Posted on 01/02/2012 1:14:28 PM PST by rickmichaels
Conventional wisdom is that whoever wins the Iowa caucus has an encouraging boost to get the Republican nomination for president in Novembers vote.
Never mind that Mike Huckabee crushed Mitt Romney in the 2008 Iowa caucus, and neither went anywhere; in the 2000 caucus George W. Bush easily beat Steve Forbes and went on to win his partys nomination; or that in 2000 Robert Dole edged Pat Buchanan and both fell by the wayside.
So while winning in Iowa is a morale booster it doesnt mean much, and will quickly be forgotten after New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida.
This year, the Iowa results may mean even less than usual, since its not a winner-take-all situation, but split among contenders according to their percentage of the vote.
So doing comparatively well is important.
By Tuesday evening we should know the winner. At this writing, polls show Romney, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum roughly share the lead. Newt Gingrichs appeal has been falling, ever since hes turned nasty on rivals. Smart money is on Romney.
Its true that Ron Paul has worked long and hard in Iowa and led the polls, easing ahead of Gingrich, until a recent surge by Romney moved him into favored status.
In Iowa, the polls may not mean much. For Republicans whose main concern is to have Barack Obama bounced from the presidency, theres almost a feeling of necessity to ensure that Romney gets the nod.
Iowans may lean towards the libertarian views of Ron Paul, but its also a given that Paul hasnt a snowballs chance of getting the nomination. Rival candidates snipe at Paul, clearly uneasy at his continuing appeal. Romney perhaps pin-pointed what even pro-Paul fans worry about Pauls casual concern about Iran developing nuclear weapons, and Romneys gentle response that Paul may not be concerned, but most Americans dont trust the idea of ayatollahs controlling nuclear weapons.
Hear, hear.
No one doubts that the Republican candidate Barack Obama and the Democrats would like to win and who would be the easiest for them to defeat is Gingrich. Apart from all the baggage Gingrich carries, hes almost a resurrection of the past: An old, outdated reminder of things left behind in this era of change and progress.
The saddest of the Republican candidates is Michele Bachmann, who in interviews insists the tide is turning in her direction as she drifts farther and farther from popular appeal.
She wont even acknowledge that shell support whoever wins the nomination, which makes her kind of pathetic, and an embarrassment to watch. She keeps pretending that shell be the candidate and of course shell support herself. If she believes that, shes not the person needed to lead America.
Self-delusion is not uncommon in politicians at any level.
But Romney seems the one with most self-control, unflappable, even-tempered, unexciting, competent, decent, and has the most potential to appeal to independents and moderate Democrats. He doesnt get the blood churning, but he may be what America needs in tough economic times.
Trustworthiness is something many of Romneys rivals havent earned, and something that many Americans are uneasy about in Obama, who radiates likeability but does not inspire confidence.
Romney looks a shoo-in for New Hampshire, which will make South Carolina easier. The race may soon be Romneys to lose and this year hes not prone to stumbling.
Romney most sensible choice for U.S. Republicans........................................ Blaaah, fizzel, pooof, Obama lite. It doesn’t mater any more, the crop of lack luster candidates won’t bring out the voters. It fizzled out when Palin and Cain lost on “Beat The Press”.
"Trustworthiness" is something Romney knows nothing of.
Romney for Obama in 2008
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."
"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"
"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"
"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"
"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"
"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"
You’ll save yourself a lot of grief if you add a comment to that effect when you post. JimRob has been ZOTting Romney supporters without mercy.
Bosh! I will not vote for another RINO.
I’m a Romney supporter? That’s news to me. In case you didn’t notice, I didn’t write the article.
Also, if I post an article about Islamic wackos killing Christians, does that mean I support it? Since when does posting an article mean endorsing its content?
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.