Skip to comments.Mitt Romney Wins Alaska Caucuses [Romney 32%; Santorum 29%; Ron Paul 24%; Gingrich 14%]
Posted on 03/07/2012 7:38:50 PM PST by Steelfish
Mitt Romney Wins Alaska Caucuses
March. 7, 2012
JUNEAU, Alaska, March 7 (UPI) -- Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney claimed victory in the Alaska caucuses, picking up the majority of states in Super Tuesday contests.
Alaska's 27 delegates will be awarded proportionately later in March.
With 4,285 votes, Romney claimed 32 percent of the statewide vote, the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reported. Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania claimed 29 percent, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas captured 24 percent and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich got 14 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...
What is it about that dang 3 percent that Romney beats Santorum by every state....yes Ohio was worse.
We have a spolier in the race, who ends up finishing dead last but allows Romney to pull squeaker wins in Alaska, Ohio, Arizona, Washington State; and Michigan.
I misspoke earlier today, it turns out Alaska doesn’t have a 20% threshold, so Gingrich will get a couple of delegates in Alaska.
Paul isn’t going anywhere.
No doubt and more than that many are beginning to question Gingrich's motives. Gingrich may be the smartest guy running so he has to see that his candidacy only serves to strengthen Mitt. I'd make the same argument to whomever was the least effective conservative candidate as of this date, March 7th. Today, that candidate is Newt Gingrich. If Newt doesn't concede and back Santorum before April it's game over. Mitt will win the Republican nomination.
here’s a previous discussion for those who want endless details about the minutia.
and the link to the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner article that UPI mentions.
The score was Romney 32%, Not-Romney 68%. Let’s take this fight to the Convention and let the Convention do what the Convention was designed to do - choose the nominee.
It would be fine if posters on here who are backing NEWT would say, in states where NEWT is not competing, please vote for RS. Especially if there is a threshold like VT and MA.
What happened to the STOP MITT movement? Did it become an ELECT NEWT movement? Before one can elect NEWT, we must STOP MITT. BEFORE.
there were 300,000 wasted votes in OH for candidates that did not meet the threshold. And who therefore got ZERO delegates.
300,000 who did not think about the rules. And of course there was the Santorum delegate fiasco in a few CD’s.
Much of rural Alaska, the Repub Party never organized to allow participation. They concentrate on Urban Centers. Support for Santorum is greater in rural areas, same as in other parts of the country. Repubs in my community requested they be included, just wasn’t in the cards to be.
Exactly. You would have thought that we would have learned from the 2008 primary that brought us McCain. Gingrich says all the right things and the little devil on my left shoulder would vote for him just to see the two or three debates between Gingrich and Obama but if Gingrich were the nominee the media would then decide that suddenly, debates aren’t really necessary because their internal polls show that voters are already aware of where the candidates stand on the issues or the President has too many real world global issues on his plate to get involved with what amounts to a media circus, blah, blah, blah... Or the MSM will pull out all stops to frame the debates to the President’s advantage. There will be an excuse, any excuse, to limit any face-to-face opportunities that would enable Newt to shine, I have no doubt about that.
But the bottom line is that in the eyes of the moderates and independents, Newt is still “Newt” and he has too much past baggage to attract them and the disenchanted Obama voters from 2008. And, like it or not, the Republican nominee will need as many of those voters they can get. Of the two conservative candidates, Santorum is unapologetic in his message (voters respect that), there is no major conservative policy advantage to be gained picking Gingrich over Santorum and Santorum is the more likeable option in the eyes of the independents and disenchanted Democrats.
I used to think of the Democrats as Jimmy Breslin’s Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight. Unfortunately, that title now better suits the conservatives in the Republican party. Here we go again. Thanks alot, Newt.
Palins state. Don’t leave that tidbit out
The last time that strategy worked will be the first time it worked. It’s 2012, no presidential candidate can win with a two month strategy.
We are being stuck in the back with a knife.
The convention is in August. You cannot put together a major national effort in 60 days!
Certainly not with so many Republicans afraid of their own shadows. We have the most beatable opponent in modern history and an electorate crying out for a Conservative leader - and the GOP is panicking its base into nominating our most liberal candidate.
Any good Conservative can beat Obama even in a short race, while the most attractive "moderate" will smell like a Democrat at the end of a long campaign. This might be our last real chance to turn away from the cliff, so we'd better get it right this time.
I don’t have the specific stats in front of me to back it up, but speaking as a former Alaska resident, it might surprise a lot of people that Alaska quite likely has more Mormons per capita than any other state besides Utah. I don’t say that disparagingly; the ones I met were great people. Just offering additional input to the story at hand.
Mormons in Alaska- wow! and no beer, no coffee?
Doesn’t matter what we think, this thing is headed to a contested convention. I went through this list and tried to estimate how many delegates Romney would get based on how things went in the states that already voted. In my estimation, he would have to overperform from here on out to get the 1,144. He might get close enough to that though that Ron Paul’s delegates would give him what he needed.
Dick Morris was on O’Reilly and said there’s a 40% chance this goes to a contested convention. He does not want that to happen so it’s not like he’s overestimating the possibility out of wishful thinking.
I have no idea if it helps or hurts win an election. I could see how it might help in one way. Obama and the dems would have to spend resources attacking any candidate they think might win up through August. Yet we could even pull out a surprise pick and undermine all that. If they waited to start their negative campaign, they’d have to rush it together in only 2 months. Meanwhile our party can spend all that time working on an anti-Obama campaign. Not to mention, we can have a SuperPAC not tied to any candidate, who starts preparing the anti-Obama campaign well in advance of the convention. Last few elections, the debates and world events defined the results more than anything, and voter sentiment was probably not set in stone until the month before the vote. Media moves a LOT faster now than it did 40 years ago.
Bottom line is we have a better chance with ABR than Mitt, so this is the far better option than handing Mitt the nomination early. Mitt appeals to the same demographics Obama does, which means it would be like nominating a black Republican and expecting him to win over 50% of the black vote. It simply wouldn’t happen. I suspect a whole lot of pro-life voters will refuse to vote for Romney out of conscience and just write someone in or stay home. I’m in Pennsylvania, I know pro-life voters, and they will not vote R if they believe the candidate is pro-choice. So Romney will lose a chunk of the base and then have to fight tooth and nail to make it up with Obama voters like the wealthy, women, highly educated types, etc.
Just look at Mitt, listen to him...it’s easy to sense in your gut that this is NOT the type of person who can ever get elected president. People who can’t connect emotionally with the public cannot win the presidency. It is extremely hard to form an emotional connection with someone who is fundamentally dishonest as Romney is. Dishonesty creates emotional distance. The public will never feel comfortable voting for him. There is an enormous amount of ill-conceived “strategic” voting giving him the nomination now. “Strategic” voting simply will not occur in November. It’s like giving Romney an artificial subsidy that, when removed, will cause his voting “income” to collapse. To base your vote in the primary on how you THINK someone you’ve never met will vote in the future is completely insane. You are bound to get a less correct result than if you simply voted on your instinct and heart. That’s what voters in November will be voting on, so the best predictor of what they will do is to vote in exactly the same manner they will. This approach to voting as amateur political consulting is destined to lead us to a historic and totally unnecessary defeat.
If it goes to convention (August) Obama wins because there is simply not enough lead time for the candidate after a fractured debate to pull together a national campaign in 60 days.
Romney won all of the 6 top 10 Mormon states that have voted so far. Look below to see the percentages each state has of Mormons and 4 more states he will win. Even if they’re 5% of the people that means they’re probably 10% of the Republicans, and if they’re twice as likely to turn out as other voters, that gives Romney a solid 20% block of votes to build off of in each primary.
Utah (Jun 26 - Winner Take All Primary)
Idaho (ROMNEY WON)
Wyoming (ROMNEY WON)
Nevada (ROMNEY WON)
Arizona (ROMNEY WON)
Hawaii (Mar 13 - Proportional Caucus)
Montana (Jun 5 - Non-Binding Primary)
Alaska (ROMNEY WON)
Oregon (May 15 - Proportional Primary)
Washington (ROMNEY WON)
Why are you repeating yourself? I already explained why the scenario is far less simplistic than that. We have SuperPACs now which could be running an anti-Obama campaign long before the convention. And since Obama can’t start targetting the Republican until he knows who it is, he doesn’t have the lead time for negative attacks either. If we nominate Romney, we lose anyway, so let’s let Rick and Newt TAKE IT TO THE CONVENTION.
Also, if you recall, the convention is the first time when most people start paying attention to the election anyway. And the exposure the candidates get in a prolonged primary is valuable face time to build comfort and recognizability. The primary offers far better media coverage than being on the campaign trail before the convention. And I believe Obama used his time on the primary campaign trail to build his state volunteers and organizations, which we should be doing as well. A long primary is wonderful for our election chances in every way (including vetting out negatives early) and more than offsets a delay at finalizing the nominee until the convention.
Newt supporters can forget about him ever getting the nomination if it goes to a brokered convention. Geesh, as smart as Newt is, I would think he would see the handwriting on the wall, and how he is handing this nomination to Mitt by staying in. I prefer him over Mitt, but, he doesn’t have a prayer of a resurgence. He just doesn’t - his baggage is too heavy and he is the least liked among the women voters.
His danged ego is in the way, or maybe he is just book smart and lacking in common sense.
You are assuming a lot. A convention with floor fights, fractured positions on candidate platforms etc doesn’t go smoothly. The media will portray the Republican Party has being chaotic and unable to govern. Even the super-pacs can’t be going negative all the time. Whereas Obama will be trumpeting the end of the Afghan war, Iraq withdrawal, Osama bin Ladin’s capture; Auto Rescue Plan (they don’t call it a bail-out in Detroit); mortgage relief to 3m individuals, historical low interest rates etc etc., we would lack a defined candidate to speak for all and build his stature as what the public can view as a capable and competent WH occupant and speak to issues that show our candidate’s grasp of the major domestic and international issues of the day. Perception is everything politics. August is just too late for any of this.
“his baggage is too heavy and he is the least liked among the women voters”
That’s right. Massachusetts-Mitt, has the Hillary Gang behind him.
No way the 2008 Hillary gang will back The Undocumented-Un, this time.
....and notice how absent the constant “womens right to choose” has been for Massachusetts-Mitt, their plant has been.
Ineligible RINO Backstabber:
"Thank Me!!!!! I cheat, I win."
The McCain/Palin ticket was up ++4 to 10 pts
in some polls, days prior to Election 2008.
So rather than helping the GOP, Romney and
TeamROMNEY and the RNME (Republican National Media Establishment)
decided to attack Gov. Palin to throw Election2008.
Romney, and the Van der Sloot RNME RINOs for Obama in 2008
Late in October, The American Spectator's The Prowler revealed:
"Former Mitt Romney presidential campaign staffers
have been involved in spreading anti-Palin spin to reporters, seeking to diminish her standing after the election.
'Sarah Palin is a lightweight, she won't be the first, not even the third, person people will think of when it comes to 2012,'
says one former Romney aide
'The only serious candidate ready to challenge to lead the Republican Party is Mitt Romney.
"Some former Romney aides were behind the recent leaks to media, including CNN, that Governor Sarah Palin was a 'diva' and was going off message intentionally."
The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"Im told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palins people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romneys former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.
"These staffers are now out trying to finish her off .hoping it would ingratiate themselves with Mitt Romney."
"Who's the Palin Leaker from the McCain Campaign?
National Review Online The publication of a Vanity Fair profile of Sarah Palin
appears to have opened old wounds in the McCain campaign.
... the source of the Diva leak was Nicolle Wallaces husband."
With 40% of the population in Anchorage Muni alone, it becomes hard to justify the expensive travel to remote Villages with less than 1% of the state population.
Include Juneau and Fairbanks and you have half the state. The Palmer-Wasilla Valley probably got covered for their couple percent since it is so close to Anchorage.
Why didn't local step up to organize their participation?
You’re overlooking a lot of what I wrote. Media attention for our convention would be an enormous plus. Remember how popular Palin became after her convention speech, even though she came out of the blue? With this much drama at our convention, the ratings would only go up and if we gave good speeches we’d get more benefit from that.
The media will always portray us badly. I don’t base my strategy on how to make the media portray me better, because that’s a pipe dream. But the convention is where we define ourselves without a filter, and a bigger audience for it counts for a lot.
Our candidates are already defining themselves and speaking to the issues. A long primary only helps us do more of that. It helps us in every way imaginable. It makes it much easier for our candidates to give speeches, travel the country and give interviews. All the candidates should simply keep doing that between June and August. Mitt is the only guy who might not do it since he cowardly runs from the media whenever he can, but he’s a bad candidate. Prolonging the process to try and get rid of him is a good thing no matter how we do it.
All this exposure may also give us a better idea of which candidate we should run by the time the convention rolls around. If we pick him now, by August the media could have destroyed him and we would have nowhere to go. All the candidates will be well known by August. Newt is already succeeding at attacking Obama on energy and has him on the ropes. The final nominee doesn’t need to be picked to do all the things you’re saying.
Point I'm making is that most Republicans in rural communities, are more socially conservative than Repubs in Anchorage, ect. Santorum might have gotten a thousand more votes.
We all know Romney will probably be the candidate and beating Big "O" the goal. With the history of corruption in Repub Party here in Alaska; many people have that in the back of their minds. The Repubs need to project better values or people will leave the party, something the Repubs need less of. Look how hard it's going to be to beat Obama with all his ethnic & minority, all the people on the govt disability, and various special interest group support that he has. We need more Republicans, not less.
In the end I ain't moving to an urban area to vote, ha ha; that would be nutty.
Again, you are making the big assumption that a brokered convention will go smoothly. The dog fights and backstabbing and insider dealing will be all excellent fodder for the media, tabloids and all.The emerging candidate will be bruised and the bruises will show. This thing needs to end and as Gingrich himself and others have said we’d in the end all unite with the one who has the magic number of delegates. As what happens, third candidates release their delegates. Someone needs to get to the 1440 mark soon. The Palin example you cite simply doesn’t apply here. That was an open seat to the WH. Now we have to deal with the power of incumbency and a fawning media that supports Obama. Despite all the debates and media focus, our prime candidates -Romney and Santorum still trail Obama by 7-9 points and Gingrich falls out of the rear view mirror. Things have changed for 2012.
There is probably no way Santorum can hit the 1440 mark even if Newt drops out as long as Romney is in the race pulling the liberal and Mormon states. It’s debatable whether Newt dropping out results in more delegates for Mitt than if Newt stayed in. He may help our cause in proportional states but perhaps not in WTA states. The only option is Romney or a contested convention. I have no interest in accelerating a Romney nomination. It’s debatable whether a Romney presidency does more damage to our party and our cause than 4 more years of Obama, so I’m willing to risk Romney losing for a better outcome at the convention.
We had the fawning media last time so again that isn’t a new factor. Incumbency is not going to be an advantage. Vague hope and change is replaced by a whole lot of failed policies, debt, unemployment, Solyndra, Keystone pipeline, doubled gas prices, Obamacare, foreclosures, etc.
The polls change every week or day almost. They don’t mean anything now. Kerry was ahead of Bush even in some July, 2004 polls I looked at. Decisions are made late. The voters we really need probably won’t even decide until the last day. There’s no reason to worry about a contested convention. It would be better if our guys criticized Obama more than each other, but we all know that’s Romney and Paul’s fault, and I’m not going to hand them the nomination as a reward for being bastards and attacking fellow Republicans brutally and dishonestly.
I'm making is that most Republicans in rural communities, are more socially conservative than Repubs in Anchorage
I would sure hope it was that way. We had a higher military ratio in Eagle River and I enjoyed that impact.
The Repubs need to project better values or people will leave the party,
Agreed. I just cannot see myself voting for Romney in the General Election. If he wins the primary, it is time to put full focus on the congressional races.