Posted on 03/14/2012 11:49:30 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The first hint that the night might not go Mitt Romney's way was his decision not to have a victory party at all, which I first heard on the Hugh Hewitt show. As I said at the time, that's an odd decision, considering the free media coverage one gets from the inevitable candidate speech. Perhaps that should have tipped us off that the early exit polls had missed the mark, and that the Romney campaign knew full well they would come in third in both Mississippi and Alabama.
However, despite the disappointing results in the two southern states, Romney ended up winning the night anyway — at least in delegates. Aaron Blake counts up the haul, including the delegate allocations from Hawaii and American Samoa:
The most recent projections from AP show Rick Santorum took 31 delegates from Alabama and Mississippi, while Newt Gingrich took 24 delegates and Romney got 23.
But this morning, Romney was projected to win all nine delegates from American Samoa’s caucuses, and he also won the Hawaii caucuses by a large margin.
AP projections show Romney beat Santorum 18 delegates to four in those jurisdictions.
So, as of this morning, Romney has won 41 delegates from Tuesday’s contests, compared to 35 for Santorum, thereby expanding Romney’s delegate lead. (Gingrich is projected to have won 24 delegates.)
According to the WaPo count after last night’s results, Romney leads in delegates over Santorum, 494-251, with Gingrich trailing badly at 131. It doesn’t extend the delegate lead by much, but it kept either Gingrich or Santorum from catching up to Romney, too.
Rich Lowry questions the conventional wisdom from last night’s spot analysis that the night was especially bad for Romney even apart from the actual delegate haul:
There’s a lot of chatter about how the Romney campaign needs a shake up. But did anyone expect him to do any better than somewhere around 30 percent in Alabama and Mississippi? The states are chock-full of the kind of voters he just isn’t going to reach in these primaries, and the only way he was going to win was if he got lucky and the anti-Romney vote broke exactly the right way. I’ve been underwhelmed by Romney victories and in this case, I’m underwhelmed by Romney defeats.
The chatter comes from two points. First, polls had him doing better than he eventually did in both states, especially Mississippi, and that makes it look like Romney can’t close the deal with conservative-state voters. Second, the expectation was that Santorum and Gingrich would have equal strength in these two states, which could have allowed Romney to take Mississippi. That didn’t happen, which means that Santorum has eclipsed Gingrich as the conservative alternative. That’s not good news for Romney or Gingrich.
The night wasn’t all bad news for Romney, by any means, but it’s overstating the case to call last night a Romney victory.
Just a reminder to Ed Morrissey......7% defection or less in the general election and Romney wins NOTHING.
Well La Dee Frickin' Da!
With three in the race, mittens gets 1/3 of remaining delegates.
With two in the race, mittens gets 1/2 of remaining delegates.
... just sayin’...
Yah, he's running away with it, huh...
Looking at where Romney does well, Romney wins where GOP loses and loses where GOP wins.
Just a reminder on how F$%ked up the process has been:
http://theiowarepublican.com/2012/mitt%E2%80%99s-nomination-manipulation/
“Just a reminder to Ed Morrissey......7% defection or less in the general election and Romney wins NOTHING.”
I wonder how bad the defection, stay at home, and third party trend will be if Bishop Willard is the best the GOP can offer. Since 1988 I have not liked any GOP general candidate for POTUS, but I have voted for and supported each and every one of them, each and every time. Not this time, if the nominee is Bishop Willard. He is the first GOP national candidate as vile as any Democrat. I wonder how many in the base will regard him with the same disdain.
Count me in.
Morrissey might have heard of no Romney party on Hewitt, but that didn’t stop Hewitt from going positively orgasmic when the false report of the Mississippi exit polls showing Romney winning there...
[ Not this time, if the nominee is Bishop Willard. He is the first GOP national candidate as vile as any Democrat. I wonder how many in the base will regard him with the same disdain. ]
The Obamaoid will BBQ Romney.. like a brisket.. the smoke will smell like “Juan McLaim tenderloin”..
AND he will not be seasoned with Sarah Palin.. or salted with Hotel Hanoi service..
It will merely be Willard burning like burnt porkchop..
NOTE**; ...No Newt...... NO win.. Santo is like a little girl playing politics..
I have never understood why states that don’t have any chance of voting for a Republican for President get a say in who we choose. At best, they should get a reduced number of delegates based on their history in Presidential general elections. That way, you keep them involved, but don’t give them an equal say.
“You guys keep saying that and yet somehow, with a tiny budget and a small but dedicated staff, he just keeps winning.”
I like Newt the best. That said, I can’t argue with you there. He does seem to have some appeal to democrats and indies too.
[ Santorum must be doing something right.... ]
Hes capitalizing on his little sick girl..
Hes using his family as proof that he is not a Union Stooge..
Actually he says nothing about a Union neither does Willard..
They are both OWNED by the Unions.. as is the Obamaoid..
You cannot get elected to anything In Mass. or Penn.. IF you’re not a Union stooge..
Rick and Willard are part of the collective.. they are drones..
Newt is indeed a whore BUT he is NOT a drone.. or a stooge..
It would be CHEAP to pay Newt a coupla of BILLION to clean up America..
I disagree with your numbers. I think in a two man race, mittens gets 40 percent. If Newt is one of the 2, he might get to 45. There are some Santorum voters who can’t stomach Newt, but Newt’s would all go to Santorum instead of Romney.
So he’ll end up with 1147 delegates and zero support...just peachy.
doesn’t the fact that they need to keep making excuses for Mittens tell them something?
Romney is the LOSER who lost to the LOSER McLame, who LOST TO OBAMA!!
Why on earth would we want to run the 2nd place guy from last time, when the first place guy from last time couldn’t beat Obama
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.