comMITTed to Romney!

The NYT reports today that Mitt Romney won the CPAC straw poll with 30% of the vote, instead of the 20% that I have seen reported as of Saturday evening.

Whatever the accurate percentage is, it’s clear that Gov. Romney is the early favorite of those party members who are among the most committed to conservative principles, those who take the time and make the effort to travel to Washington to take part in the conference.

I have followed CPAC for three years now and last night’s performance by Rush Limbaugh was off the charts. To speak for over an hour, without the aid of a teleprompter, only the occasional reference to a set of notes, was very impressive. I didn’t even try to keep track of the number of standing ovations that Rush got, the crowd was constantly rising to it’s feet. What a thrill for those in attendance. I know they’ll be back in their communities this weekend with many stories to tell and fired up about the prospects the party now enjoys to make significant gains in both Houses of Congress in 2010.

If you haven’t already done so, please join a local Republican club or committee and become part of a growing cadre of grassroots political activists whose goal is to move away from the big government, big spending, big promises and small results of the current administration.

~~John Cronin~~

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/

By Michael Falcone

Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts emerged as the top potential Republican presidential nominee in a straw poll of conservative political activists who gathered in Washington this week.

Mr. Romney won the support of 30 percent of those who took the poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana trailed in second place with 14 percent, followed by Representative Ron Paul of Texas and Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, who both received 13 percent of the vote. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich rounded out the top five. Organizers said it was the third time that Mr. Romney had won the poll.

He rallied the conservative audience in a speech on Friday in which he urged them not to “dwell on the battles we’ve lost,” but rather, “get ready for the battles we’re going to win.”

But the nonscientific poll, which was based on the responses of 1,757 attendees, suggested that conservatives may be keeping an open mind about the 2012 election. While 55 percent of conferencegoers said they were generally satisfied with the field of candidates whose names have been floated as possible contenders, 44 percent said they wished the Republican Party had better choices. Read more…

Share on Facebook

Share This

Looking at this primary campaign debate video, it’s not hard to remember why John McCain lost his one shot at getting elected President. His attempt to explain why his Amnesty bill was not an amnesty is a case study in why the voters hold most politicians in contempt.

In the video, Mitt Romney rightly points out that McCain could at least attempt to deny that the bill was a de facto amnesty because it did have some bare bones requirements to qualify for the provisions of the bill. English proficiency, no felony convictions and pay a $5,000 fine. Wow! Tough stuff! Who said we weren’t going to lay the wood to lawbreakers? As one pundit pointed out, the $5,000 fine was nothing more than a membership fee.

The other thing that struck me was the three man tag team of McCain, Giuliani and Fred Thompson all ganging up on Gov. Romney in an attempt to rattle him. Even under trying circumstances, Mitt was very effective in getting his points across.

With rumors swirling about the possible collapse of the Mexican government and the poor people of that country under increased pressure to try to escape the poverty, violence and corruption of their system, now it’s more important than ever to have pro border law enforcement policies coming out of Washington. Of course, that is highly unlikely coming from this administration. Looking at the video and hearing Gov. Romney’s common sense solutions to a problem that is threatening to spiral out of control, the tragedy of the outcome of this election cycle and both the leadership that we got and the leadership that we were denied is brought home with a vengeance.

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

I came across this article by Peggy Noonan this morning and although it is dated Jan.2, 2009, it seems to be an article that was written some time ago, around the period following the 2008 primaries.

The article deals with some of the leading figures in the election, but I wanted to excerpt the part that deals with Gov. Romney. I know this can be categorized as “water under the bridge” but it is still encouraging to hear another opinion from the political right, other that the Mike Huckabee looneys who are forever decrying doctrinal deviations.

~~John Cronin~~

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE

The Republican contest may well end on Tuesday, but I sense little relief and much unease. In terms of avowed programs, policies and approaches, Mitt Romney was the more conservative candidate, and his even-keeled air won many friends. He offered executive experience and business acumen. As for how he came across, here is Mike Deaver on Ronald Reagan: “This is a face that when the baby sees it, the baby smiles.”

His supporters tell me he will fight to the end. The conservative establishment still has hopes. But the great unruly base may be doing some redefining.

If you go by the Florida returns, maybe this year positions aren’t everything. Republicans on the ground think the conservative is the one who suffered 5½ years in the Hanoi Hilton. Republicans on the ground think the conservative is the one who has endured a lifetime in the rounds in Washington and survived as antispending, antiabortion and pro-military. Republicans on the ground think the conservative is the old fighter jock who’ll keep the country safe in a rocky time ahead. And maybe Republicans on the ground are saying: He earned it.

The conventional wisdom is Mr. Romney can’t win it while Mike Huckabee’s in it. If Mr. Huckabee dropped out, Mr. Romney might pick up his conservatives. But Mr. Huckabee seems very happy running, and perhaps happy thinking of his future as the Mitt slayer in the party of John.

Mr. McCain seems to me to have two immediate problems, both of which he might address. One is that he doesn’t seem to much like conservatives, and never has. They can’t help admire him, but they’ve disagreed with him on so many issues, and when they bring this up his demeanor tends to morph into the second problem: He radiates, he telegraphs, a certain indignation at being questioned by people who’ve never had to vote in Congress and make a deal. He’s like Moe Greene in “The Godfather,” when Michael Corleone tells him he’s going to buy him out. “Do you know who I am? I’m Moe Greene. I made my bones when you were going out with cheerleaders.” I’ve been on the firing line, punk. I am the voice of surviving conservatism.

This doesn’t always go over so well. Mr. Giuliani seems to know Mr. McCain is Moe Greene. Mr. Huckabee probably thought “The Godfather” was kinda violent. Mr. Romney may be thinking to himself, But Michael Corleone won in the end, and had better suits.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Polls this far out are more important for their entertainment value than for anything else, but they do offer a very general guide for “taking the Party’s temperature.”

On two unrelated notes, did you see where Louisiana has graced the Republican Party with two seats this year? Rep. Jefferson, the scandal-tainted Democrat who evidently foresaw the banking crisis by a couple of years and providentially deposited $100,000 in cold, hard cash in the freezer compartment of his refrigerator, was unceremoniously turned out of office. We have got a long way to go, but we are moving in the right direction.

On the second note, we went out to dinner last night at a new Mexican restaurant in a St. Louis suburb and except for a couple we saw dining in another area, the four of us were the only customers during what should have been the dinner rush. Because it was so slow, we had a chance to visit with our waiter and the manager of the restaurant, both from Mexico.

The waiter didn’t speak much English and he was talking to my brother and a friend of his, while I got into a conversation with the manager about, what else, politics.

He was against the war in Iraq, citing a documentary he saw about the war which showed the wounds that our service personnel are enduring and I saw the pain in his eyes as he recalled the footage. I told him we all wish the war was over and that the killing and casualties would stop.

But I told him that there are worse things than war. I asked him to keep in mind that Islamofascists flew two airliners into the Trade Towers in lower Manhattan and killed almost 3,000 innocent people whose only offense were that they were Americans. If we didn’t respond to that, the terrorists would have taken it as a sign of weakness and would have kept coming at us here, where we live. Instead of rolling over for them, we took the fight to their neighborhood, brought democracy to 50,000,000 people and secured the world’s oil supply. All in all, not bad.

We talked about the economy, the moral decline in America, his background of moving to Mexico from Spain and then from Mexico to California. He is a hard working guy, ( I could tell from his handshake that he has done a great deal of manual labor ) loves his family and is very worried about the direction that his adopted country is moving in. At the end of the conversation, I could tell that he is about a quarter of an inch away from becoming a Republican voter. His values are the same as the members of this site and I will encourage the RNC to reach out to these voters, not by promising the illegals something they haven’t earned, but by asking them to join a conservative party that will promise to enforce the law and help to restore, first to the Party and then to the country, the principles that made us the greatest civilization on earth.

~~John Cronin~~

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/2008_12_05_Poll_finds_Romney_in_good_shape_for_White_House_run/

By Dave Wedge

Former Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney’s bruising battle with Sen. John McCain has apparently left him in a good position should he decide to make another White House run in 2012.

According to a CNN poll released today, Romney is running third among possible Republican presidential candidates, slightly trailing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Of the 460 Republicans polled, 67 percent said they would be “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to vote for Palin, followed by Huckabee with 65 percent and Romney with 61.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani ranked fourth with 57 percent, former House Speaker Newt

Gingrich with 52, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal with 44 and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist with 32.
Huckabee, who’s now hosting a Fox News show and recently put out a book, ranked first among those who said they’d be “very likely” to vote for him with 34 percent. Palin was second with 32 percent followed by Romney with 28.

Crist had the most opposition with 20 percent saying they were “not likely at all” to vote for him. Gingrich followed with 19 percent while just 13 percent said it was unlikely they’d vote for Romney.

Share on Facebook

Share This

I had to drive up to McCain’s St. Louis office to pick up my Poll Watcher credentials this morning and in doing so, I also got the chance to meet Hizzoner, Rudy Guiliani. Rudy was there with Mo. Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond and they came out the back of the building to the loading dock, you know, where all the really important speeches are delivered.

There was a small but very enthusiastic and vocal crowd of Republican activists present and the group erupted when America’s Mayor and Kit Bond came through the doors. Both men talked about the importance of the election and the national security stakes involved. Both men talked about the coming middle class tax increase, but Rudy was particularly funny the way he presented it. First he held his right hand as high as it would go and started out at the first figure the Obama campaign gave us, $250,000, then he lowered his hand as he said $200,000, lowered it again at $150,000 and so on. Neither Obama, Biden and now New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson can agree on a figure, so I’m just going to take a wild guess and say, for now, I’ll go with the lowest figure of $120,000. ( subject to revision without prior notice )

We were chanting USA, USA at times throughout the speeches and shouting out some things we wanted a McCain administration to pursue. I asked Rudy to accept the Attorney General slot, if offered. He just grinned and thanked me for coming out. That’s whats so cool about these small gatherings. You get, even if for all of five seconds, to tell the Party’s leadership what you want. This crowd wanted several things: No military budget cuts, no “tax refunds” for people who don’t pay taxes, ( BTW, I called out at that point and said, “That’s not a tax cut, that’s WELFARE” and the crowd starting chanting, WELFARE, WELFARE, WELFARE and Kit and Rudy were beaming back at us and giving us the “thumbs up sign” ) and finally, no “spreading the wealth around.”

It was fun and well worth the trip. Now I have to get my packet of materials out and start studying.

~~John Cronin~~

Share on Facebook

Share This

The text below comes from an email sent to me from Townhall Magazine where they talked about an upcoming issue of their magazine. The issue will feature the “Six Keepers of the Reagan Flame.”

If it doesn’t include Romney’s name their stock will plummet in my estimation, but that’s a debate for another day. The reason I posted the text here is because they captured almost to the word the way I feel about this election and the choices we are faced with.

~~John Cronin~~

Dear Friends,

It has been twenty years since Ronald Reagan left office and now there are only eleven days until Americans pick the 44th President of the United States.

Regardless of who prevails on election night, we as conservatives have a lot of work ahead of us. If John McCain wins, conservatives will have to keep the new administration’s feet to fire, making sure the principles that Reagan espoused are not only not forgotten but championed.

If Barack Obama wins, America will face the most dangerous four years of liberalism this nation has faced since Jimmy Carter. Conservative will have to take up the cause of freedom like never before to ensure that America still resembles the nation Ronald Reagan left us once Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi are through with it.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Romney 48%…..Huckabee 3%……Now that the electorate has had 6 months since Super Tuesday to weigh the relative merits of Romney vs. Huckabee, Romney is beating Huckabee like a rented mule.

~~John Cronin~~

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WILL BE MCCAIN’S VP?…

GIULIANI

2% 348
K. B. HUTCHISON

18% 2,460
HUCKABEE

3% 454
LIEBERMAN

4% 614
PAWLENTY

7% 952
ROMNEY

48% 6,728
DARK HORSE

17% 2,390

Total Votes: 13,946

[Editor's Note: Intrade 10 AM Central time.....Romney 71.0, up 26 points]

Share on Facebook

Share This

We are almost down to the wire on the Veep Sweepstakes. The McCain campaign has certainly milked this for all it’s worth. Like the rest of us on this site, I am hoping McCain does the common sense thing and picks Mitt Romney. Not just so we can have bragging rights, I truly do not care about that. I do care about the country. I worry about what this country will be like after four years of an Obama presidency.

IMHO, we are on our way toward national bankruptcy if we don’t stop the profligate spending. Both parties are guilty of this and I leave it up to our readers to make the judgment about where the bulk of the blame lies. One thing I do know is the mood of the voters in this election. You hear it from people from all walks of life, from both sides of the political spectrum. The mood of the voters can be summed up in one word. Anger.

I won’t attempt to publish a laundry list of grievances, you know them as well as I do. But the anger that ordinary voters feel towards the political class is higher than at any time in my memory.

Obama has proven to be an old line machine politician from the southside of Chicago, just like we were told months ago, when his idolization was in full bloom among an electorate that yearned for a new style of leadership from a new style of politician. His choice of Joe Biden, who is by all accounts an affable and likable man, but a unimaginative and “safe” pick who has done nothing to boost the political fortunes of the man who would be President, speaks volumes about the governing style of a future President Obama. It doesn’t say new, it says business as usual.

I don’t see any of the positive “change” that as been talked about so much in this election cycle. I see the same dreary old tactics that the Dems have been slavishly following since the days of FDR. The politics of envy, of class warfare, of “the little guy” pitted against the “privileged few.”

The Dems look like they will limp out of Denver fractured and frustrated. Frustrated with the internal battle for the nomination, that has left them bruised and battered as a party. I just hope against hope that McCain & Co. don’t shoot themselves in the foot by naming some obscure Governor as Veep because he is so “well liked” by McCain personally. Or by naming an obscure woman, because she is a woman. How condescending and patronizing is that? I have in mind Sarah Palin, a woman who probably will be a force in the Party eight years from now, but not in this election. Or Kay Bailey Hutchison, whom I like, but she will not fare well in a debate with Joe Biden. Or Meg Whitman, a very successful and accomplished businesswoman, but if you asked 100 American voters at random who she is, how many could tell you? Three, two, bupkis?

That is why I view the end of the Veep Sweepstakes with some dread. If McCain fumbles the ball this early in the first quarter, what will our prospects look like as the seconds on the scoreboard count down to zero?

Obama has played it safe. To me, he appears more like a man who is trying not to lose than one who is trying to win. If McCain picks Romney and lets Romney be Romney, playing it safe ain’t gonna work.

Governor Romney will elevate the rhetorical level and will bring the right balance of intellectual and emotional appeal that a winning ticket must have. The McCain campaign must make specific, nuts and bolts recommendation for it’s view of where the country should go over the course of the next four years and Romney will be unsurpassed at that, but it also must connect with the voters on the emotional side as well. When Romney waxes Reaganesque, when he defends the sanctity of life, talks about the preeminence of the American family, that America’s best days are not behind us, but ahead of us and that this country can achieve astounding things when the creative power of Americans is freed from the heavy hand of government, that is when he resonates with the majority of voters.

We will know, in about thirty six hours, if we will play offense or defense for the next two months.

~~John Cronin~~

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/28/america/28repubs.php

WASHINGTON: Senator John McCain has decided on his running mate, two Republican strategists in contact with McCain’s campaign said Wednesday. He is expected to reveal his choice at a rally at a basketball arena in Dayton, Ohio, at 11 a.m. Friday.

McCain’s decision is known only to his small inner circle of advisers, no more than three or four people, who have refused all public discussion on the matter. Republicans close to the campaign said that the top contenders remained the same three men who have been the source of speculation for weeks: former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and, possibly, Senator Joseph Lieberman, independent of Connecticut.

Romney remained the most talked-about possibility on Wednesday among Republican Party officials and on cable television, not least because of the theory that he would help McCain win Michigan, a crucial state in this election and where Romney’s father served as governor.

Share on Facebook

Share This

While Michelle Obama is speaking in prime time tonight…

“Cindy is not here today and I’m sorry she’s not,” said McCain. “She’s on her way to the little country of Georgia.”

McCain has been a staunch supporter of Georgia in that country’s clash with Russia, and sending his wife there underscores his commitment. It also could deflect attention from Michelle Obama’s convention speech in Denver as the Obama campaign seeks to introduce the family to voters

Cindy McCain shows that both she and here husband are ready for Prime Time!

McCain has the experience necessary to be our Commander and Chief. Obama on the other hand not so much.

[See MSNBC]

Share on Facebook

Share This

Here’s another story ( with more details ) on the plan to have Mitt Romney and Rudy Guiliani crash the Democratic Convention in Denver, Colorado next week. I have to tell you, I LOVE THE CHUTPAS. We Pubbies have got a nerve, don’t we?

I think it was a brilliant move and Rudy and Mitt can dish it out with the best of them. Doesn’t hurt to have 15,000 reporters and their crews milling around with Sony mini-cams at the ready.

Woo Hoo!! Can’t wait for the fireworks to begin!

~~John Cronin~~

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080821/pl_nm/usa_politics_denver_republicans_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When Democrats gather in Denver next week to nominate Barack Obama for president, they’ll be joined by such uninvited guests as Republicans Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney.
The two former presidential candidates will be among two dozen or so Republicans in the city hoping to get their party’s message out during a week dominated by Democratic festivities.

Their slogan? “Not Ready ‘08: A Mile High and an Inch Deep,” a play on the nickname for the high-altitude city in the western United States.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain, Obama’s rival for the November 4 election, is expected to keep a relatively low profile that week, though he is scheduled to appear as a guest on “The Tonight Show” talk show on Monday.

His surrogates will set up shop within walking distance of the Democrats’ convention hall, hoping to catch the attention of the 15,000 reporters gathered there.

“With all the hype of the actual convention and all the Obama fans gathered in one spot, we’re going to get beyond the glitz and the celebrity and talk about the facts of his record,” said Matt McDonald, a McCain staffer overseeing the effort.

Share on Facebook

Share This

More buzz in the national press about a possible announcement (we are told within the next 48 hours or so) regarding Sen. John McCain’s selection of his running mate. If it’s Mitt, Obama just got some world class competition.

I was doing some neighborhood canvassing this past Sunday for Dr. Bob Onder’s Congressional campaign and the two hottest topics were: 1. Illegal immigration (voters want the borders secured) and 2. Energy prices (voters want domestic drilling started, yesterday). As we Mittheads know, Gov. Romney is pitch perfect on these issues as well as many others and his coming onboard right in the middle of Obama’s World Apology Tour would change the campaign calculus dramatically.

~~John Cronin~~

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080722/D9233BT80.html

ROCHESTER, N.H. (AP) -

Yet another town-hall meeting isn’t doing the trick. Neither is dropping in on a former Republican president. So just what can John McCain do to draw attention away from his showy Democratic rival? Pick a running mate, perhaps.

Speculation swirled Tuesday that McCain might name his vice presidential partner within the next few days - right in the middle of Barack Obama’s overseas tour.

McCain aides were not helping tamp down the speculation with their comments, often made late in the afternoon, of “no announcement today.”

But what about tomorrow? Or where? On Tuesday, McCain campaigned in New Hampshire, not all that far from a lakeside summer home of vanquished GOP rival Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor. Romney was nowhere to be seen. Well, it wasn’t really that close to his lakeside home.

One member of the audience told McCain he seemed like a very “forgiving” man. “Have you forgiven Mitt Romney?” he asked the senator.

Amid laughter, McCain said, “Mitt has been of tremendous help to my campaign. … He does a better job for me than he did for himself.”

Last Sunday, McCain was in the Bronx at a Yankees game with another former rival, one-time New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. “You hear all kinds of stuff,” Giuliani later said, “but I’m not thinking about anything but helping to get him elected.”

The campaign is also not very open about where McCain is going next, keeping scheduling matters close to the vest. And that adds to the frenzy.

[EDITOR'S NOTE: HERE ARE TWO WEBSITES THAT ARE REPORTING THAT MITT IS McCAIN'S CHOICE FOR VP RUNNING MATE. I CAN'T VERIFY WHETHER THE REPORTS ARE TRUE OR NOT. THIS IS MEANT STRICTLY AS A FYI.]

http://nyformitt.blogspot.com/

Share on Facebook

Share This

By Anna M. Tinsley and Jeff Claassen

Star-Telegram Staff Writers

Some North Texans don’t have to file their tax returns to get big refund checks in the mail.

Dozens of area residents who donated to the campaigns of Republicans Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani are getting some of that money back.

After ending their presidential bids in February, Romney and Giuliani began returning $84,920 and $53,200, respectively, to Tarrant County donors, according to a Star-Telegram analysis of Federal Election Commission data.

“It’s a very interesting action on the part of Mitt Romney and Rudolph Giuliani that their people sent back donations they didn’t use,” said Allan Saxe, an associate political science professor at the University of Texas at Arlington. “It’s a noble action on their part.

“Once those donors get that money back in the mail, it should make them feel very good about the candidates they originally supported.”

Candidates can legally use those donations for everything from paying campaign debt to funding bids for another federal office, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

With Giuliani and Romney out, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain for the first time became the top money-getter in Tarrant County in both February and overall, the analysis shows.

McCain has raised $437,473 in Tarrant County during this presidential race — $211,087 in February alone.

That may be partly because at least five local donors who received refunds from Romney or Giuliani are believed to have donated the same amount or more to McCain’s campaign, records show.

One of those listed, lawyer Dee Kelly, said, “I gave money to McCain because I wanted to, not because I got a refund from anybody.” Kelly has donated to several candidates.

The other local donors could not be reached for comment Monday.

Presidential candidates who drop out of the race cannot use their campaign funds for personal expenses.

Under federal guidelines, they can either give the donations back within 60 days after dropping out or get donors’ permission to use the money for something else, such as a charity, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

“This shows that Giuliani and Romney were really pretty honorable people,” Saxe said. “Some people loan their own money to the campaign and then pay it back through donations. But they’re returning money, and they’re doing it quickly.”

Share on Facebook

Share This

Hat Tip to Ranzel for bringing this excellent analysis to our attention. Mitt Romney is nailing down the Reagan coalition.

NEW YORK TIMES

Tags: Florida, John McCain, Mitt Romney

Does Mitt Romney have a victory to cling to in Florida? Joshua Trevino, vice president for public policy at San Francisco’s Pacific Research Institute (and one of the founders of the conservative blog RedState), breaks down the numbers on his personal blog.

“Mitt Romney is in a bad way,” Trevino writes. “He blew through $10 million in Iowa and lost; and outspent McCain eight to one in Florida, and lost that too. But for all this, Mitt Romney is not done yet and the reason lies in the breakdown of this evening’s Florida vote.” He continues:

CNN has the exit-poll numbers, and they reveal some surprising things:

* Romney won pro-lifers.
* Romney won the mainstream religious. (Huckabee won the very religious ­ less than one-fifth of the pool.)
* Romney won the Protestants.
* Romney tied Huckabee with Evangelicals.
* Romney won the pro-GWB voters.
* Romney is the primary second choice of Giuliani voters, Thompson voters …. and McCain voters.
* Romney won the immigration hard-liners.
* Romney won the upper-middle class, earning between $100,000 and $200,000 annually.
* Romney won the terrorism-oriented voters.
* Romney won the self-identified conservatives and the self-identified very conservative.
* Romney won the values-oriented voters.
* Romney won the white voters.
* Romney won the tax-cutting voters.

In short, Mitt Romney won the Republican Party’s idea of itself ­ and that, too, is a big deal. If you’re white, Protestant, anti-abortion, go to church on Sundays, think well of the President, want lower taxes, hate terrorists, make a good living, want to do something about immigration, and live in Florida, chances are you voted Romney. The question before Florida was whether McCain could win a closed Republican race, and now we know he can. The question now is whether he can win conservatives ­ and in Florida, he did not.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Though I provide analysis below, I do not suggest I have answers to the questions I raise. But I do raise questions that I think are of critical importance and consideration; not just to this current presidential contest, but more importantly to America. These are questions I think nobody wants to discuss (see photo below).

Tonight (1/29), I have heard the term “lick their wounds” several times. That is not at all how I feel about the loss in Florida. It is fair to say, I believe, that America as a nation, has matured in its history to a point in which a woman or a black man can be elected President by a majority of both sexes and a majority of those of the white or black races. I believe that America has come of age to the point that the bigotry we call sexism and racism, though still engrained in some people, has been marginalized.

What about the bigotry of religious intolerance? In an enlightened age, it is known by all that bigotry of any kind is not acceptable. In this modern day, we don’t generally hear statements of bigotry in common language in ways that were pervasive as recent as the 1950s and 1960s. Religious bigotry was even out in the open at that time as evidenced by evangelical ministers that routinely and publicly denounced the idea that Americans might vote for a Catholic. Today, bigotry of any kind, as a matter of common discussion in mixed company, is simply unacceptable in today’s diverse age. As a result, we do not hear public discussion about religious bigotry. Does that mean that this form of bigotry has also been marginalized to the point America can elect a Mormon? I do not believe it has. In fact, I think it is still pervasive, if now private.

In the states in which GMR won the Silver, by how much did he miss the Gold? Usually around 5%, maybe 10%. Today, he missed the Gold by 6% in a very large state. Since I began to seriously pay attention to presidential politics for 2008 back in 2006, I have seen poll results showing that a fair number of Americans are unwilling to ever vote for a Mormon; anywhere from about 20% of those surveyed to 40% recently. Since I have always concluded that America has matured to the point at which religious intolerance has been effectively marginalized, I more or less dismissed those poll numbers as based on simple ignorance, not bigotry.

Then, as the early state caucuses and primaries became history, I started to see a trend that I saw repeated today in Florida. It is fair to say that a majority of Americans do not find McCain acceptable as President as evidenced by his votes of 35% compared to 65% to all others. But to understand whether bigotry is at work against MR specifically, we need to drill down into the numbers. Is it not also fair to say that the most conservative voters of all would not be generally attracted to McCain, who is a well-known liberal Republican, or at least a Republican that cannot be trusted?

[In order to keep this commentary from becoming longer than it is, I use only the initials of candidates’ first and last names and any time there is a number, it represents a percentage]

In Florida, among evangelicals, the votes were JM(30), MR(29), MH(29). We can conclude that the 29 who voted for MR are not bigots. My presumption is that the reason MH’s 29 did not go to JM is because they consider him way too liberal to represent their values and principles. But if MH were not in the race, would all 29 go to MR? As you think about that answer, if they would not all go to MR, why would any significant portion of them go to JM? Incidentally, as MH keeps smiling and telling the world he can be the nominee, he knows he cannot. He won exactly 4 of all non-evangelical votes; that is par for the course for him. Since day one in Iowa, there has never been broad support for MH. Why does he stay in the race?

White evangelicals voted this way: MH(31), MR(31), JM(28). I think it is fair to say that those who voted for JM would be the more moderate or less orthodox evangelicals, simply because they could have chosen an orthodox evangelical in MH, and they did not. If true, and MH were not in the race, would MH’s 31 go to JM or MR and why? Why would an orthodox evangelical vote for the more liberal, twice married, untrustworthy Republican when they have MR, whose values and principles are much closer to theirs by comparison?

Of voters who think abortion should be illegal, the votes were MR(35), JM(29), MH (21). These are very conservative voters. We know 35 are not bigots and since MR won the majority here, we know that a very high percentage of voters know him to be strong pro-life. If MH were not in the race, would most of his 21 go to MR or JM and why? Of voters who think abortion should always be illegal, the votes were MH(32), MR(30), and JM(26). These voters are even more conservative overall. If MH were not in the race, would most of his 32 go to the more conservative candidate MR? If they would not, why not? Why would more than a handful go to JM instead of MR? Could bigotry influence their decision to go to JM?

Voters that identified themselves as very conservative were MR(44), JM(21), MH(20). It is well known by now that MR is the most conservative of both JM and MH. That being the case, if MH were not in the race, would his ‘very conservative’ voters go to the known, more conservative MR or to the less conservative, more liberal JM? And why? Could bigotry influence their decision to go to JM?

Over at Evangelicals for Mitt, both Steven Muscatello and Nancy French think MH should do “the honorable thing” and drop out. Read their excellent arguments here and here. But think of the context of my rhetorical questions above and consider this. If RG could so easily see the vanity of continuing the race, knowing he could never win, why can MH not see it? Or is it that he sees it and has ulterior motives? Think of the irony. RG, the person many have derided as ethically challenged, drops out seeing the reality; there are no ulterior motives really. MH, whose supporters consider the most ethical and upstanding man in the race, who would consider himself the most humble among them all, plans to “win the nomination” to quote him. Right. And pigs will fly for the first time in February. We now have resounding proof that MH cannot garner more than 10% of all non-evangelical votes and he has only nearly received 40% of all evangelical votes in one state. Clearly, he has no broad support, unlike GWB did as an evangelical. So, his decision to stay in the race is based on what? Ego? Vanity? Love of the sport? Is he lying to us when he says he is not running for Pastor in Chief? Or does he want to influence his voters away from MR and if so, why?

As many at this site have shown, MH revealed his stripes when he let slip his rhetorical Jesus/brother question in an interview. He also ardently campaigned in Salt Lake City to save the Mormons there from hell at the evangelical convention.

My opinion is that the frequent citing of 20 to 40 percent of all Americans unwilling to vote for a Mormon for President, the bigots are at the low end of the range. I may be naïve, but I do not believe that 40% of all Americans are religious bigots. Now, we know that when MR loses the Gold, the margin of loss is only 5% to 10%. That margin of difference is well below the 20% conservative estimate. Where are those 20% or so aligned? Are they divided among RG, MH, and JM? Are they mostly with MH or JM?

My conclusion is that the margin of victory that JM has enjoyed in any state, is a direct correlation to the reported bigotry still pervasive in America. If so, how does MR overcome this obvious bigotry, to win? These less than 20% “unwilling voters” are currently aligned with RG, JM, and MH, in some unknown mix. But knowing this does not help, does it? By definition, if they are bigots, MR will never be their choice. It cannot be argued that all 20% of these “unwilling” voters are in JM’s camp. Yet, it is he that is the beneficiary of their unwillingness to ever vote for MR. And clearly not all of the supporters left in RG’s and MH’s camp are bigots; but some are. So it is fair to say that if both RG and MH were not in the race, a fair number of their non-bigoted supporters would back the most conservative candidate in the race — MR. And why are the voters not following Rush Limbaugh’s advice to not vote for JM and MH?

So again, what is the motivation of MH to remain in a race he knows he cannot and will not win? Is his primary motivation to steer as many evangelicals to the Protestant JM, away from MR? If so, is that reason enough to not drop out of the race?

I think this issue is the 900-pound gorilla in the room with which nobody wants to make eye contact.

~ Vic

[Source of exit poll information above: CNN Politics]
.
.
.
NOTE: Any comment left at this post that is primarily religious based or which contains vitriol, is antagonistic, or generally obnoxious, will be deleted without notice. Please set a standard of discussion that is productive and illuminating. If you have religious opinions, please leave them out of the discussion at this post.

.

Share on Facebook

Share This

THIS POST IS PURELY FOR FUN. So, please don’t slap me around for putting up a piece that feels premature on the outcome of Florida. Maybe it is simply because I am a little nervous about tomorrow (I am writing this at 10:30 p.m. CA time) and just want to diffuse the tension with some humor. Whatever it is, just humor me for a moment.

I got a call from a good friend telling me to turn on the Hugh Hewitt show, so I was wrapping up at the office anyway, I jumped in the car just in time to hear HH introducing Rudy Giuliani. Here are some excerpts from the interview. I love HH’s interviewing style; he is able to get a lot of information very quickly:

HH: Mayor, the Los Angeles Times is reporting, and Drudge has picked it up, that you’re hinting at dropping out. I think that’s nonsense, but why don’t you deny it.

RG: I have said the same thing I have said for months, and it’s this. I have said this way back, I believe that the person who wins the Florida primary will be the Republican nominee. I started saying this, I don’t know, sometime in August, because it seemed to me that this is the lead-in to February 5th. And if somebody gets a nice win here, you’re going to have a tremendous advantage in all those big states that are coming up. So that…I repeated that today, so they assume that means…actually, I’m not sure I know exactly what they assume that means, but we’re in it, we’re going to win. I’m not conceding to anyone that we’re not going to win. And if they want to ask questions like well, if you don’t win, what are you going to do? And I have never, ever contemplated questions about if you don’t win.

And this snippet:

HH: Will you be at the Reagan Library on Wednesday to debate?

RG: I’ve got my ticket.

HH: (laughing) That’s not a yes or no, Mayor.

RG: I haven’t cancelled my ticket, although I’m not sure I travel by ticket anymore. But I have plans to travel to California, either on the red-eye, or early the next day. And having been on the board of the Reagan Library, I never turn down an invitation to go to the Reagan Library.

After I heard the whole interview, I discussed it with two friends. I asked them if they thought RG could actually quit the race if he came in a lousy third or fourth in Florida. They both thought he would not quit. I gave an opinion that he might. Why? When it comes to campaigning, he has a history of quitting.

When RG ran against HRC for the senate, he quit. Granted, he had to deal with the major blow of cancer and his nasty affair that was all over the news at the time (I happen to think he used the cancer as an excuse to get the limelight off of him and his affair — is that too cynical?). Then, what does he do weeks before the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa when he was running strong? He quit! That was stunning. Then, Mr. McC-Amnesty thought, hey if it is good for Rudy, it must be good — “I quit too!” Then, when RG is polling rather strong in a few of the early states and competing (sorta), he quit those states and called it “STRATEGY.”

I will admit it. As I listened to the interview this afternoon, I heard a gentleman. We can all locate his flaws and find fault with him; no question. But in his Brooklyn way, he was gracious today. The guy is just getting pummeled every time someone sticks a microphone in his face! He is feeling the hammer at every turn these days.

So here is the question of the day. A sort of lottery or pool. I guess that is not right because nobody is keeping score. But how many of you think RG could actually drop out of the race before Tsunami Tuesday? Actually announce he is done before Feb. 5th? I don’t give it a high probability because I place a lot of stock in his very large ego and the fact that he has very little to lose to wait it out a week. If he finishes a lousy third or fourth though, and if he considers himself a true statesman, he might just quit. He has finished fourth-to-last in all of the early states.

I peg the probability at 35% that he quits before Feb. 5th if — and this is a very big if — he finishes Florida a distant third or fourth place. Remember, he already leads today in votes by virtue of the tremendous early voting that he lobbied for.

What say ye?

~ Vic

PLEASE CONTRIBUTE TO MITT’S CAMPAIGN ——> HERE (no amount is too small)

— Source Code = ECA064

AND THANK YOU!

Share on Facebook

Share This