Tag: Mitt Romney

Rasmussen: Romney 27%, Santorum 24%, Gingrich 18% in SC Primary Poll

There is a reason for this and I will explain it:

Video:

(removed – video auto-played and was annoying…)

The Story:

 

What a difference a caucus makes. Rick Santorum who two months ago had one percent (1%) support among likely South Carolina Republican Primary voters now is running a close second there with 24% of the vote.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the Palmetto State finds former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney still in the lead, earning 27% support from likely GOP Primary Voters, up from 23% in early November. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is in third with 18% of the vote, followed by Texas Congressman Ron Paul at 11%.

Bringing up the rear are Texas Governor Rick Perry with five percent (5%) and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman at two percent (2%). Another two percent (2%) of these likely primary voters like some other candidate, and 11% remain undecided. — Via Election 2012: South Carolina Republican Primary – Rasmussen Reports

Okay here is the reason that Romney is doing so well in this polls; First off, name recognition. Second of all, Romney is more of a moderate and those type of Conservatives will gravitate towards him. Santorum is a bit more of a hardcore Republican and Conservative, especially when it comes to social issues, like Abortion. This turns off the more fiscal Conservatives.

Not only this, Romney is appealing to the Independents as well — which will ruin Obama’s chances of relection, if Romney gets the nomination — which, at this point, I believe will be the case. Also, if he is as smart, as he seems to be — Romney will pick Santorum as as his running mate and that will be the ticket come the 2012 general election. Which will put Democrats into a frenzy and you talk about war? Holy crap! 😯

Others: The Hill, The Moderate Voice, American Research Group, Hot Air, CatholicVote.org, GOP 12, LifeNews.com, Big Government, Campaign 2012, Outside the Beltway, ABCNEWS, Taegan Goddard’s …, FiveThirtyEight, Ballot Box, The PJ Tatler, Wake up America and American Spectator

Ha! Newt says he is “not rich”

Man, this is bad.

AllahPundit calls it “laying it on with a trowel”. I was thinking more of a 12 horse motor pump into a 10 inch hose fitting myself. I’m talking about a cement pump.

What am I talking about?

This:

CONCORD, N.H. — Less than 12 hours after finishing in fourth place in the Iowa caucuses, Newt Gingrich opened a new, more aggressive chapter in his campaign, taking pointed shots at rivals Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, who both finished ahead of Gingrich. At one point, Gingrich hinted he would make Romney’s personal wealth an issue, telling a reporter “I’m not rich.”

Speaking to reporters shortly after arriving in New Hampshire, Gingrich dismissed Romney’s razor-thin victory—the former Massachusetts governor ended the night with 25 percent of the vote and only eight more votes than Rick Santorum. “The fact is, three out of four Republicans rejected him,” Gingrich said.

When asked why he chose to congratulate Santorum and not Romney on his caucus success, the former House speaker said, “I find it amazing the news media continues to say [Romney’s] the most electable Republican when he can’t even break out of his own party.… The fact is, Gov. Romney in the end has a very limited appeal in conservative party.”

Later, in a campaign stop in Laconia, Gingrich’s kept up his attack – and it got personal. Asked by a local reporter if he would buy a home in the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, where Romney has a summer home, Gingrich replied, “No, I can’t afford things like that, I’m not rich.” His wife, Callista, added a jab at Romney as well. “We have one home,” she demurred. The Romneys own two summer homes, including one in California.

This coming from a dude who made 1.6 million from Freddie Mac . 🙄

Over to you AllahPundit:

Surely a man eligible for a six-figure line of credit at Tiffany’s has the means to buy himself a cottage in the sticks. Or maybe more: I’ll bet $1.6 million from Freddie Mac would get you something nice and airy in Hanover. This is the second time that Gingrich has taken a dig at Romney’s wealth, do note, but the first time came with caveats: Romney had already taken a dig at his Freddie earnings in that case, and Gingrich wasn’t sniffing then at the fact that Romney’s rich but rather what he did to become that way. Tonight’s little aside is more of a pure class pander, which is yet more evidence of just how bitter Newt is about that beating he took on the air in Iowa.

Indeed.

My question is simply this — if Newt is poor, what the heck am I?!? 😯

Oh and also; pandering?!? That doesn’t even begin to describe it. The dude is flinging poo at Romney desperately hoping something — anything will stick.

Thus another reason why I am not very big on Newt. Him, the heir to the Reagan mantle — yeah right! 🙄

Nate Silver explains it.

This pretty much sums it up…:

I don’t care if you call it a win or a tie. In Iowa on Tuesday, Mitt Romney had a performance that looks ugly on the stat sheet , but which accomplished quite a bit when you consider it in its broader context.

The two most important things that Mr. Romney accomplished are as follows:

First, Mr. Romney eliminated Rick Perry from the nomination contest. Of course, Mr. Romney got a lot of help from Mr. Perry himself. Maybe we should use the passive voice — Mr. Perry was eliminated from the nomination contest. The conclusion is the same: the man who once looked like Mr. Romney’s most formidable rival has suspended his campaign.

The result was not unexpected based on late-stage polling — in fact, the polling average nailed Mr. Perry’s share of the vote almost to the decimal point.

But it was not long ago that Mr. Perry looked like he might finish in a solid third place, at a bare minimum, in Iowa; a poll conducted as recently as Dec. 12 actually had Mr. Perry ahead of Mr. Romney. And there was some chance that Mr. Perry might have done quite a bit better than third place. I’m not convinced that there was anything that happened to Rick Santorum that couldn’t have happened to Mr. Perry, if only Mr. Perry had received the right injection of momentum — say, an endorsement from the Family Leader, a conservative group — at the right time. — via Winning Ugly, but Winning – NYTimes.com

I think is pretty mcu spot on, read the rest, it is very interesting. A little wonkish, but very interesting.

This is a mememorandum thread.

It’s getting ugly between Gingrich and Romney

…and Gingrich does not disappoint with this shot across Romney’s bow: (Via CBS News)

Video:

Of course, the bad part was that Gingrich sort of stuck his own foot in his mouth, when he called Romney a liar and then turned right around and said he would support him if he were the GOP nominee. D’oh! 🙄


Lord Edward Morrissey, who knows this stuff better than anyone, I think, saith the following:

Hey, not to rain on Gingrich’s parade, but how is that different than any other PAC or super-PAC? I’m pretty sure that Gingrich-supporting PACs aren’t run by disinterested strangers, nor are those for Rick Perry or any of the other candidates in the race. That’s a problem in the structure of the campaign finance regulations that impose artificial divisions on contributions. If those were removed, the same money would flow into these races, but the candidates themselves would be responsible for its use instead of hiding behind PACs and super-PACs — and that includes Newt Gingrich.

As I’ve written earlier, there is nothing wrong with so-called “negative” campaigning. Candidates should draw contrasts between their positions and those of their opponents, and their records as well. As long as that is being done honestly, there is nothing wrong or dishonorable about it; in fact, that’s why we have primaries. Gingrich chose to eschew that strategy and now wants to claim some kind of victimization because the rest of the field chose not to follow in his footsteps. On top of that, Gingrich has descended to name-calling, which looks more like a dog-in-the-manger ploy than a way to gather support in the few short hours before Iowa voters trudge to precincts tonight. A confident candidate wouldn’t have sunk to the level of this conversation the morning of a caucus.

Indeed.

Also too, I say this as a kid, who grew up in the inner city of Detroit; there is nothing funnier than watch to rich, white old guys fighting it out like school kids. I find it quite amusing. 😉 😛

Again, as it is has been written many times over in the right-wing political blogosphere and also said by others on Fox News; Gingrich is a thinker, a Conservative intellectual, if you will — but he is also a bomb thrower, who is not apt to thinking on his feet. This video above proves that. In other words, it is okay to be a bomb thrower, you just have to be able to run from the bomb, in the right direction! 😯 😛 😉 😀

Romney Leading Paul in Paul in Iowa Poll

It is starting to look like Romney might just be the man who gets the GOP nod. It is early, but I have that feeling.

Via the Des Moines Register:

The Des Moines Register’s latest Iowa Poll shows a surprise three-way match-up in contention to win the Iowa Republican caucuses: Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum.

Santorum, who has been largely invisible in the polls throughout the campaign season, is now beating the other evangelical choices and has a clear shot at victory Tuesday night.

But political analysts note there’s little time for Santorum to cash in and regroup before New Hampshire, where voters weigh in nine days from now, while Romney is positioned to replicate what he’s done in Iowa in all the early states.

In four days of polling, Romney leads at 24 percent, Paul has 22 percent and Rick Santorum, 15 percent.

But if the final two days of polling stand alone, the order reshuffles: Santorum elbows out Paul for second.

“Few saw this bombshell coming,” GOP strategist David Polyansky said. “In an already unpredictable race this is another stunning turn of political fortune.”

The piece goes on to talk about Santorum; who I utterly despise as a human being. The only reason that Santorum is getting traction at all, is because of the collapse of Bachmann’s campaign. Of course, polls mean nothing, they are simple snapshots into the minds of those taking the poll. What honestly counts is the actual caucuses themselves.

Either way, it should be very interesting.

Other sites covering this subject, right and left — via Memeorandum: CNN, The Politico, Iowa Caucuses, Washington Post, Hot Air, FiveThirtyEight, The Moderate Voice, msnbc.com, Patterico’s Pontifications, Washington Monthly, 2012 Decoded, New York Times, Outside the Beltway, Daily Kos, Business Insider, americanthinker.com, The Iowa Republican, ABCNEWS, The Huffington Post, Big Government, The Caucus, Guardian, Ballot Box, The Daily Caller, The Atlantic Online, Catholic Bandita, A plain blog about politics, Campaign 2012, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, Talking Points Memo, The Spectacle Blog, Mediaite, The Page, State of the Union, Balloon Juice, GOP 12, Riehl World View, Politisite, Associated Press, Saint Petersblog and Yahoo! News

The Southern Avenger on Nikki Haley and the New Conservatives

Transcript Here

The bit about Boss Hogg is too funny! 😆

News from a Different Perspective

Disclaimer: I present this little newsletter as a different perspective on the news. I will give you a fair warning; the author of this newsletter is a Fundamental Baptist. In the interest of full disclosure, I am, doctrinally, also a Fundamentalist. This is not to say that I do not have issue with the 21 century Fundamentalist movement, especially among the Baptists.  But I do agree with most of this newsletter. This is the difference between Conservatives and liberals. We Conservatives, and yes, even “Right of Centers” like me, are quite tolerant of others opinions. Unlike Liberals, who will turn on someone who disagrees with them. Having said all that, I present the newsletter…

—–

PDF VERSION

FRIDAY CHURCH NEWS NOTES

May 7, 2010, Volume 11, Issue 19

The Friday Church News Notes is designed for use in churches and is published by Way of Life Literature’s Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Unless otherwise stated, the Notes are written by David Cloud. Of necessity we quote from a wide variety of sources, but this does not imply an endorsement. For instructions on how to unsubscribe to this list or to change mailing addresses, please consult the information paragraph at the end.

THE WORST PROBLEM WITH IB FRIENDS INTERNATIONAL (Friday Church News Notes, May 7, 2010, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) – In my estimation, the worst problem with Clarence Sexton’s Independent Baptist Friends International movement is that it has circled the wagons against “criticism.” The reason I joined an Independent Baptist church in 1973 not long after I was converted was the separated Christian living, the willingness to take the whole Bible seriously, even “fanatically,” and the bold defense of the faith. I had grown up in Billy Graham’s denomination, the king of non-judgmentalism and the chief enemy of Biblical separation in our generation. Being convinced that the Graham philosophy is unscriptural, I joined the Independent Baptists. It was in the early 1990s that I first saw signs of a bold rejection of separation among Independent Baptists and the spread of the damnable New Evangelical “judge not” philosophy. This occurred in conjunction with the rapid growth of Contemporary Christian Music and its contemporary Southern Gospel counterpart. Widespread love for carnal music accelerated the spread of the non-judgmental philosophy among Independent Baptists. Music, we are told, is an inconsequential issue. The Promise Keepers movement was another catalyst for the non-judgmental philosophy. When I exposed the ecumenism of Promise Keepers, I was rebuked and mocked by the some IB leaders. They argued that the good outweighed the bad and that we should be glad that men were being taught to assume their spiritual responsibilities. This is the theme-song of Independent Baptist Friends International. When I wrote a lengthy e-mail to Pastor Sexton, a gracious and respectful e-mail expressing my concerns, he did not even acknowledge its receipt. He knows of me and my ministry; he has preached in my home church and has talked with my pastor on several occasions. I have heard from several other men who have tried to communicate with Sexton about this matter and have been ignored, some of whom consider him a personal friend and all of whom appreciate him as a brother in the Lord and a fellow soldier for Christ. I am not talking about ignoring warnings from a man’s hateful enemies; I am talking about ignoring warnings from friends. And not just ignoring the warnings, but even treating the warners as troublemakers. I have received angry e-mails from several men rebuking me for speaking out against IB Friends. They say that I should shut up and just focus on the “big issues.” Well, I’m not going to shut up. Big problems usually grow from small ones. God has instructed me to prove ALL things, to preach with rebuke and reproof, to earnestly contend for the faith. Without judging and reproof, there is no mechanism of correction and error can grow apace. Sexton urges all of us to be friends, and I am all for it. God’s Word tells me that the wounds of a friend are faithful (Prov. 27:6). Paul was a friend when he rebuked Peter’s “small” hypocrisy. He was a friend when he reproved the church at Corinth for their errors, including such “small” things as the sin of misusing the Lord’s supper and taking one another to court. I urge Clarence Sexton to stop stonewalling reproof, to stop pretending that criticism of IB Friends is some sort of carnal persecution. I urge him to publicly acknowledge that his friends have every biblical right and responsibility to criticize what he is doing. I have a suspicion that his critics in this matter are the best friends that he has.

Continue reading “News from a Different Perspective” →

Video: We Will Remember

(H/T HotAir)

Sign the Pledge at We Will Remember.

Rep. Bart Stupak is retiring too

Now this is one that I totally saw coming:

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who had a central role in the health reform fight as the leader of anti-abortion Democrats, plans to announce Friday that he will not run for reelection, a Democratic official said. Without Stupak on the ballot, the seat becomes an immediate pickup opportunity for Republicans.

“Now with health care done, he’s retiring,” a friend said. “He has thought about retiring for the last three cycles, but was always talked into staying: to elect John Kerry to help end the war, to elect a Democratic majority to get health care done.”

President Barack Obama called Stupak on Wednesday and asked him not to retire. Stupak, 58, also resisted entreaties from Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), the dean of the Wolverine State delegation.

via Rep. Bart Stupak won’t seek reelection – Mike Allen and Josh Kraushaar – POLITICO.com.

Of course, the G.O.P. got a very funny dig in:

“After selling his soul to Nancy Pelosi, it appears that Bart Stupak finally found the courage to tell her no,” said Ken Spain, communications director of the National Republican Congressional Committee. “The political fallout over the Democrats’ government takeover of health care has put the political careers of many Democrats in jeopardy thanks in part to Stupak’s decision to abandon his alleged pro-life principles.

Heh.

As to what headaches this might cause for the Democratic Party, they might just have a problem getting that seat back. Now Ed over HotAir says that the U.P. is not deeply Conservative; which is partially true. However, I happen to be from Michigan and I can offer a different perspective. For the record, I have lived here all of my life and I happen to know the people around these parts and I can tell you what I do know. Now Detroit proper? Liberal/Progressive/Whatever you wanna call it as heck; now as for the ‘Burbs? The further South and North you get of Detroit, the less Liberal or Democratic Party leaning it gets. The only reason John McCain lost Michigan, was because his stupid President Campaign advisers chose to abandon this State, which left many Michigan Republicans quite peeved. When it comes to choosing Presidents around here, people vote, usually, the personality and the Person, and not the Party. I can tell you, from personal experience. Most Michiganders are NOT happy with Jennifer Granholm. It is not uncommon to hear that name and the term “Stupid Bitch” attached to it; and no, I do not mean from me! 😉

As most of you most likely already know; Michigan has been hit with one of the worst, if not the worst one state recessions ever. Many people here in Michigan voted for Barack Obama (NOT ME!) hoping he would bring change to the employment situation here in the Detroit area and in Michigan as a whole. So far? Nothing. We still have the highest unemployment problem in the United States, last time I checked, it was 75% in the city of Detroit. Based upon conversations that I have had with people around here in the last few years, there are people here in the State of Michigan, who are just fed up with the Democratic Party in general. The people of Detroit and largely the people of Michigan as well, are sick and tired of political speeches and empty rhetoric, they want results and so far, the token political Party of this area has not produced anything at all; but rhetoric and political speeches.

Having said all of the above, Democrats might just find themselves struggling to fill this seat again and many of the Senatorial seats in Congress and the House come November. There has also been talk that the Governor’s office might just flip back to the Republican for the first time since to the term of Governor George Romney. (Mitt’s Daddy…) Now that my friends would be feat in itself!

Again, it should be a very interesting thing to follow. Hey, at least it’s content, something I’ve been struggling to find here in the last few days! 😀

The Blogger Round Up is here.

Update: Looks like the folks over at FireDogLake, which is a liberal blog, are not to keen on this guy either:

If you’re a politician not inclined to deliver under “intense political pressure,” you have no business being a politician. And if death threats were a factor in resigning, there pretty much wouldn’t be a member of the Democratic caucus left. Stupak sought the spotlight. He wanted to lead the pro-life Caucus and hijack the health care debate. He refused to quit even when he essentially won by getting the Nelson compromise, which functionally did about everything he wanted. He made the debate a living hell and went out of his way to punish half the US population. And in the end, everybody hated him, left and right. Well played.

Ouch! That ought to leave a mark. 😯

Video: America's Comeback

This Comes via The Other McCain:

RGA 2009 Chairman’s Report

Republican Governor’s Association HQ

The revolution starts today. What are you doing?