Skip to comments.Romney wins Michigan and Arizona primaries
Posted on 02/28/2012 7:48:25 PM PST by Red Steel
DETROIT, Feb. 28 (UPI) -- Mitt Romney was a double winner Tuesday, capturing the Michigan and Arizona Republican presidential primaries, results showed.
The Detroit Free Press declared Romney the victor over his GOP rivals in Michigan.
With about 74 percent of the precincts counted, Romney had 317,258 votes (41 percent) to Rick Santorum's 286,530 (37 percent), results posted by the Free Press showed. Ron Paul was third with 88,521 votes (12 percent) and Newt Gingrich followed with 50,726 votes (7 percent). Another 2 percent voted "uncommitted" and a handful of votes went to several other Republicans who are no longer contenders.
CNN called Romney the winner in Arizona. With 71 percent of the vote counted, Romney had 191,182 votes (48 percent) to Santorum's 101,232 votes (25 percent). Gingrich was third with 65,182 votes (16 percent), with Paul bringing up the rear with 33,505 votes (8 percent).
Exit polls in the two states Tuesday had indicated electability was the top priority among Republican primary voters.
Thirty-three percent of Michigan voters said beating President Obama is the top priority when selecting a GOP nominee, while 38 percent of voters in Arizona said the same, CBS News exit polls indicated.
Romney and Santorum slashed at each other ahead of the Michigan primary, which was too close to call. The contest in his home state is seen as crucial to Romney and his claim of the front-runner's mantle.
Despite the closeness of the Michigan race, the Post said Romney was expected to win about three times as many convention delegates as Santorum Tuesday. Arizona is a winner-take-all primary. Michigan's 30 delegates are allotted proportionately to the primary winner in each of the state's 14 congressional districts. Arizona's winner picks up all of its 29 delegates.
The Washington Post said Romney was expected to garner 45 delegates from both contests, with Santorum picking up about 15.
Gingrich and Paul were not expected to win any delegates, and did not seriously campaign in the two states.
Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, and Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, have been shooting fireballs at each other in recent days.
Romney blasted Santorum's use of robocalls urging Democrats, who can vote GOP in Michigan, to vote for Santorum.
"I know why [President] Obama doesn't want me to face him but I just think it's outrageous and a terrible dirty trick at the last hour, by the way, late in the afternoon on the day before the election, maybe hoping no one would notice, they start sending out calls to Democrats, union members telling them to go into the Republican primary and vote against Mitt Romney," Romney told Fox News.
"This is a new low for his campaign and that's saying something," he added.
Santorum told Fox News Monday night he's just trying to attract the Democratic voters he'll need in November.
"When he runs a robocall of my voice from four years ago saying good things about him, that's not a low moment, and when I run a call basically saying, calling Democrats that are eligible to vote here, to vote for us, that's a low?" he said.
That’s assuming that FR conservatives are the base. Im not sure that is the case.
Santorum has already won Michigan, in reality.
A close call in AZ is a win for Santorum, too.
The only way I would even consider Romney is if he picked a REAL conservative for VP.
Even then I would have to seriously think about it.
I fear Romney is almost as big a lier as Obama. He would have to be.
He is Victor Victoria of the Republican party. That is to say, he is a liberal democrat posing as a Republican posing as a new born conservative ( although there is absolutely no evidence he is conserv)
I would feel little better if Romney would say he would whole hearedly commit to choosing Constitional Conservative(s) for SCOTUS.
Although, he is a lier so....
How does a brokered convention work exactly? Are the choices limited to the candidates that are/were running?
How long was Santorum’s concession speech? OMG intoxicated by his own verbosity!
If your analysis is correct, Romney is the nominee. By the time enough of the voters decide to switch to move Newt out of third or fourth place in the upcoming states, Romney will have locked up enough to coast to a win at the convention. In most Super Tuesday states, Newt would have to double his current polling (in one week) to get into second.
You really believe that a Romney pick would be any different from an Obama pick? Lay off the Koolaid.
Well based on that strategy then santorum would not have been running by the time michigan came around. He would have dropped out long ago. As it is santorum has 59 delegates and gingrich has 32 which is not an incredible margin for santorum.
I am not singling out santorum or gingrich. I am just saying conservatives as a group can’t blame it on karl rove or some convenient whipping boy. Somehow conservatives must unite around a candidate if they want to beat romney.
Romney was on course to be the nominee months ago once the “base”, and I’m not sure who is running it these days, decided to get flightly and start jumping around based on debate performances. I’m a little old fashioned. I wanted to pick a conservative nominee based on an overall conservative record to most issues but that seems to be a minority view the last few elections.
All I know is that while the liberal segment of the GOP may be a minority they settle on a nominee early and stick with them. Meanwhile we’ve ended up with Newt who has a history of being a serial adulterer with a penchant for kissing up to liberals and the establishment if it advances his own career. Ron Paul who is an anti-semite. And Santorum who makes conservatives and “tea Party” goers hypocritical considering how they blasted Bush and now want to back someone who likes big government even more then he did but has less personal charm to sell himself.
Is it a wonder voting turnout has been so low? I’m certainly not voting for any of these people in the primaries. The madness that made these the pick of the crop to choose from isn’t going to lure me behind any of them and other conservatives must feel the same since they’ve abstained from voting too.
I'd just as soon give it to Obama than Romney. I don't want the Republicans blamed for it.
I agree. Not as embarrassing as we had hoped, but barely squeaking by in your home state is not something to be proud of.
Who said I was for Romney? I despise the dude. Please see my tag line.
When I said “We’ll see what happens next Tuesday,” I meant I was rooting for either Rick or Newt to do well. I’m not going to bash either one of them, an activity that seems all too common on Free Republic. These two guys....Rick and Newt....both have their good and bad points, but both of them are light years better than either Obama or Romney.
I would run, not walk, to the polls this November to vote for either Newt or Rick. Maybe they should join forces to battle Romney and then Obummer.
My big worry is the two of them splitting the conservative vote and paving the way for that phoney Williard.
Mob rule has ensued and this country will further sink into the morass of sin and debauchery. The USA will soon go under. If the Lord does not return it will happen in my lifetime, and I'm 51.
“A lot of people have that my guy didnt win so Im gonna pout and not vote and let obama win attitude.”
Including the GOPe.
And if Romney is the Nom, I'm not voting for him. I bet a LOT of people don't. He could never win against Obama, anyway. Either Newt or Santorum should back-out. We've been saying that for weeks now.........
Well, here’s the reality.
NH, IA, FL, MO, MI, MN, CO, NV, AZ, ME, SC are gone. That’s 12 states. So far Newt has 1.
Score is 7 Romney. Santorum 4, Newt 1.
Newt’s not gonna win Wyoming. That makes 13 states down. Romney with 8, Santorum 4, and Newt 1.
That means that Newt has a state deficit of 7 on Romney. He has 37 states to make up that deficit. In order for him to beat Romney in states, Romney cannot win more than 15 of the remaning states.
NY, VT, NJ, CT, MA, DE, MD. That’s 7 right there. Romney needs only 8 more.
To get to 15 -
HI, CA, IL, NM, ID, MT, OR, VA and WI! That gives him an unassailable lead vs Newt.
This is what Newt is up against. Newt needs to beat Romney in one of OR, MT, ID or NM in order to win the nomination, and he can’t afford to lose anywhere else.
“Youre also making the strange assumption that Santorum and Newts standings in the polls are going to stay static”
Nonsense. I outline a variety of assumptions based on polling. Even Newt at his best isn’t going to get more than 14 states vs Romney. It’s too late for him at this point. We are already 1/3rd in and Newt has exactly one state.
“Santorum had his chance and blew it in a big way.”
Uh, no. He tied Romney in MI - and picked up 15 delegates to Newt’s zero on the night. I’m sorry, you don’t get to write the narrative. At the end of the day, it’s Santorum 15, Newt, 0. The last time Newt picked up a delegate was in South Carolina.
“Newt got a BIG bump in the last-day voting”
All the way up to 7 percent in MI?
“Newt got 11% of the last-minute vote. He only got 3% in the few days before that”
So you’re proud of the fact that your man almost surged up to Ron Paul levels? Do you even hear yourself?
And how did that work out for team conservative? First time we’ve lost a state because of vote splitting. Hey, facts are facts. So far the states lost because of conservative vote splitting - is one, and that’s because of Newt.
“Lets also not forget that 9% of the voters in Michigan were crossover Democrats and voted HEAVILY for Santorum.”
And? Santorum won among conservative + very conservative. As he did in CO, MN and MO. Look at the counties. Santorum did better in the more conservative counties.
Wow, and here I thought I was on Free Republic which supports conservatives?
You’re happy to see Mitt cruise to the nomination?
I haven't been to those places lately, but at least they have beautiful cities. When I speak of the Eastern Bloc, I am talking about not being able to find vegetables, or walking into a "store" where there is one item in the window. Do you remember that funny advertisement (I think it was for Yellow Pages) where the guy had a shop called "Bob's Rug?" ANd he only had one rug in the store? That's what I'm talking about. We would joke about that: "Pavel's Purse" or "Cristov's Crystal Vase." You would walk into these stores in the "business" district and there was one thing to buy - if even that. The next day, the store would be closed. We had a man on the train in East Berlin come over to us and bend down to look at our shoes (high top trainers). They had never seen shoes like that, stuff we totally took for granted.
I'm talking about cities that are falling into ruin around you. Some of the beautiful medieval towns in south Bohemia where the buildings had not been painted for 60 years and stuff was crumbling and everything was gray and drab. The elegant water fountain in the town square where the water nymph's face was missing along with several limbs. It was very, very sad because you knew that at one time, it was a gloriously beautiful place. Imagine this in our cities and what that would be like. Imagine broken cars and old appliances dumped on the side of the road. Medians and yards that are never mown - no home that stands out for someone to be proud of. Or for an even better visual, just read "Atlas Shrugged." Or drive through the Detroit.
I'm also talking about what living like that does to people spiritually and psychologically. They walk differently; they speak differently. They whisper in public. They always look over their shoulder. You guys think I'm kidding... I'm not. I felt like I was in the middle of a bad spy movie when I was over there. And this was after the Berlin wall had come down.
Nothing is by accident with these folks.
I guess we’re all going to have to get used to big government socialism.
So pay your taxes - your government is broke. :)
You just about summed it up...
Yet, that is what you ignore. Instead, you focus on issues that are, while important, not on the radar of the voters at this time.
Furthermore, you are so focused on these issues that you render everything else irrelevant. So you focus on the candidate who is the best on that, regardless of how bad he may be on other conservative issues.
That monomania blinds you. You support a candidate that is great on social issues, middlin’ on defense, and poor on fiscal/small government issues.
Whereas I look at them all, with special focus on pushing small government.
And Newt is an 80% type of candidate. 80% of what I want on both social and fiscal conservatism... which means he's good in all the areas, not just one.
But your monomania on solely social issues keeps you from looking at the rest of the complete conservative package. And that's specially bad when the election climate isn't focused on those social issues.
Thanks for the great comments, the truth of which are undeniable. And when you look at where we reside on that repeating cycle, it’s quite chilling.
I was taking a guy to task last night for trashing Santorum for addressing abortion, homosexual marriage, and contraceptives.
I wouldn’t address contraceptives like Santorum did, but I do believe our culture is destroying itself, and promiscuity given cover by the availability of contraceptives is part of the problem.
Abortion? Homosexual marriage? He’s wrong to address them?
It makes you ask yourself, who do we as Conservatives actually believe here? If this guy is wrong to address these things, then I better start morphing me belief system.
Not gonna happen.
I appreciate your comments. You take care.
Hey, you’re probably on to something there.
I’ve not studied the 1860 election, but your comments are interesting.
There does seem to be an environment conducive to multiple parties popping up and causing the scenario you’ve been predicting. It will interesting to see play out.
Clinton won his first term with 43% of the vote. I hope you’re proven wrong this year, but I wouldn’t bet against it.
Good food for thought.
I’m going to have to say that I think you’re probably a lot closer to the truth of it than any of us want to believe.
It has been my take that we have one of the worst fields of candidates this year that I have seen.
So much opportunity, and so little preparation to take advantage of it.
The polarization of this nation is undeniable. It’s such a shame that a nation second to none, is being ripped apart from within. Where this leads is to nothing good, that’s for sure.
I honestly believe the Republican party is done.
The first figures I saw last night had Santorum in the lead about 40 to 38%. I expected to see that swing to something like 46 to 38%. Larger cities tend to take some time to count, and they generally swing the vote to the more liberal direction later on.
You’re right that there wasn’t a big traditional shift later on. There was a rather small one. I’m not sure what the Michigan vote count swing usually looks like on the nights of elections. This may be what their numbers generally look like. I just don’t know.
Do you live in Michigan? Not trying to undercut your theory. I just wondered if this was typical.
You are right that it was quite steady all evening.
You were under the impression Romney supporters frequented this forum? Really? You didn’t know that Santorum supporters did? Really?
If you thought trashing Santorum here non-stop for the last month or so wasn’t going to affect the vote, then why do it?
Sadly, Newt didn’t pick up votes. Romney did. Who knew?
You either lack reading comprehension skills, analytical skills or simply want to misrepresent my position.
Don’t be a jackass.
Sarcasm does not become you.
FReeRepublic is but a microcosm of political conservatives. Early on, the forum owner and a majority of FReepers had Mitt Romney categorized as a liberal phony.
There have been dozens of Cain, Bachmann & Perry supporters comparing their candidates to Paul, Romney, Huntsman, Newt and Santorum. Not always civil, but enthusiastic until their preferred candidate left the contest. Many turned to Newt.
All voters are not as informed as FReepers....that’s just the way it is. Not all voters look to FReeRepublic for guidance....so what happens on FR stays on FR.
Call me more than a touch cynical, but I consider much of this coronation as being preordained. I do not trust the Party leaders to make sure that the votes are counted factually, truthfully and accurately. It’s become an inside job. The Party leaders want this over with ASAP.
Some extreme partisans may claim the ends justify the means. I disagree and see such a result as an end run on democracy. Democracy is about inconvenience, messiness and infighting, not convenience, expedience and tidiness.
I don’t disagree with you, but you tell me who has more public baggage that the folks of this nation are aware of, Newt or Rick?
Most folks didn’t know who Rick was, much less what his views were in total. They knew plenty about Newt. Newt tanked. He’s struggling to win in Georgia, and isn’t even running in Virginia. He started his career in Georgia, and now lives in Virginia.
So what do we do? Well we pulverize Rick Santorum.
Okay, well we’ll see how that works out for us.
I appreciate the response.
And the reality is what it always was. . . all “conservatives” are not pure and the the general voting public is pretty far away from true conservatism. As much as I personally identify more with Santorum than any other candidate, it’s just wistful thinking to believe there are more of “us” than “them”.
Yep. The Party Insiders Hath Spoken....
You are entitled to your opinions. 1st amendment is still alive and well.
What it all boils down to is prosperity in the country. It is a well known fact that richer countries do a better job of taking care of environment. Example: West Germany Vs. East Germany. Same thing with maintaining buildings, parks, roads etc.
Prosperity is better served by a system which builds incentives for hard work. Creating more dependents with handouts and high taxes are the opposite to human nature for work hard.
It is really not much more complicated than that. Every policy Obama has pushed is exactly the opposite of basic human nature.
I would encourage you to continue to think of my posts as sarcasm and dismiss them.
I think you’ll be a lot happier that way.
Why on earth would you rather see Romney win in Michigan than Santorum win in Michigan?
Isn’t that cutting your nose off to spite your face?
“You are entitled to your opinions. 1st amendment is still alive and well.”
Yes it is. I am not the one defining what is not ‘relevant’ to the entire thread.
Like Romney will nominate a Scalia type.
Romney or Obama, same thing.
That’s why I call him Robamney.
I understand your point, and it is part of the problem. However, nowadays, I don't think contraceptives is what's really lowering our standards. I'm somewhat of a libertarian when it comes to that, Harvard Law "students" notwithstanding...har. I believe that our pop culture that we are bombarded with daily by the MSM, Hollywood, acadamia, and advertising to be the real culprits in lowering the bar.
Personally, I don't think we will ever get back to the moral equivalence of the Founding Fathers. You know how hard I've tried (VetsCoR), but I've given up of late. I'm awaiting 4 more years of bambi and hope he pisses Joe-six-pack and Soccor-moms off enough to open their eyes and join us in a new, hopefully peaceful, revolution. Unless that happens, our great experiment in self-determination is going to end.
On an up note. Some European countries are starting to refute their socialist political systems. Maybe, when Greece, Italy, Spain, et al learn their lesson, they can provide some insight to the average American how socialism will just not work. But then, we have some 49% of Americans who don't pay fed income taxes and want more stuff so who knows how long the above would take?
If the average Joe/Josephine doesn't wake up soon, I will be looking to move to Arizona (cutting edge 2nd and 10th amendment state), or maybe even out-country to Costa Rico and hopefully escape the failure of the western political system.
Yes, there are places that even the most powerful will not interlope...Costa Rico, Cayman Islands and others. There are many that the regional/world fights would not affect, due to elites needing safe havens for their money.
Sorry for the rant, but I'm done if bambi gets another term. I'll fight against that SOB, but I believe he will get 4 more...the gimmes want him and they grow by the day.
Sorry, I wasn't clear that it is the last step that I hope not to see. "From dependency to bondage". I believe we are at the step above..."From apathy to dependency". We are yet to be in bondage...yet.