doctrines are in total opposition to the Word of God, the doctrine of salvation, the Christ of the Bible, and the Christ of Christianity.
2) Mr. Romney has flip flopped on abortion, homosexuality and a number of other issues while in his position of leadership as governor of MA. He had the opportunity to take a stand and he bent which ever way the political wind blew.
3) During the gas crunch/crises that took place while he was governor of MA. Mr. Romney had the opportunity to provide some relief for the struggling people of MA by rolling back or eliminating the exceptionally high MA gas tax during the period covering the gas crisis. People throughout the state were hurting. People in the state begged him to do this but he staunchly refused… so much for his commitment to “cutting taxes”.
Yes he is “handsome” and telegenic, but people here in NH know him, what he believes and how he governs and frankly, many of us do not want him to become the leader of the free world and can not/will not vote for him.
I, along with others who have mentioned these facts concerning Mormonism are telling the truth about the cult in order to educate the public at large. Whether people wish to acknowledge it or not, the fact of the matter is this: what one believes and follows has a direct bearing and impact upon how they live their lives and how they view the world and their place in it and in the case of politicians, …how they govern (The "president" of Iran is a good example of the reailty behind this principle). Therefore, stating what Mormonism teaches, believes and practices is not “Mormon bashing", it is presenting reality. The facts stated above about the cult which Mr. Romney is so actively involved in are readily available and easily verified by anyone and everyone who is willing to take the time to do some simple apologetics research with an open mind, taking Mormonism at face value, examining it's founders, leaders, doctrines, beliefs and practices in light of history, the Word of God and the founder (The Lord Jesus Christ), leaders, doctrine and beliefs of biblical Christianity and "the faith once and for all delivered to the saints."
The bits about religion are above my pay scale, but I recognize a fake when I see one, and so do most conservatives.
Mitt’s a fake.
this is off topic, but it sounds like you may enjoy this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YPyvJacwUI
“Are people actually getting hip to the reality that if Romney is the nominee he simply won’t win?”
He has been elected to office once, with no reelection.
I think that people wonder why he is even in a presidential campaign.
I could care less if the Romulan worshipped the sun; it is his draft evasion that turns my stomach.
Good post.
Right on target. Excellent.
I’ve been saying since day one that the man is simply not electable.Folks here in the Midwest don’t want another New England liberal anywhere near the Oval Office.
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.