I think last night was probably pretty close to what I would have considered to be the worst case scenario. Newt only won his home state of Georgia, Santorum won in Oklahoma, Tennessee and North Dakota and Romney took the rest (Massachusetts, Vermont, Virginia, Ohio, Alaska and Idaho). I was hoping that Ron Paul would have been able to unite the not-Romney vote in Virginia and then take some of the small caucuses as his small devoted following could definitely tip the scales in states where a thousand votes can decide things. Imagine what the stories would have looked like this morning if Ron Paul had taken Virginia, Alaska, Idaho & North Dakota while Newt took Georgia, Tennessee & Oklahoma? People would have gone nuts, Santorum would have been all but finished and this race would be wide open. As it stands now, Romney has a near 100% chance of being the nominee. It would take a historically epic meltdown for him not to be. We'd practically have to find out that he is an active White Supremacist, had a sexual affair with Barney Frank and/or find out that he is, as many have suspected, an android (preferably all three) for him to be denied the nomination at this point. Money, organization and an automatic vote from Mormons (which helped flip usually very conservative western states to his side) have really proven to be insurmountable. The constant splitting of the conservative vote hasn't helped either. Santorum's strategy of sticking around, despite abysmal vote tally's after Iowa, to wait for Newt to be destroyed, has helped him vault to the #2 position but also seems to have helped Romney become the nominee. I'm sure Santorum supporters could say the same thing about Newt sticking around but I really don't think Santorum could unite the party like Newt. Santorum does well in states with lots of social conservatives while Newt has a more broad Reaganesque message which could potentially unite economic, social and foreign policy conservatives under one candidate.
I'm sure there will be some uber die hard Newt supporters who will attack me for not having enough faith. Yes, I realize that Newt is not to be underestimated and that people have left him for dead before but I just don't see how he can be the nominee at this point. We've had 23 contests and he has won a grand total of 2 of them. He's underperforming what Mike Huckabee did in 2008 at this point who had won 6 of the first 31 contests. Other than getting a nice big check from Fox to start his own show, Huckabee doesn't have much to show for that performance politically. Let's say Newt wins in Alabama and Mississippi. Then what? Santorum isn't dropping out, so how does Newt get victories outside the deep South? Heck, given his loss in Tennessee, which borders his home state of Georgia, I don't think even Alabama and Mississippi are done deals. The most he can hope for is a denial of a majority of delegates to Romney and a brokered convention. But the power brokers aren't going to go with Newt no matter what, they friggin hate him with a passion I've never seen. Plus historically they have favored a more moderate candidate at conventions anyway, whether or not they personally like him. In 1952, the very conservative Robert Taft got the shaft (with some delegates actually stolen from him at the convention) in favor of the RINO Eisenhower, who historically wasn't even a Republican. In 1980, these power brokers were trying to get a co-Presidency agreement between Reagan and Gerald Ford to water down Reagan's conservatism. If we have a brokered convention this year, we know Paul will go with Romney given his collusion with him this year anyway and Romney will walk away with the nomination one way or the other.
What about Santorum? He doesn't have much of a chance either. He just has very little appeal outside of social conservative heavy states. He just can't get to 1,144 without winning in the northeast and California and I find it hard to believe he will have a chance at that. And again, a brokered convention is not going to nominate someone like him.
It seems all that is left for me to do is to decide who to vote for in the fall. It definitely won't be Obama but it won't be Romney either (I decided that months ago). I've never voted for a liberal in my life and I am not starting now. The Libertarian Party might be getting another voter, despite my complete disagreement with them on foreign policy. At least they believe in small government, unlike Obama and Romney.
Cross posted from libertarian neocon's blog.
23 comments:
Going by delegate counts though, it is extremely unlikely that Romney will have the delegates needed to win come the convention. And as long as Paul doesn't get the delegates (so he can swap them for a VP or similar slot), there is a good chance we won't get Romney. There is a very high likelihood of a brokered convention, and that is at least more palatable to me than Romney.
Why do you say that? Based on my calculations using the CNN delegate counter, he needs only 48% of the remaining delegates to win the nomination. At this point he has captured about 54%. For Newt (or Santorum) to win they pretty much need about 2/3rds of the remaining delegates which would require an almost herculean effort.
On the brokered convention front, I dont think we'll magically have some super candidate that will come out of that. People will go nuts, and not in a good way. For someone to come forward who didnt get a single vote in the primaries? That would be a scandal of historic proportions. Also none of the other choices are that wonderful. Jeb? We're all sick of the Bush family already. Christie? Just as liberal as Romney, just more forceful. Daniels? Too soft on foreign policy. Even Paul Ryan isnt as conservative as I think people realize.
Anyway, I think we would exit a brokered convention with a Romney as #1 with a Rubio or Santorum VP.
By the way, I'm counting both bound and technically unbound delegates in my math. I know that Randy Evans from the Newt campaign is only counting the legally bound delegates to come up with his argument that there is no way for Romney to have all the delegates he needs but that is just ignoring a whole lot of delegates that will probably have no reason to vote against the establishment or against their local voters.
I can't provide too many specifics (as I didn't do the calculations) but a radio host that I listen to spends a lot of time running likelihood scenarios and runs up with Romney just shy of the necessary number prior to convetion: http://stevedeace.com/news/national-politics/super-tuesday-super-questions/
Regarding the less stellar candidates -- I agree that we are looking a slew of slightly conservative candidates all the way to liberal candidates, but I happen to think every single one you listed is better than Romney. I believe Romney will sell us (conservatives) down the river because he doesn't have a conservative bone in his body nor an honest one. I'm not sure about Christie, but right now I'd take the devil I don't know over the one I know in Romney. I'm not excited, don't get me wrong, but I don't think we have to worry about the worst case scenario of Romney being the candidate UNLESS one of the other candidates makes a deal for their delegates.
Btw, if you tally up the delegates according to http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/R-PU.phtml
(which is an awesome site having all kinds of info including all the delegate rules for each state) -- Romney only has 33.8% of the delegates needed to win -- this was updated today. Also, keep in mind that the Florida delegates are going to be contested by Newt's campaign, which will help. Still he needs 49% of the delegates (not much difference from your number) -- but look at which states he has left -- a decent chunk will not vote for Romney. Yes the NE and the mormon states will, but the personality of the states must play into this.
FWIW, if the brokered nominee really sucks -- maybe a write-in for Newt is in order??
Thanks for the Green papers link, I had seen the analysis before but forgot which site it was from. I would absolutely LOVE for Newt to miraculously pull it off somehow. Who knows, if there is a war in the mideast in the next few weeks and oil skyrockets maybe his $2.50 gas thing will resonate more and that will catapult him. One thing I remember though from prior races is that the late primaries become very lopsided even in two person races. Note how well McCain did against just Huckabee alone last time, getting 60, 70 or 80% of the votes a lot of times. Momentum can be a powerful thing and the momentum is with Romney.
I agree that some sort of triggering event is necessary at this point for Newt to win.
Btw, this is a good reason to take into account why binding vs non-binding delegates do matter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFH4cQwM7kc
One scenario where I think a not-Mitt Romney brokered convention is better than a Romney nominee is that the impact on the downstreem races won't be so severe. I think Mitt Romney is so detestable that people will stay home, and we'll lose some solid people in the House and Senate (admittedly the truly solid are rare). If a non-Mitt shows up, I think it'll be far less of a loss.
Unfortunately I can see a brokered pick, if they havent gone through the primary process, as making the process itself an issue in the campaign. Obama will keep saying that at least he was picked by the voters in his party unlike _____ who was picked by the political bosses in a smokey backroom deal.
You can see that process scaring off some independents who think it will seem dishonest, which frankly it would kind of be.
And given the convention is supposed to start on August 27th, we're talking about 9-10 weeks for a candidate to be introduced, get the party behind him and answer all the squeels of dishonesty.
I say this as a good friend of you and the site ...
There are many things that can happen between now and the convention. We know from much recent experience that trends can crest and fall in the space of two weeks.
If Newt were to take Texas and then be strong in California, there's be much reason for the untethered delegates to get on his bandwagon.
Other events could make this even more likely.
I say we fight like hell for NG and do everything we can to make things break just that way.
One step at a time Xymbaline. First he needs to take MS and AL and then continue with wins along the way. TX is 2 months away, if he doesnt have any wins between now and then he wont take it or CA.
Damn, I was feeling so good from the other politijim article, wish I had stopped, but, had to come back, now going to bed with a sick stomach. Thanks politijim , reality sucks
YOU KNOW WHAT, LIBERTARIAN_NEOCON?
I THINK NEWT IS DOING GREAT! Check out his speech. With some very partial, VERY partial notes.
Newt Campaign Speech Pell City, Alabama March 7, 2012
“I WOULD LOVE TO DEBATE BARACK OBAMA AT ANY GAS STATION IN THE COUNTRY”
http://electad.com/videos/newt-gingrich-campaign-in-pell-city-alabama-march-7-2012/
Newt:
We currently send $500 Billions overseas. AMERICAN ENERGY creates jobs, saves money. $2.50 or less gallon of gas, as the market fluctuates.
North Dakota had 25 times more oil that we thought. Not 25%. North Dakots has doubled our U.S. reserves. Think about if one of the bigger states, like Alaska or California. In California, the Monterey Formation probably has 80 MILLION barrels.
In the next generation, the royalties for oil would be between $16 and $18 TRILLION. If we used DISCIPLINE, we could pay of the entire federal debt with royalties from oil and natural gas. We owe it to the young people. We should not be putting a mortgage on our children.
Obama’s ideological policies are exactly wrong for America. Keep us unemployed. Keep gas prices high. We must defeat Obama for the future of the United States.
I need your help to win the primary and win the nomination. To win in the fall. and then for the next four years in order to govern.
And I am not running just to defeat Obama. We need to fix the judges, bureaucracies, the laws.
So we’ll organize the entire ticket as a team. House and Senate will stay in session after Januaray 3rd, and whne I get sworn in on January 20th, they will have repealed Obamacare. Also Dodd-Frank, which is killing small banks and business. And Sarbanes-Oxley which is crippling American business with red tape and nothing useful.
On that day, about 2 hours after inaugural, series of executive orders. One: abolish all the White House czars as of that moment. Also approves KEYSTONE PIPELINE. I keep telling the Canadians, DON’T CUT A DEAL WITH CHINA. GIVE US UNTIL JANUARY. Three, Our embassy to Jerusalem.
You cannot change Washington unless you understand how complicated our Constitution is.
I worked with Reagan in 1980′s we cut spending 1st time since WWII. 16 million new jobs. Campaign to end Soviet Union.
Then in 1994, largest increase in vote in American history. We ran only POSITIVE ADS because people wanted HOPE.
ENTITLEMENT REFORM.
CUT SPENDING 2d time since WWII. I was there for both of those.
Largest tax cut, 11 million jobs 4 years. More people worked, paid taxes, this helped balance the budget. The first 4 BALANCED BUDGETS IN A ROW.
The other Republican candidates do not have the understanding to change this.
Romeny palyed the game in Massachusetts. Teddy Kennedy came to the signing of Romneycare. Santorum also played the game as Senator. Go along to get along.
Whn Reagan asked for a tax increase, I VOTED NO. When H. W. Bush broke his word and asked to raise taxes, I VOTED NO.
I think Romney and Santorum would play the Washington game just fine.
I AM DIFFERENT. I intend to CHANGE the Washington game. BEING A MANAGER OF DECAY IS NOT ENOUGH.
$2,50 a gallon is leadership. You offer people a VISION OF DRAMATICALLY BETTER FUTURE. AND THAT IS WHY I AM RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.
And I need your help. Are you on Facebook? On your home page, put NEWT = $2.50 GAS. Are you on Twitter? hashtag #$2.50 gas
WE NEED YOUR VOTE NEXT TUESDAY IN ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI. IMMEDIATE AND CRUCIAL.
GO TO NEWT.ORG AND GIVE ONE GALLON OF NEWTGAS. $2.50 TEN NEWTGAS GALLONS, $25.00
IF WE WIN ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI NEXT TUESDAY, THIS IS A WHOLE NEW RACE -- AGAIN.
THANK YOU!
here's the link again -- I don't think it made it through"live"on the last comment
“I WOULD LOVE TO DEBATE BARACK OBAMA AT ANY GAS STATION IN THE COUNTRY” http://electad.com/videos/newt-gingrich-campaign-in-pell-city-alabama-march-7-2012/
xymbaline -- (such a pretty name!!)
I totally agree with you. Newt looks fabulous in his Alabama speeches today.
someone over at Legal Insurrection pointed out that Santroum actually only won a few more delegates than Newt.
Libertarian_neocon, you get to support the candidate of your choice. Of course.
But you've taken a public stance in favor of NEwt twice. And every time the going gets tough, you fold up house of cards.
I'm with xymbaline. I'm figghting to support NEwt every step of the way. I think Newt will win.
Why would we have someone of his caliber RIGHT HERE, and his solutions -- and then not get to have the benefit? It could be.... but....
I am fighting to get the every American to get to know NEwt.
Get to know the solutions that will give us a prosperous tomorrow. Plentiful gasoline, jobs, energy, a balance among the three co-equal branches of government, power returning to the people through the 10th Amendment.
The good things we can do are SO GREAT!!
And this is not even close to over. Where is your courage, libertarian_neocon.
Why did you talk xymbeline out of her High Morale?
NEVER GIVE UP. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER GIVE UP. Churchill said that. Right?
Seriously, kriskxx, I think you were closer to it before you cam here and got all discouraged.
If you get a chance to watch the two speeches Newt gave in Alabama, there's really energy there.
libertarian_neocon, I'm sorry you are feeling discouraged. But this could very well have a strong next act. Very strong.
Stay with NEwt. He's the strong horse candidate. Newt has endurance because Newt has the ideas that are supported by the reality of what AMerica means.
hopechange, if you go to my personal site http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/ you'll see I've come out for Newt quite a few times more than twice. I officially endorsed him in early December and have been writing pro-Newt stuff and posting speeches since then. I love Newt and am with Newt until the end. But that doesn't mean I have blown out the part of my brain that is capable of mathematics. The thing about objective analysis is that it helps if you are objective. ;-)
By the way, in my previous post here "It's Do or Die Time..." I wrote,
"It's time to stop dilly-dallying. Super Tuesday is upon us and with that, the nomination race could be all but over unless conservatives and libertarians finally unite behind one candidate, a candidate who can beat both Romney AND Obama. That candidate needs to be Newt. "
They didnt unite behind one candidate and now we are in the situation we are in. I know it might seem like I am going back and forth but I actually have been consistent.
I will always believe Newt is the one to be President. BUT, unless he has some knowledge or something special up his sleeve, it's just not going to happen. I really don't like to say that. I absolutely detest Mitt Romney and know he has thrown his money and LIED his way down the path.
I can't physically make people vote for Newt. I can talk until I'm blue in the face, but people already do have an "imbedded idea" implanted in their minds about Newt personally.
I am however, very disappointed that the Tea Party people have NOT gotten behind Newt. Even Sarah Palin, who seems to be afraid of actually endorsing Newt, even though she said she voted for him in Alaska. Voting and endorsing are two different things.
So unless I have missed something, I will continue to support Newt and hope an awakening happens and people come to their senses.
I completely agree radionut
Your analysis is spot on, Libertarian Neocon... I hope and pray, & will not give up on Newt.. but, reality is reality & we all have to face this very real fact: When Newt loses states, he REALLY loses.. (He campaigned in Washington State for a while and he placed dead last!) Like all of you, I think Newt is THE BEST... but, to date... the voters think otherwise.
These GOP primaries are about a race for Delegates, not a beauty contest, a personality contest or popularity contest either at this point. The amount of States won delegate between Santorum and Gingrich has been a difference of a hand full of delegates except for Gingrich Georgia 36-3 and Santorum Ohio 37-0. The contest is now in the deep South for the most part Gingrich favorably. Ron Paul defeat in Alaska has affirmed complete definitive proof of a shut-out on his campaign quest.
The deep South will rise again hopefully! Newt Gingrich remains the only true conservative alternative. If Gingrich can stay in the race, either he wins or has the potential to drive the primary to a brokered convention. If we cannot get Newt Gingrich in as our nominee, a brokered convention is our next best hope. A brokered convention would certainly not be perfect. In some ways it would be the ultimate “death by committee” nightmare. We would not get the next Ronald Reagan out of that convention but we would get a candidate better than Mitt Romney and possibly a candidate who can beat Barack Obama.
Anything can happen. Joseph Gallant
Is libertarian neocon Politijim other personality? (this,personality, I do not care for)
tough room
Post a Comment