Posted on 01/11/2012 9:14:45 AM PST by Fred
Mitt Romney came out on top in New Hampshire, but he should have done far better against the hapless competition.
You gotta hand it to the Mittbot 3.0. With all the charisma of a foreclosure agent and all the charm of a calculator, Mitt Romney rolled to a win in New Hampshire, a state in which one of Mitt's many mansions sits—and right next door to Massachusetts.
Given those advantages, Romney looks weak even when he wins. Sure, he managed to surpass his 2008 total in New Hampshire (75,546 votes). But look at his competition this time! The field is so weak it would make a lame old plowhorse look like Secretariat. None of Romney's opponents ran a significant number of negative ads against him in New Hampshire. It's pretty easy to look bulletproof when your enemies are shooting blanks. Yes, Jon Huntsman ran a "comparative ad" that was weaker than baby's pee. And, yes, Newt Gingrich body-slammed Romney in the Meet the Press debate, essentially calling him a liar and demanding he "cut the pious baloney." But no one hit him right between the eyes with the kinds of ads Hillary and Barack used, let alone the carpet-bombing Romney's allies used against Gingrich in Iowa.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
If ever there was an expert on “charmless”, Paul Begala is it.
Romney, the GOP’s answer to Gore and Kerry.
hapless competition?...
FUPB!
“all the charisma of a foreclosure agent and all the charm of a calculator..”
I have to concede, reluctantly, “the forehead” nailed it
We conservatives are being led to an arranged marriage with a guy who otherwise couldn’t get a first date on his own
Facts:
- Romney - 100,000 votes in New Hampshire Republican Primary
- 257,000 votes cast in New Hampshire Primary (A Republican record vote)
- Republican vote in 2008 - 235,000 votes (McCain winner)
- Democrat Vote in 2008 - 285,000 votes (Clinton, Hillary winner)
- Democrat Vote in 2012 - 58,000 (Winner Obama - 80% of the vote)
- 49,000 votes for Obama, 10,000 vote for other Democrats (Obama uncontested for nomination)
- 2012 Democrat vote was 20% of 2008 vote and 10,000 Democrats voted for someone other then Obama
- Conclusion, Obama will lose New Hampshire in November, 2012
- 80% of Democrat vote just does not cut for Obama
- Objective research of past uncontested POTUS running unopposed in NH Primary shows massive better performance the Obama!!!
- Negative performance and protest vote against Obama probably with a good number of votes cast for Hillary Clinton should be vehical for Democrat Party to dump Obama !!!
- if this below par, negative political “Obama” performance continues, the Democrat Party will lose both the White House and both houses of congress!!!
Right now it's all about kicking Barrack Obama out of the White House.
The best I can hope for is that Sarah Palin and Herman Cain bring their charm factor to the campaign trail after the nominee is coronated and bring some enthusiasm to the party.
Begala is about as charming as a stomach pump.
No such thing is happening. Conservatives rallied in IA and almost got Santorum to win. There are no Conservatives in NH and Rats are allowed to vote in the GOP Primary. Why anyone panics about two contests that generally do nothing to produce a GOP nominee is beyond me. Let's wait and see what happens in SC where there are real Conservatives voting and has a closed Primary.
Before panic sets in, lets just look at what the delegate count is so far:
Romney 13 Paul 9 Santorum 6 Newt 4 Perry 3
Someone needs over 1100 delegates to wrap this up. This is far from over.
Bump!
Your point merits restating. This was an open primary and the Rats are up to mischief since they don’t have a race. We’ll know more what’s going on when we get to a primary where they can’t vote.
It should be no surprise that non- or pseudo-Republican candidates did well in New Hampshire, since CNN reports that roughly half of those who voted were not Republicans. I am unsure why there is a difference between “Party ID” and “Party Registration,” but non-Republicans were 53 percent of the “Vote By Party ID” and were 47 percent of the “Vote By Party Registration.” It is preposterous that these people played a major role in the selection of the Republican candidate!
I duuno about that. He could only manage 39% of the vote, in his backyard, in a state that he's been campaigning *hard* in since about 2007, and one that allows crossover Dem voters (who won't be voting for *anyone* with an (R) after their name, come November). My guess is that the Romney camp is doing some serious sweating this morning.
If he pulled 50 or 60% of the vote, I'd have said "OK. That's a victory, and it was completely expected." But a plurality, and a marginal one at that? I don't think so.
However, the MSM is so determined to make him BO's competition, that if he'd have won by one vote, it would have been "A Landslide".
We will see in SC and FL. If Romney is still pulling the same numbers, I'll be more worried about him. Otherwise, there's a long way to go.
I think crossover democratic voters are a huge problem in these early primaries. They got McCain in and now they are voting for Romney...
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.