Skip to comments.With Mitt in the lead, anti-Romney Republicans weigh their options
Posted on 02/04/2012 3:31:39 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Those who continue to believe that Romney can be stopped are focused as is the campaign of Newt Gingrich on the possibility of a long delegate fight. They have largely given up hope of anyone winning a knockout victory over Romney, hoping instead that some other candidate can prevent the former Massachusetts governor from wrapping the race up before the Republican National Convention, which is set for Tampa, Fla., in late August.
We have never gone through a delegate fight like this, said Bob Vander Plaats, an influential conservative and the head of the Iowa-based Family Leader organization. You need around 600 delegates to win, and I think that will be very difficult for Gov. Romney.
Vander Plaats added that the reason Gingrich has been emphasizing that there are 46 states to go in the contest is because he can do the math.
Similar themes are sounded by prominent conservatives in the media. Erick Erickson of Red State wrote Thursday that the fact that many states award their delegates proportionally, rather than on a winner-take-all basis, could play to Gingrichs advantage.
If Gingrich is serious about staying in till the convention, he could deny Romney a first ballot win and spare the base from the man they dont like, even if Newt himself cannot get the nomination. He is more of a long shot today than he was a day before Florida, but he can still be the nominee, Erickson wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
If Romney wins the nomination I pray that some brave conservative true-blooded American will run as an independent.
“If that can be achieved, than maybe a compromise candidate can emerge.”
Possible but unlikely. I think it more likely that 2 or 3 way deal will be made. Try this on for size:
- Mitt gets the nomination.
- Rick gets V.P.
- Ron gets a couple of planks in the platform and either the Fed chairmanship or his choice of who gets it.
“...and many Gingrich supporters find Santorum to be almost as bad as Romney.”
And most Paul supporters can’t see much difference between the three of them.
I would never vote Romney. I don't care who his running mate may be. He represents the embodiment of everything I hate about pandering politicians, not to mention he is a liberal. I despise the man.
“...and she said that people forget Ron Paul has quite a few delegates that will NEVER go for Romney and this may swing toward keeping him out. Getting Ron Paul more delegates may be the best way to keep this goofball from the nomination and also a way to let the GOP know Americans want more than Obamney. Its an interesting idea....”
I’m a Paul supporter. One of the few who openly posts FR these days it seems. And I’ll tell you what I think: I think that they’ll make a deal. Keep in mind that most ideologues are as willing as anyone else to make a deal. It’s just that their price is a lot higher.
I think that supporting Ron Paul makes sense from the strategic perspective of getting a whole heck of a lot more out of any deal if and when one is made. They aren’t going to sell out their base for 30 pieces of silver.
Because a good VP pick does what in an administration?
There is talk a lot that people did not even show up to this caucus in NV because of the utter nightmare in 2008.... with the horrible unorganized situation, people waiting around for hours for instruction on what they were supposed to do etc.
Word is too that the Orthodox Jews and the Seventh Day Adventists are holding their caucus right now at the Addleson Center in LV. Since its their sabbath, the caucus decided to let them hold it later in the day.
Just in - Washoe County -
Newt is not on the ballot in some of the Tennessee counties, but the voters there can help by petitioning their County Sup. of Elections to get him on the ballot...OR getting the word out that “write-in” votes are counted. Then in the counties where Newt is not on the ballot, his name can be written in. That is my understanding, but if I am wrong I hope a TN Freeper will let me know.
This says a lot about the typical voter who uses such pitiful superficial reasons to support a candidate for President. What give me so much concern is how easy it is to throw out misinformation and how many eat it up as fact. There is so much misinformation out there on both Newt and Romney and I am worried that both have not yet been able to figure out how to counter it before the dim-wits eat it up and call it manna. This situation will be worse when the Obama machine starts blowing it out with $billion horse power with the American voter so willing to lap up that swill off the ground.
Whether the nominee is Newt or Willard, they had better get their communication techniques ready for prime time. Their performance in this area has our freedom at stake.
If Romney is the Republican candidate, I will stay home on election day. There is no difference between him and Obama.
Don’t support Newt. He would lose big among women voters.
As Yogi Berra would have put it, this seems like Déjà vu all over again.
In 1986, California's über-liberal Democratic Senator Alan Cranston seemed vulnerable. But of the 12 or so Republican candidates, 11 were conservative, and only one, Rep. Ed Zschau, was liberal. Although conservatives dominated the California GOP at the time, the 11 conservatives split up the vote, and Zschau (as in Mao) won with about a third of the votes. Because there was no runoff, Zschau got the nomination.
This placed conservatives in a dilemma. Much as they hated Cranston, Zschau's voting record was very similar--for one thing, he was pro-abortion and rabidly anti-military. Another factor was that Cranston, due to his age, would likely serve only one more term, whereas Zschau, being young, would likely become a liberal fixture in the Senate--like Clifford Case (R-NJ) or Jake "the snake" Javits (R-NY)--and being a Republican, he would face no serious GOP challenger. We conservatives found ourselves screwed either way. I wound up voting third party, and a friend whose views are to the right of my own voted for Cranston.
In the end, Cranston narrowly won.
The only way to stop Romney is for Santorum to drop out, endorse Newt, and get the VP nod in exchange. Additionally, massive amounts of money needs to flow into his campaign.
“Just think. The first American presidential race in history where neither candidate is a Christian.”
If it’s Romney against Obama it will be and the media will inform us that a poll has been taken and only thirteen percent correctly answered that BOTH Obama and Romney are Christians. At the same time they will tell us that unemployment is down to six percent and pink Unicorns are almost as plentiful as pink plastic Flamingos.
Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein thank you. You should add that Republicans have never stood a better chance in California since. About 26 years ago. Hey lets do this on a national level, that way we can also lose them all for a quarter of a century. It seems we are determined to bite off our nose in order to spite our face. I have a better idea, why don’t we just win this November with whoever wins the nomination and then take it from there.
Just think. The first American presidential race in history where neither candidate is a Christian.
Just think,(first time also),that we have a man whose running that thinks he is going to become a god vs. a man who thinks he is a god. Dear God help us.
WE FELL FOR THAT LAST TIME!!!!! Sarah is the ONLY reason we
accepted McCain, NOT THIS TIME I DO NOT CARE WHO IS ON THE
TICKET,!!!!! FOOL ME ONCE AND ONCE ONLY!!!!!!!
I am a woman and Romney makes my skin crawl, he is a sleazy car
salesman PLAIN AND SIMPLE!!!! I am not that crazy about Newt
but I lived through the media destruction of Newt. GO NEWT!!!!!!
Not even if Sarah Palin was his VP? Hmmmm That’s the kind of logic that got us Obama in the first place. The kind of logic that had my Precinct Committee Officer Write-In his own name on the 2008 ballot.
RP will get my vote in VA.