Posted on 01/13/2012 5:34:15 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Mitt Romney is suddenly leading everywhere – except where it matters. Pollsters say that he’s running well nationally in the Republican presidential contest, but South Carolina – which votes on the 21st – is too close to call. Insider Advantage puts Romney on 23 percent in the Palmetto state, Newt Gingrich on 21 percent and Rick Santorum on 14 percent. The New York Times has made a prediction that takes into account all the momentum swinging around following Mitt’s New Hampshire win. It comes up with Romney at 25.5 percent and Gingrich at 24.7 percent (Ron Paul slips in third with 16.4 percent).
The message is clear: Romney is vulnerable in South Carolina. And if a Right-wing alternative were to win the state, the primaries would become a two way race – a race that a consistent conservative might actually win. South Carolina is handing the Republican Right a golden opportunity to stop the Romney bandwagon.
The problem is that the conservative field is too divided to take advantage of it. True, the candidates are finally waking up to the fact that they need to do something about Romney. Gingrich’s spokesman told the Washington Post that, “The goal is to get rid of Romney. Our goal is to remove Mitt Romney from the competitive ranks.” And Newt is making good on his promise. His super PAC is spending $3.4 million running an ad that explores Romney’s dubious record as a venture capitalist. The 28-minute short film dubs the founder of Bain Capital, “more ruthless than Wall Street”. Rick Perry, who failed to make a mark in either Iowa or New Hampshire, is likewise reinventing himself as Che Guevara. He told a crowd in Lexington, “I understand the difference between venture capital and vulture capitalism.....
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Santorum should get out. Perry should get out.
1. Margin of error.
2. Common sense says that Newt & the Ricks are splitting the conservative vote versus the liberal Willard
3. Some polls are merely establishment or Dem push polls to promote the biggest establishment or liberal candidate which is Willard in BOTH cases.
Hmmm….
Speaker Gingrich-led (or run) Republicans….the result:
* Voting on each of the Contract with America items
* Four consecutive balanced budgets
* Over $500 billion of debt paid off
* Major welfare reform accomplished
* 11 million new jobs for America
* Unemployment falling to under 4%.
Common sense in this case is wrong.
Santorum is collecting about 2/3rds of the conservative vote. Most of the Newt voters are former McCain voters. We’re talking moderates and independents.
It’s typical for moderates and independents to push out the conservatives. We’ve seen it throughout the race.
If our goal is to elect a conservative who can beat Obama and Romney - Santorum’s our man.
If our goal is to elect a moderate, and ensure a Romney nomination, then we need to get behind Newt tout de suite.
Newt should get out first.
Doggie pile on Willard! Doggie pile on Willard!
OOOHHhhh come on,
Most McCain voters held their noses and voted for him.
Because they DIDN’T want Obama.
Santurom is sitting at 16% Are you saying he has a better change then Newt Gingrich?
WE DO NOT WANT ROMNEY!
“Dumping Toomey over for Spector was but one prime example of his dutiful dedication to the fraternity of liberal Republicans in DC.”
A mistake which cost him his senate seat 8 years ago.
I suppose I could quote Newt Gingrich who has remained in Washington all this time, presently resides in VA, and who boasts about being an insider.
Instead I’ll quote this from PPP:
“A poll of Florida voters released Thursday by Democratic pollster PPP found Gingrich with a 30-point lead over Romney”
How far have we come in a month, have we?
“This also would explain why, with the exception of shoe leather politics paying off after a solid year in Iowa.”
If he were an insider why would he bother conducting a shoe-leather campaign? That makes no sense to me. If he had no fight in him, why did he win Iowa?
If you want someone with no fight, how about Gingrich who meekly rolled over and conceded Iowa? Is this the man that you really believe is interested in beating Romney?
I don’t see it. So far Newt’s done his job as a staking horse for Romney without posing the risk that he actually might win.
That was Gingrich 2.0. You are asking us to support the 4.0 version.
Santorum is getting very little conservative support (except for the social conservatives, who don’t care about the rest of his positions and the fact that he spent years in the Senate without accomplishing a single thing) and his voters would probably go to Romney if he dropped out. Santorum himself, I think, is angling for a reward from Romney...not VP, because I’d be surprised if Romney selected a former opponent for VP, even one who not a very good opponent, but possibly a Cabinet position.
Some of Perry’s voters might go to Gingrich, but I think more of them would probably go to Ron Paul.
So who knows? I think both Santorum and Perry should drop out, not necessarily because it would benefit Gingrich (I don’t think it would) but because it might clarify things and then you would have a 3-candidate race: Romney, the annointed one; Ron Paul, the clown candidate the GOP always seems to have; and Gingrich, who mysteriously seems to believe that ideas are important and that Americans really care about something other than how many times he’s been married.
Absolutely, yes. He won in Iowa, and he’s the better choice over Newt to beat Romney in the head to head.
He was at 2 percent in South Carolina and is now up to 16, and people would have you believe that his support is ‘collapsing’. I don’t know about you, but the man who can go up 14 sounds much better than the man who has dropped 20. Who’s collapsing here? Do you want me to do a graph showing South Carolina support over time? ;)
“Most McCain voters held their noses and voted for him”
And they are doing the exact same thing for Newt. Look, you don’t have to hold your nose for Newt. You CAN have a conservative, a real conservative nominee. You don’t have to settle.
Santorum staked out Iowa because he had no budget, and he moved there and spent a year meeting and greeting. That’s fine, and he could afford to do it and in addition, obviously had nothing else to do. He didn’t do well Iowa through ideas; nobody cared because he never even stated them. He did well because Iowans had seen him and the ladies thought he was a nice young man and he had such a lovely family.
Santorum is a classic DC insider who sat in the Senate for years and never did a thing, and of course endorsed Arlen Specter, but he now has divorced himself from this to the point that most people don’t even remember that he was ever there. They just look at his sweet wife and those lovely children, and they think his lack of ideas, halting delivery and deer-in-the-headlights looke are kind of cute and endearing.
“Santorum is getting very little conservative support (except for the social conservatives”
So social conservatives aren’t ‘really conservative’. They don’t count, eh?
“Santorum himself, I think, is angling for a reward from Romney...not VP, because I’d be surprised if Romney selected a former opponent for VP, even one who not a very good opponent, but possibly a Cabinet position.”
I heard that Kinky Friedman actually was supposed to get that nomination. It was all over the news yesterday.
“I think both Santorum and Perry should drop out”
Well of course, because we can’t have a social conservative in the race, and social conservatives aren’t REAL conservatives.
“that Americans really care about something other than how many times he’s been married.”
Oh well. I guess cheating on your wife and then marrying the lady you were cheating with, and then doing that a second time makes you the REAL conservative. Good thing for that!
You’ve convinced me, as a social conservative of the following:
1, Newt doesn’t support me or my ideals any more than Romney.
2, If the choice comes between Newt and Romney that I have no choices in the race.
Good job sir. Well done.
Social conservatives aren’t real conservatives. Indeed. Well said livius! Newt should make you his campaign manager.
Same ole crap about the one little baggage on Santorum. Santorum is winning in the delegate race and beat Perry and Newt in two states SO FAR. He had better stay in much longer than the other two. Why are you folks not looking at results? Your dreamy thoughts are just weird.
Your insane. Santorum is winning in delegates and states. Newt has been horrible in the primaries so far. He should drop out because he cannot relate to the voters as is proof in his dismal 4th and 5th place.
In addition to which, he has been described as "The most honorable politician I know" by Dick Morris. You can consider the source, but it seems a significant statement. And character is what endears a politician to me.
I could not even read the rest of the posts because I already know what they are saying. They are either Ron Paul, Newt, Romney or Perry supporters. It is unbelievable that the only ones who have a clear vision of what is going on in our Republican Primary must come from “across the pond”. I echo Sarah Palin’s sentiments, are we all numbskulls?? Do you want another McCain? Newt may win debates, but O isn’t going to give him a chance at any. The Dems already have a trouncing of Mitt with Romneycare and his “big business” connections. Perry is just another GWB from Texas—STUPID to them. Unless someone steps in from the shadows, Rick Santorum is our only prayer, but only it we get behind one candidate. Think about why none of the others are options.
Speaker Gingrich was fined $300,000 for ethics violations and then he resigned from the House "under pressure from his Republican colleagues" -- but he is a good debater.
Just call it "take one for the Gipper"!
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.