Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
James Of England ·
February 29, 2012 at 4:30am
Please come and join the conversation as the results pour in. As Michigan is a very open primary, Democrat members are particularly welcome. ;-)
Edit: it appears that most of the conversation will be about Michigan, where the overall result is still in doubt, and the Delegate count is even more in the air...
And as I type this, ABC calls Michigan for Romney. And now AP is.... and now FOX. The Delegate count is awarded (almost certainly) one at large delegate each to Santorum and Romney, with each Congressional District awarding 2 delegates to its winner. You can find the District map here, and the results by county here.
- Comment (107)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments:
Jul '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Freeven
Perhaps. But this should have been one of Mitt's strongest states. And yet he was scrambling to the very end, with his attack machine in high gear, outspending Santorum 4-1 (per Fox), with Paul helping him, and Newt continuing to drain votes away from Santorum . Yet he only won by three points. There's no doubt that Mitt remains a strong favorite to win the nomination, but he also remains an incredibly weak candidate, as Santorum showed again tonight. · 1 minute ago
He called his shot in the midst of bad polling, and he won.
It was an extremely gutsy move, which he pulled off.
If Santorum proved that Mitt is weak, he had a funny way of showing it. There were two contests today. Both in relatively competitive states.
Did Rick win either?
Look, I like Rick Santorum. But it is a fantasy to pretend that he gained this evening.
He lost.
Mar '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Hey, he could write his own speeches.
And, he is a true conservative.
What could go wrong?
Apr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Valiuth
Chris Deleon
Sorry, with comments like this, you just show your utter arrogance.
If Mitt Romney wins the nomination, expect major disengaging, and a very likely loss in November. That is reality, not vindictiveness. · 2 minutes ago
Funny, I think Romney supporters will also predict a loss in November if Santorum is nominated....funny that. · 23 minutes ago
For what it's worth, I don't think that Santorum would be unelectable in November. Unlike Mitt, he wouldn't be competitive with Obama in fundraising, but Mitt's austere fiscal conservatism has disadvantages against compassionate conservatism, and Santorum's identity politics are much better.
I agree with Palaeologos that enthusiasm for booting Obama, repealing Obamacare, cutting the deficit, supporting the military, securing religious liberty, and, eg., building the Keystone pipeline, is unlikely to fade totally in April/ May. Whoever the candidate is (of the choice of two), the focus will be on Obama after that.
Jun '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
I'm starting to believe that Romney will indeed be our Republican nominee for President, or as Democrats call it, King of the Theocratic Racist Homophobes.
Apr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
I think you're just spoofing here, but it could come across as unkind... Especially to Tea-Partiers who support Romney. · 12 minutes ago
In Paris' defense, he spoke of the Tea Party "establishment". The Tea Party rank and file have been happy to vote Mitt, but the establishment has been less so. Ex-pols and failed pols have supported Santorum, the Tea Party Patriots and Tea Party Express have both had made shows of Newt support. The Tea Party Caucus has generally supported Mitt, with the notable exception of Bachmann.
May '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
I think you're just spoofing here, but it could come across as unkind... Especially to Tea-Partiers who support Romney. · 21 minutes ago
[Editors note: I've removed a comment that is so full of errors and attacks that it refers to everyone from people skeptical of Romney to prominent Romney supporters as people who "view Romney with contempt." We can do much better. Please do so.]
Edited on February 29, 2012 at 4:15pmApr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Frankly at this point...I am loosing the will to care who the nominee is. I think I like Mitt best, but frankly I'll take Santorum too. I'll vote for either of them in the general come November. I kind of wish we could focus back on Obama and his various inadequacies, but I fear we will have several more months of this masochistic flagellation known as primaries.
I hear there will even be another debate...Good God how we needed another one.
Dec '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Palaeologus
If Santorum proved that Mitt is weak, he had a funny way of showing it. There were two contests today. Both in relatively competitive states.
AZ wasn't close to being competitive, which is why Santorum hardly campaigned there. My comments were about MI, where he made Mitt work hard and spend a lot of money to "dodge a bullet" in what should have been one of his best states. As I said, a Santorum win would have been huge, but a very good showing nonetheless.
Dec '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Valiuth: Frankly at this point...I am loosing the will to care who the nominee is. I think I like Mitt best, but frankly I'll take Santorum too. I'll vote for either of them in the general come November. I kind of wish we could focus back on Obama and his various inadequacies, but I fear we will have several more months of this masochistic flagellation known as primaries.
I hear there will even be another debate...Good God how we needed another one. · 26 minutes ago
I'm with you here. My vote was cast a month ago. All that's left is to watch the circus, especially as I think we lose even if we win this election.
Dec '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Oh, I don't know. It turns out that Santorum's challenge to Mitt in Michigan even got Mitt to talk to TEA Party groups to ask for their votes! That counts as a significant benefit of the contested primary.
If the contest dragging on ends up with Romney winning, one can well hope that along the way Romney will learn something about the conservatives within his own party.
Dec '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Palaeologus
Freeven
Perhaps. But this should have been one of Mitt's strongest states. And yet he was scrambling to the very end, with his attack machine in high gear, outspending Santorum 4-1 (per Fox), with Paul helping him, and Newt continuing to drain votes away from Santorum . Yet he only won by three points. There's no doubt that Mitt remains a strong favorite to win the nomination, but he also remains an incredibly weak candidate, as Santorum showed again tonight. · 1 minute ago
He called his shot in the midst of bad polling, and he won.
It was an extremely gutsy move, which he pulled off.
If Santorum proved that Mitt is weak, he had a funny way of showing it. There were two contests today. Both in relatively competitive states.
Did Rick win either?
Look, I like Rick Santorum. But it is a fantasy to pretend that he gained this evening.
He lost. · 2 hours ago
Yes, but in losing in Michigan, Santorum may actually have won more of that state's delegates than Mitt did. That's a more than respectable showing, in a state that a few weeks ago was written off to Romney.
Dec '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Palaeologus
He called his shot in the midst of bad polling, and he won.
It was an extremely gutsy move, which he pulled off.
First question: why would Romney ever poll poorly in Michigan?
Second question: did Romney knock Santorum out of the nominating contest with his victory in Michigan?
Genghis Khan said:
Romney's victory in Michigan tonight didn't approach that level by any stretch of the imagination.
His victory in Arizona was more impressive numerically, but not terribly costly to Santorum, who didn't expend extensive resources there.
Mitt Romney did today what he had to do -- but that he HAD to do it is a measure of his weakness.
Apr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
I'm a little surprised at the relatively low turnout in Az., right at 41%, depending on the final Sec/State numbers, with Maricopa county (Phoenix) clocking in at 39-1/4 and Pima (Tucson) at 46. I thought it would be considerably higher, over 50% at least in Pima county.
Sep '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Hurrah for James of England and all the other Mitt fans! I hope you take genuine pleasure from this night's events. Seriously, I really do.
Dec '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
The King Prawn
From the CoC list of violations:All caps. Online, it's yelling.
Paris has worked hard on this site (plus attending and reporting on CPAC for two years in a row), so he gets to [capitalize] wherever he wants.
Edited on February 29, 2012 at 4:17pmFeb '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
What amazing arrogance.
The only reason the GOP has any sort of future at all is because the [Tea Party] dragged it back from the abyss after the establishment had no idea what do about Obama.
Turns out groveling and surrendering doesn't accomplish much. For the GOP, that is.
And the reward for those folks is [nasty, arrogant insults]. From the same establishment that ran the country and the party into the ground.
Good luck with that. Or not.
Edited on February 29, 2012 at 4:18pmApr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Stuart Creque
Oh, I don't know. It turns out that Santorum's challenge to Mitt in Michigan even got Mitt to talk to TEA Party groups to ask for their votes! That counts as a significant benefit of the contested primary.
If the contest dragging on ends up with Romney winning, one can well hope that along the way Romney will learn something about the conservatives within his own party.
If you have access to Lexis, or search elsewhere, you'll find that Romney's been speaking to TEA Party meetings since they began. Most of the caucus endorsed him months ago. Independence Hall Tea Party (PA, NJ, DE) endorsed him; although they didn't say it, I'm guessing that a lot of that was in gratitude for his efforts in support of Christine O'Donnell, unlike Santorum (although Gingrich was on the right side of that one). They were big O'Donnell supporters and waited till Newt was done before endorsing.
The non-Huckabee conservative base were the people who won Romney those states he did win in 2008. He's not unfamiliar with them.
Apr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Stuart Creque
Yes, but in losing in Michigan, Santorum may actually have won more of that state's delegates than Mitt did. That's a more than respectable showing, in a state that a few weeks ago was written off to Romney. ·
The state was written off to Romney because the ABR was Newt, who couldn't compete in states far from Georgia. Competing in the mid-west against a candidate whose base was the mid-west would always be harder.
Stuart Creque
His victory in Arizona was more impressive numerically, but not terribly costly to Santorum, who didn't expend extensive resources there.
If Arizona doesn't count on that basis, then neither do Santorum's clear wins in Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri. In a heavily Catholic state, with neither side expending much money, Santorum was obliterated. He's hoping to win 3/10 of the most Catholic states (NY, TX, and Pennsylvania), but when he doesn't compete, he really doesn't compete. It will be interesting to see if he goes to Alaska this week, or if he just campaigns in the states where he's most favored.
Apr '11
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
Thank you to you and (the other?) Katie for your congratulations. Your graciousness and sportsmanship should be a model for us during the long, brutal, March of southern states.
May '10
Re: Faux Live Chat: Michigan and Arizona edition
On average, in Presidential politics, the "Tea Party" (" " because it's not an organization; more of a concept, or, in the best sense of a the term, a conspiracy) is as close to the average Republican voter as the supposed Republican Establishment. Proof: Romney has about double the primary votes of anyone else; and the Tea Party never had a candidate it liked.
Edited on February 29, 2012 at 1:53pm