March 19, 2012

When Every Contest is a “Test”, Every Journalist is a Campaign Strategist

  8:53 am

The New York Times above-the-fold headline this morning screams, “Illinois Is Test For Romney.”


Is that sort of like how New Hampshire was a “big test” for Romney?

Kind of like how Florida was a test for Romney?

Or how Washington state was a test for Romney?

Maybe like how Michigan was a test for Romney?

Or perhaps it’s akin to how Ohio was a test for Romney?

Oh, wait — maybe it’s a test like how Puerto Rico was “yet another test” for Mitt Romney.

At what point does the student who keeps getting A’s on all the tests get to graduate?

Of course, the media would have nothing to report on if the race between Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney was over, so they are prolonging this thing as long as they possibly can. (And by nothing to report on, I of course mean nothing that can damage the Republican brand quite as much as the mud slinging between our front runner and our also-rans.) And just to show how altruistic they are, many of these “reporters” are putting their journalism degrees to good use by trying their hands at campaign strategy.

That above-the-fold New York Times piece, for instance, tells Romney that Illinois is more conservative than it used to be, and urges him to try and reach out more and connect with the conservative GOP base. Romney is having trouble in Illinois, they posture, because “middle-of-the-road Republicans” are “becoming obsolete.”

Thanks for the help, Gray Lady. But wait — what about this new Politico piece up this morning that also presumes to offer strategic advice to Team Romney? They claim that Romney is having trouble in Illinois because he has been “moving to the right” — and that “tack to the right on a range of issues” is costing him votes in a moderate state like Illinois.

Well, thanks for that helpful bit of analysis.

I’m sure the New York Times and Politico both have nothing but the best of intentions at heart when offering this contradictory advice to Romney. (And if you believe that, I have some oceanfront property you might be interested in.) But when all the lights are turned off tomorrow night, Mitt Romney will have passed yet another test imposed on him by the media. Republicans will be one step closer to having their nominee. And our other candidates will continue to play right into the media and the DNC’s strategy of prolonging this nomination battle. The real “test” in this race isn’t Mitt Romney winning yet another primary. The real test is for Santorum and Gingrich: which do they love more – themselves, or the country and the party?



by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest
Thunder (Romney/Rubio 2012)

Larry Saboto's Crystal ball predicts the upcoming races and then goes on to predict who will be the favorite

in each state, based on Larry's prediction, we can conclude the final results will be.

Romney 1,426

Santorum 765

NY Times reports the following delegate count:

Romney 521

Santorum 254

Saboto's Crystal ball predicts


Illinois 3/20

Romney 34 -- Total 555

Santorum 0 -- Total 254

Louisana 3/24


Romney 5 -- Total 560

Santorum 8 -- Total 262

DC 4/3


Romney 16 -- Total 576

Santorum 0 -- Total 262

Maryland 4/3


romney 28 -- Total 604

Santorum 6 -- Total 268

Wisconsin 4/3


Romney 27 -- Total 631

Santorum 12 -- Total 280

Connecticut 4/24


Romney 25 -- Total 656

Santorum 0 -- Total 280

Delaware 4/24


Romney 17 -- Total 673

Santorum 0 -- Total 280

New York 4/24


Romney 66 -- Total 739

Santorum 26 -- 306

Pennsylvania 4/24


Romney 18 -- total 757

Santorum 41 -- Total 347

Rhode Island


Romney 12 -- Total 769

Santorum 4 -- Total 351


The crystal ball ends here, so we can take some further guests.

5/8 Indiana


Romney 15 -- Total 884

Santorum 31 -- Total 382

5/8 North Carolina


Romney 25 -- total 1,009

Santorum 30 -- Total 412

5/8 West Virginia


Romney 10 -- Total 1,019

Santorum 21 -- Total 433

5/15 Nebraska


Romney 16 -- total 1,035

Santorum 16 -- Total 449

5/15 Oregon


Romney 15 -- total 1,050

Santorum 10 -- Total 559

5/22 Arkansas


Romney 14 -- total 1,064

Santorum 19 -- Total 578

5/22 Kentucky


Romney 18 -- Total 1,082

Santorum 34 -- total 612

5/29 Texas


Romney 60 -- Total 1,142

Santorum 92 -- total 704

6/5 California


Romney 150 -- total 1,292 [Romney wins nomination]

Santorum 22 -- total 726

6/5 Montana


Romney 13 -- Total 1,305

Santorum 13 -- total 739

6/5 New Jersey


Romney 50 -- total 1,355

Santorum 0 -- total 739

6/5 New Mexico


Romney 18 -- 1,373

Santorum 12 -- 751

6/5 South Dakota


Romney 14 -- total 1,386

Santorum 14 -- Total 765

5/26 Utah


Romney 40 -- total 1,426

Santorum 0 -- Total 765


What Romney, his surrogates, and any fair-minded pundit/reporter should say about Romney “not being able to sew this nomination up yet” or “having trouble getting to the 1144 delegate magic number”:

“Even if I (Mitt) had won every single vote in every single state so far and taken every single delegate from those states, I’d still be nearly 200 delegates away from getting the required 1144. You see the process and the rules and the calendar have changed and with more proportional allocation and fewer delegates being awarded in early states it’s just not like it used to be. This race cannot rightly be compared to previous contests and contestants. It’s like raising the basketball hoop 2 feet, and complaining that your favorite team isn’t scoring as much as it used to. The process is still fair and guided by rules, but those rules have changed and it’s simply impossible to become the nominee in a matter a few weeks like it used to be.”

I give that as free advice.

Delegates so far: 960.


Journalists proving once again why they are one of the least trusted professions, next to politicians.


CBS Radio news just reported on the "close" race between Santorum & Romney. They then had a Santorum clip with him whining about "Being out spent 10:1, blah blah blah". It's all negative from him. Even when Romney is asked about Santorum & Gingrich, he's gracious, but not negative (sometimes he does manage to get in a good zinger, though).

Santorum is less presidential with each passing day...


1. LA really only has 13 delegates? 13?!? Even Utah has 40! Is that right?


5. LA has 46. Need to update the chart?


Give em "Passing the tests" hell Mitt!


#6 Patrick: On Larry Sabato's site, it's mentioned that only 20 of the LA delegates will be selected based on the primary. The rest will be chosen at the state convention. That still leaves 7 delegates missing but it accounts for most of the discrepancy.


The media's obsession with giving advice is not new, nor does it only apply to Romney. And I think it is unprofessional if not dangerous. It used to be that there were straight newspersons who simply reported the news/facts, and there were separate commentators. Now the two rolls are blended and it is often difficult to discern fact from opinion. I believe this is an Orwellian threat to our democracy because when facts are treated as opinions, the gov't can treat the media as if it were nothing more than entertainment. It doesn't help that television news hires entertainers and models as newspersons. A woman's figure is more important than a degree in journalism. It also confuses and demoralizes the citizenry.

I suppose one could argue that I am overdramatizing the problem given that facts and news are still being reported. And there are multiple sources of news. But it is also true that news is being ghettoized (?), meaning people are getting their news from sources that reflect their ideological bent. Thus, despite there being many news sources, great multitudes are tuning in to select sources.


I think it is time to stop calling Romney "our front runner" and start calling him "our presumptive nominee".

The whole premise of the articles you mention is wildly flawed, because Romney was never "struggling" in Illinois.

Matthew Kilburn

"And by nothing to report on, I of course mean nothing that can damage the Republican brand quite as much as the mud slinging between our front runner and our also-rans."

Thats probably not a fair assessment. Fox is as guilty as the rest of them...and you'd be hard pressed to argue that Fox wants to damage the Republican brand.

By "nothing to report on" you mean nothing that will attract as much attention from the general public. Elections are a big money maker. The more elections there are, the more money there is to be made.


1 - Do you have a link for those projections?

Thunder (Romney/Rubio 2012)

Will Says:

March 19th, 2012 at 9:22 am

1 – Do you have a link for those projections?



9 - Amazing. Perhaps the first and only time I will ever say I completely agree with Meh Romney.

I don't expect it will ever happen again.



While I agree that the mainstream media has an incentive to keep this thing alive, I also think there are some more important factors.

1. The conservative media - I just read articles from Bill Krystal and William Sowell who tried to imply that Santorum still has a chance. Talk Radio stands to make a bunch of money by leading their minions into war against the "establishment" and the "moderates." There was a time, say 2008, when we had candidates like Romney who bowed out when the race was effectively over. Now we have TRUE PATRIOTS who don't know when to fold, mainly because they are being brainwashed by Limbaugh & Co.

2. Republicans foolishly changed the structure of the nominating process by pushing all of the winnter take all states to the back.

3. The emergence of corporation-funded Super PACs means that a candidate like Gingrich, who has literally won only two states, can stay in the race until the end based upon the money from one man. I know conservatives like to trash campaign finance reform, but seriously?



I've always said the NYT would have more readership and wouldn't be close to bankruptcy if it actually even attempted to stay objective in its news and editorials. And it would make the whole country better off by setting a journalistic standard. It certainly had the potential. Instead it's now not any different than liberal radical blogs and full of malcontents and socialist parasites who love dictating how other people's money should be spent. What a wasted opportunity to lead the way for what was once a famed national paper. It still does have some excellent photography though.


13 - I don't see where he projects that Romney gets to 1426. Am I missing something? He only lists the April months.


Matt, pushback. Talk to me when Santorum stops holding Romney below 50%.


The 20 LA delegates are proportionate. So presumable, Newt will get some too. So those numbers are not too far off, although I would not be surprised if Romney wins in LA.


I also think PA will be much closer than projected. I don't buy the polls showing a huge Santorum lead. They are just trying to scare Romney off from campaigning there.


New ARG Poll

Romney 44%

Santy Panties 30%

Grinch 13%

Paul 8%

Undecided 5%

Seems to be on same track as PPP poll just released


A few other things,

PA delegates are all unbound and have NOTHING to do with the beauty contest in PA. They are all Republican insiders and Romney is very likely to get most the delegates from PA (although they may not be able to report exactly how many delegates each candidate gets out of PA, just like super delegates). See this:

NE has no delegates up for grabs in mid May and all delegates are determined by state party convention in July (nothing to do with primary). Same with MT with a convention in mid June. Romney as the presumptive nominee will get all these delegates. There are also many delegates given by committees/conventions in June in IA/LA/IN/PA/IL (all likely going to Romney as the presumptive nominee.


1.... Romney will win NC


21.... link for the new poll


As I wrote yesterday, I think this contest ends before May. Anecdotally you hear the Santorum momentum slowing and Gingrich is basically dead man walking.

Ironically, the establishment is what is keeping this race going. Ironic because many, including me, consider Romney the establishment candidate with all the endorsements and money. But you keep hearing these establishment voices giving their blessing for the fight to continue. It was the gov of Alabama voting for Santorum and yesterday Haley Barbour disclosing he voted for Newt and saying a contested convention might not be a bad thing. So if the party really wants to shut this thing down they need to get on the same page.


Santorum needs a BMI test.

Romney is the Republican candidate this round. Anyone still studying up on that one fails the class.


A quick look at Newsmax ( shows a pile of ABR headlines.

Santorum: Odds of a Brokered Convention Increasing

Santorum Attacks Romney Over Puerto Rico Language Battle

Romney Fails to Sparkle in Illinois

GOP Exit Polls: Enthusiasm Uneven for Romney, Santorum

Romney Concerned About Late Entrant in Race

What happened to Newsmax? Why in the tank for Santorum? And, somebody, tell me why Santorum, with his record, is more "conservative" than Romney with his record?


18.... three candidates are running against Romney.... (not one) that is why Romney goes under 50%.



You are being very generous to Santourm in NY and MD. Also in IN, only 27 delegates are up at the primary in May and the rest are determined at the convention on June 8 (after CA and after Romney is the presumptive nominee).


27 - What happened to Newsmax? Newsmax was never a serious organization. It' is only slightly less useless than Alex Jones' Infowars.

glenn for Mitt for POTUS 2012

I'm calling it now: April will for all intents and purposes END the nomination. I suspect all four go all the way to the convention, but by near end of April, Romney will be around 850 and Santorum under 400 with CA, TX, UT still to go. TRicky Rick will then be mathematically eliminated and the electorate will want the main event (Romney vs Obama) to start, as it should.

Time to get the two whining clowns out of the way and get the whining clown out of the WH.

TIME for the spring of Mitt to begin.


Santy Panties.... biggest presidential "whiner" candidate. Could you imagine him in the oval office??????


31.... spot on... so tired of the whiner twins --- Santy Panties and Grinch


How are the campaigns doing money-wise? That will tell us more about when this will end.


Romney will go over on June 5th, still. But he will do it big time. Later, he will get most of the unallocated delegates, and, of course, the 40 Utah delegates.

If he wins BEFORE June 5th, it will be because consensus has formed.....everyone knows Romney will be the nominee, and a strong majority have resigned themselves to it.

Either way, the race is over.



I would not be surprised in the least if Santorum dropped out in late April/early May. Under normal circumstances, he would have dropped out after super Tuesday. Newt can then stay in and rack up a few more delegates (just like Huckabee) so he can say he came in 2nd, although he came in 3rd.

My Man Mitt 4 President

When did Newsmax switch from Newt to Santorum? Either way they have not been for Romney or even neutral for a long time.


2. Awesome point - wickedly true and very powerful! Another arrow for my Romney quiver.

My Man Mitt 4 President

37 is for 27.

Conservative Independent

I started laughing when I saw this thread. It fits in with our discussion last night where the media has decided that not only is every state Mitt's home state but that he must get over 90% of the vote to win decisively. They don't care that it was actually Santorum who spent his high school years in Mundelein, Illinois and graduated there.

Anyway, if anyone is in Illinois and is interested, I got this from Team Illinois today

You're invited to an Election night event with Mitt Romney

Doors open at 6:30 pm

Event begins at 8:30 pm

Renaissance Schaumburg Hotel

1551 North Thoreau Drive



RSVP/Questions at


While Romney won Puerto Rico, by 83%, if you look to the past again to 2008, the same old pattern holds. Which is, that JOHN McCain continues this primary cycle to over perform Romney's lacking strength.

So yes Romney won a liberal area which can not even vote in the General. though if it could It would go overwhelmingly to Barrack Obama.

Hispanics are very liberal and want their socialist welfare handouts.

All demographics show Hispanics vote heavily Democrat, so of course they will vote for Romney who is right up their liberal alley.

The thing to remember is again, John McCain in 2008 by not 83% McCain won Puerto Rico by 90% This pattern has held in every single state that has voted this cycle of 2012, John McCain wins by larger margins, than Romney wins in those SAME AREA McCain won back in 2008.

Yes John McCain won liberal Puerto Rico by 7 % points more in 2008 than Romney won it by in 2012.


Candidate John McCain Mike Huckabee Ron Paul


Win 90.38 % Lost 4.80% Lost 4.33%


28, uncdave. The point is that the majority continues to vote against Romney; that's not a secure or invincible front-runner, one of the reasons why Santorum is not finished. Aside from the obvious fact that in over half of the contests so far it has been Santorum who has been benefitting from Romney's weakness.

The hard facts are tough to dispute. Romney is the front-runner, getting top tier showings in 24 of the 29 contests which have either been held or for which we have corroborated multiple polling.

And Santorum continues to also get top-tier showings in over half of those contests, 18 to be exact.

The picture is clear; Romney is the front-runner and Santorum is a viable and formidable challenger.

Like I say, talk to me when Santorum has failed to get a top-tier showing in more than half the contests.


#41. If you look at the 2008 GOP caucus in Puerto Rico, you will see that there were 42 other contests held before theirs. The race was over and McCain had already wrapped up the nomionation. Puerto Rico was an after thought. States like New York, California, New Jersey, Virginia, and many others had already voted. Romney was out of the race and it was a McCain lovefest. Please dont compare apples and oranges Jason.



John McCain got 188 votes in 2008. Romney will get over 100,000K. The race was over in 2008 when Puerto Rico voted. Jason, if you want to make a valid point, go ahead and make it. But don't think the people on this board are stupid. Also, the governor and most political leaders (house speaker and senate leader in PR are Republicans).



Jason, in 2008 it was a caucus, with just 208 people participating, and the race was already over.

This time it was primary, and the turnout will be somewhere between 130 000 and 140 000 in total.


Take a look at Drudge headlines. LOL!


Santorum Endorses Romney!


[1504 Days ago]


'If you want a conservative as the nominee of this party, you must vote for Mitt Romney'...



41 - And the moron strikes again. McCain got under 200 total vote0 in PR in 2008.


42.... Romney dropped out of campaign in 2008 after Super Tuesday. Mathmatically he could have stayed in and it was possible he and Huck could take him to the convention. He and Huckabee could have both stayed in and taken away from McCain and keep him under 50% in most states but he knew the writing was on the wall and McCain would eventually win. He exited with dignity and then endoresed and campaigned hard for McCain. Santy Panites and the Grinch seem to be whiners and have their feelings hurt because Mitt didn't play nice. Ricky and Newt are two major whimps.


Fox may or may not want to tarnish the GOP brand, but most on Fox have been all too willing to put dents in the Mitt brand. Mitt's struggled because he's had to fight most of the conservative media. When he said yesterday on Baier, he's not only had to fight the guys still in the race, but all the other ABRs--who Mitt did NOT point out, were enthusiastically supported by Fox, Rush, et al.

This has been my battle cry all along to the con media: Why are you tarnishing Mitt when he's obviously the only one in the race (or likely to get in the race) who (1) Beats Obama and (2) Could actually be a credible POTUS?

It's still a mystery to me. After analyzing all possibilities I come up with the same conclusion with which I started: The vast majority of Fox/Rush/Ingraham/Levin listeners are anti-Mormon and they didn't want to offend and thereby lose their listeners.

At some point I imagine (but am not certain), when Mitt becomes the irrefutable inevitable nominee, they will jump on board "just like they said they always would." But not before they cause some damage to our chances.

In the meantime they seem absolutely horrified that Mitt continues to grow while their faves, Newt and Rick, can't close the deal despite being on Fox 24-7.


42 - And even less are voting for Sanatorium.

Conservative Independent

I honestly don't see what Santorum has to offer the country that would make people want to vote for him. He's never been a leader, does not have an economics background, makes points by insulting groups of people, campaigns mainly in churches and doesn't even try to correct the pastors when they say hateful things about a group of American citizens who happen to be Mormons. I'm not even sure what his message is that he is running on. His entire voting base seems to be supporting him because he's not Romney. They don't even particularly like him but want a brokered convention where someone else will be picked.


Santorum happy Barry Goldwater is gone


41.... duh.... the race was over in 2008 when PR voted and it was a very small caucus because no one really cared and knew John McCain was the nominee



As Teemu said in # 45, Your # 41 blog is exactly what folks in the NYT would conclude. McCain won 90 + % of a 2008 caucus that had 208 votes. He won about 180 votes

Romney won 83 % of a full primary with over 130,000 votes and had a margin of 100,000 votes over the runner up. McCain won by about 146 votes.

What exactly is your relevant point ????


Since we're all used to seeing CNN watch results from state races come in, let me put in these terms:

With 25% of precincts reporting:

Romney: 54%

Santorum: 26%

Gingrich: 14%

Paul: 5%

If CNN or the AP saw those kinds of numbers, I feel like they would call the race.


#54: I've been thinking the same thing: What does Santorum have to offer? He's not brilliant; he's not charming; he has a sketchy voting record; no leadership record. He just talks and talks and talks and talks until you want to pull your hair out.

With no money and no organization he's done what Huck did last time: Tap into the evangelical/SoCon vote as the "Christian leader."

It's served him well, but not well enough to win. Just well enough to screw things up--which he appears happy enough to do.


#42 criggs: What are you counting as "top tier"? Finishing second? Finishing third?

Conservative Independent

#52 This has to be coming down from the guy who owns Fox. It doesn't matter. They have lost me as a daytime viewer although I still watch Cavuto and BOR. I have pretty much stopped watching all cable news. I want to make up my own mind about this election. The networks are pushing for this Primary to be dragged out and don't want Romney running against their chosen one. I will never watch FNC again for Primary or general election returns. I would rather put up with the odious Erik Erickson on CNN than listen to all the Mitt negativity on Fox.


Give em severe "Downstate" hell tomorrow Mitt!


I Romney is a weak front-runner what are Santorum, Gingrich and Paul?


53, Will. To be blunt, that's extraordinarily disingenuous. It completely ignores factors like momentum, or what would happen if this was a two-man race. The fact is that there's this group out there, mostly being held by Gingrich, whose votes are TOTALLY UNKNOWN if Gingrich is out of the race. Yes, yes, they split in two says Gallup, yeah, yeah, right.

And what happens when it's a two-man race? Intangibles start playing a role, like momentum for Romney or Santorum, the last gaffe by whomever, etc. etc.

The truth is we absolutely DO NOT KNOW what happens when Gingrich gets out of the race. What we DO know is that both Santorum and Romney, between them, consistently receive well over half of the votes cast, usually around 60% of the votes. No other candidate is anywhere, and the jury is out on whether Republicans would pick Romney or Santorum if there were no other choices.

The truth is that if Romney really were the strong front-runner the Rombots claim, he wouldn't be winning these 25% and 30% victories; and there's no getting around that.

And, while we're on the subject of who is and is not a strong front-runner, I've also read some comparisons between Obama and Romney in terms of where they were at this point in the nomination battle, comparisons which, frankly, are completely inappropriate. Obama WAS a strong front-runner by this point, regularly winning competitions by over 50%, and far more advanced in the delegate hunt as well.

And in terms of political performance, Mitt Romney, you're no Barack Obama; sorry.


seems like everyone thinks mitt will win illinois, right?



what are Santorum, Gingrich and Paul?

Ha! We all know what they are? Paul is a niche guy; his voters will are not going for anybody but him ever so they don't matter.

As for Santy and Newty: We all know what they are too.


A few weeks ago I was listening to a media panel on the radio (I think CNN on satellite) and they were all spouting on about how Romney is not giving them the access and attention they want and not like in 2008. They were bashing his campaign for ignoring the media. I think this may be the root of the problem from much of the media's perspective. This is payback from them to Romney. They are teaching him and his team their lessons in case he becomes president. They want him to know who the real boss is, and for he and his team not to forget it.


59, Joshua: Excellent question. My definition of a top-tier showing is a showing which must be added to the overall total in order to equal 50+%. For example, if, in a four-way race, Candidate A gets 51%, then he, and he alone, received a top-tier showing in a state.

If, on the other hand, Candidate A came in in first place with only 30%, then someone else must share the top tier with him. If Candidate B got 29%, for example, then Candidate A and B both received top-tier showings.

And so forth and so on. The point is that a winner who got 50% or less of an electorate's vote is faced with the bleak fact that OVER HALF of that electorate's vote went AGAINST him, and therefore that candidate cannot yet be called a strong winner. Hope that makes sense.

63, Freddy. It's quite simple.

Gingrich has received top-tier showings in way less than half of the 29 contests which have either taken place or for which we have corroborated multiple polling, 5 to be exact. Gingrich is therefore an also-ran.

Paul has received top-tier showings also in way less than half of those contests, 7 to be exact. Paul is therefore also an also-ran.

And Santorum has received top-tier showings in over half of those contests, 17 to be exact. He is therefore a viable challenger.


61.... Fox coverage of elections has gotten really bad. CNN much better. Hannity is still stuck on Reverend Wright and if I hear him say Dems keep saying Reps want dirty air and dirty water and want to push grandma over the cliff I am going to throw up like Santy.

Let Britt Hume and Charles take over for Hanntiy. Dump dumb Greta at 10:00 as well. Fox is losing its brand and is coming off as mental light weights because of Hannity, Greta and Bill O'Reilly.


James from TX, What you're forgetting is that In states that had this small of a vote comparable to Puerto Rico, Maine for example to numbers of votes were the same, Low turnout, but the percentage held the same nonetheless.

I am arguing that if it was the same vote margin Romney would of held it by the same unshakable lower percent of 83%.

If you have studied advanced Variable calculus inversion value. Which hold that in layman terms, It does not matter the total object, or in this case vote total, the percentage will hold by being homogeneous as the precincts showed they only deviated by 2% from all the precincts that did vote. This tells be it is safe to assume this.

For those who might be math wiz's, you will understand this equation. sqrt{(1-\sin^2(u))} = \cos(u)

Take away: Romney won in all regional Puerto Rico areas by no more than a deviation of 0 to 2 % points.


They were even praising George W. Bush (ironic coming from the liberal media), saying how good access they got with Bush both in 2000/2004 when he was running and as president.


FOX has been part of the not Romney team this cycle but at least Brit Hume, probably the best guy who was ever on that network with the possible exception of Tony Snow, gets it.

>>"It's almost politically incorrect these days to say that Romney is winning. The fact is Romney is winning, and he is winning pretty big. Now, anything can happen in politics. Straight-line projections are very dangerous and I'm not making any predictions but I think the road ahead for any other candidate is exceedingly diffcult and the effort to deny him a majority looks like a long-shot as well," Brit Hume said on the Panel Plus version of "FOX News Sunday."

Given that this is a proportional race, Romney is winning huge. It's just the media and the not Romneys who don't understand or can't bring themselves to tell the truth.



Newt (Moonbase) .... is the grouch.... the grinch

Ricky ..... constantly has his panties in a wad and whines constantly (santy panties)

Paul .... well... he is just Paul



Your math in your analysis is wrong. If you look at North Carolina, you have Romney winning 25 delegates but you increased his total by 125. Check it out again.

5/8 Indiana


Romney 15 — Total 884

Santorum 31 — Total 382

5/8 North Carolina


Romney 25 — total 1,009

Santorum 30 — Total 412

None the less, it points out that Romney should still make it to 1044 with room to spare.


That Drudge headline is priceless. Drudge has gone to bat for Mitt over and over and over again. And consider too that Drudge gets about 33 million hits a day, or 1 billion per month. That is huge.

I want to see how many views that youtube clip gets. Right now it's just over 7000


Another point about Illinois.

RCP shows Romney's lead has gone from 4% to 6% to 9% to 15% over the past few weeks. ARG shows it at 14%, right near what PPP has it as.

And in the PPP poll, it says that 9% of folks had already voted and that Romney leads among those, 48-30%. An 18% lead among the 9% of folks who already voted, and a 14-15% lead among those that hadn't.

That's pretty big.



Yes, 83% is very weak. Complicated equations prove that.

By the way, Nancy Pelosi got 80% of the vote in her San Francisco district in 2010. She must be getting pretty weak with the Republican getting 15%. I don't think she'll make it another term.


Unfortunately, Pablo is right in 15. It's about the money.

52. KG is right too. People like Limbaugh, Levin, Palin, etc. all know where the bread is buttered--a lot of anti-Mormon listeners in the south.


Mitt smacking Santy Panties around a little today in IL

Ricky will be whinning tonight on FOX I am sure!


James from TX, you look very sad, I am sorry you feel so intimated by my matcheitcal skills and observations of the available data I use to prove my point.

Conservative Independent

#76 I have lived in Illinois most of my life. Primaries out here and even elections traditionally have had low turn outs. I'm glad that Romney decided to spend so much time out here because he has created a lot of enthusiasm. None of us knows what happened downstate in the churches yesterday. Romney will win and I will be thrilled if it's by 14-15%. Romney's Illinois team has done everything they could possibly do to get out the vote even calling about turning in absentee ballots. Romney will win Illinois but the question will be by how much.


James from TX, you look very sad, I am sorry you feel so intimated by my mathematical skills and observations of the available data I use to prove my point.


The real “test” in this race isn’t Mitt Romney winning yet another primary. The real test is for Santorum and Gingrich: which do they love more – themselves, or the country and the party?

ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON! Grinch and Sanctimonious are self centered arsholes!

Conservative Independent

#79 I was at that rally in Vernon Hills yesterday. Ann and Mitt are wonderful speakers in person. They really talked about hope and a lot of change. Their emphasis was on the economy and on military defense. They both made everyone there proud to be Americans. That's what has been lost under Obama.



Why would I be sad? Romney's the nominee.

By the way, are you still voting for yourself?


64 - Now that I see that you are just another irrational RomNot, I won't bother trying to have a real conversation with you anymore.

Answer me this: What percentage of delegates (the only votes that really matter) does Mitt have, and what percentage does Sanatorium have?


Please tell me the must win states for either Santorum or Gingrich? It seems these clowns can just keep losing and losing.

I really have never seen a Primary where the ENTIRE media was so against a single candidate winning in my entire life. The fact that Romney overcame just shows you how formidable he really is.

You can already sense that the race is coming to a close, even a "brokered" convention is simply going to produce Romney as the nominee. He's too far ahead in delegates and votes.

Louisiana could be the knockout punch that lets this race end a few months early, and give the GOP a chance to heal and turn their attention to the real contest ahead.


Here's a complicated, esoteric mathematical calculus: The more Mitt wins, the more Rick whines. :-)


67 - You are exactly right! And with a little luck, Romney will be the one teaching them how irrelevant they really are. The media could use a good humbling.


Romney and Santorum both beat Obama by 9 in MO.

Romney ties Obama nationally, Santorum loses by 6.


Oh and by the way, since Roemer already dropped out of the race and is running for Americans Elect, almost all of his vote is probably from people who mixed up Roemer and Romney. Fred Karger doing better than Paul can be explained by the fact that he was in PR from Tuesday to Sunday election, campaigning, and he had adds in the air, but there is no explanation for Roemer, who has averaged this far 0.1% in Republican primary, getting 2.2%. So Romney's percentage would be closer to 85% if Roemer had not been on the ballot.


James from TX, I would vote for myself, as Romney will be the nominee, but I know it won't be counted as i have not attained the age of 35. I am 3 years shy of that number. So, I plan on voting for my Grandpa instead who has more wisdom than even Romney.


#41 Fun with statistics 😉 Obama's good at that too. Anyone paying attention, though, know PR is VERY conservative, and VERY Republican.

You don't have to spin a win.

My Man Mitt 4 President

Jason what may not fit into your mathematical equation is that the average voter does not trust career politicians. Voters may have a preference of religion and vote their religion in some states, but overall America is in the decline and people would prefer to give someone new a chance. They prefer someone who does understand money, bankruptcy, jobs and (the economy). They are willing to take a chance on a stiff with smarts who has a good marriage, family who heaven forbid made a lot of money and is a Mormon. I dare say if he doesn't do what he says he will do they will find someone else in 4 years, but today in this economy voters are saying YES to they guy who loves American and works for free when he volunteers time to the Olympics, or the government.


73- I hate that movie, but that is spot on.



In most states, ballot order is random and different on every ballot. However, in Puerto Rico, they have a fixed order. Roemer won the random drawing for first place on the ballot. This may have something to do with his better showing. Mixing up Roemer and Romney may be part of it too. Frankly, I am really surprised that Paul did as poorly as he did.


#42 The only reason Santorum is still in this thing is he was too dumb to get out when he should have (circa T-Paw, Bachmann and the rest), is now the last man standing, and is still too dumb to do advanced math (addition, delegate addition, that is). And we think he can somehow balance the budget of the ship of state?

Any marketer knows you need to offer 3 price points, and the value shoppers tend to pick the middle one on autopilot. Santorum's showing is less about his strength as a candidate, and more about the consumers (voters) voting reflexivly without even thinking.

America, we can afford the best (Romney will serve for $1). We need the best (The problems we face require nothing less). Stop settling for second best (Good speechifiers, but poor leaders).

Reginald from texas

Jason, this is a vote for the President of the United States, not for Pastor in Chief.

My Man Mitt 4 President

While I love Paul message of returning to the constitution, he is not winning the election. Some voters like underdogs but most people want to be on the winning team. The wider the margin the less people vote for the losers.


Massachusetts Conservative, are you stupid? Rasmussen Reports released a current poll on Friday that showed the total reverse of your silly focus on the popular vote which is irrelevant, as it does not decide presidential election outcomes.

I might [point out to what I know you know, the all that matters in the Electoral College Vote Outcome.

The data from Rasmussen, which you yourself crow about when it shows numbers that favor Romney, shows the mile wide flaw in post in This Data.

Let us review a post from even this liberal website.

Rasmussen Core Four States 2012 Presidential Poll

Rick Santorum 48% (44%) [47%]

Barack Obama 44% (49%) [46%]

Barack Obama 46% (46%) [44%]

Mitt Romney 42% (42%) [44%]

Among Independents

Rick Santorum 56% (41%)

Barack Obama 34% (46%)

Mitt Romney 44% (40%)

Barack Obama 40% (42%)

How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as president?

Strongly approve 29% (24%)

Somewhat approve 19% (24%)

Somewhat disapprove 10% (13%)

Strongly disapprove 42% (38%)

Survey of 500 likely voters in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Virginia was conducted on March 10-15, 2012. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 percentage points. Results from the poll conducted March 3-8, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 17-22, 2012 are in square brackets.

My Man Mitt 4 President

100. How many times are you going to post or refer to ONE poll?



You have one poll, we have hundreds.

Give it up.


Massachusetts Conservative, whatever you say, I guess you like OLD POLL DATA. The little twist is this. Will these numbers hold up. Who knows. But if they do, I suspect Romney will start to tank, as Primary voters want to defeat Obama.


64, Will. You should know that I am appalled at the thought of a Santorum or Gingrich nomination, and fervently hope Romney gets the nod, for reasons which I've outlined on these pages many times in the past, and which some of you may be sick of reading! If there is any hue and cry for me to repost those reasons again here, I will be happy to repeat them (I'm not shy).

Now, delegates: The official delegate count appears at . So far 1040 delegates have been selected. Romney has won 40% of them, and Santorum has won 16% of them. In other words, Romney and Santorum together have won over half of the delegates so far.

Like I said, Romney is the front-runner and Santorum is the only viable challenger; no one else need apply.

87, Common Cents. This is not a direct answer to your question, but this answer will help you understand my perspective, I think. For Santorum to be knocked out of contention, in my opinion, he has to score top-tier in half or fewer of the contests. At the moment, he has scored top tier in 18 of the 29 contests I count (contests which have either taken place or for which we have corroborated multiple polling). In order to be knocked out of contention, one possible path would be for Romney to beat him by over 50% tomorrow and for Romney to continue doing so for the four contests after that. That's my standard.


Comparing Barack at this point to Mitt at this point is absolutely absurd. The men (if you can call Obama a man) and the circumstances are totally different.

Obama was a young, inexperienced know-nothing, half-white, half-black with no record but a lot of false promises. EVERYBODY wanted to elect the first black POTUS--especially this promising cool kid with his sonorous baritone at the teleprompter. Barack had EVERYBODY (with the exception of Hannity and people who got how bad Obama would be) on his side.

Mitt has almost no one on his side with the exception of MANY really solid endorsements. His constituency is smart, pragmatic, moral people who see he would be a good POTUS, people who embrace his success, experience and goodness, which seem to be off-putting to many.

If Mitt wins it will be because people appreciate the fact that he is the polar opposite of Obama: ie, a mature, straight-thinking, hard-working proven leader.



That is false, those unbound delegates have not been really selected yet, also RNC delegates haven't been selected during the election process, so Romney has gotten over half of the delegates that have been truly selected.


105, K.G. I confess I'm a little confused by your posting.

First, I'm not clear on the point you're trying to make when you point out that he is half-white, half-black. I may be missing something.

Secondly, I thought I had been clear on the following, but perhaps not: It is after Super Tuesday. And we are in the middle of a presidential nomination battle. There is an apparent front-runner. This is where Romney finds himself today. That is where Obama found himself in 2008.

So I proposed to compare their two situations, POLITICALLY and STRATEGICALLY. I was not comparing them as people or as political leaders (though I have made no bones about preferring Obama). So I think you missed my point, or I did not make it clearly.

And by that standard Obama, a few weeks after Super Tuesday, was in much stronger POLITICAL shape than Romney, regularly racking up wins that totaled over 50%.

Hope that clarifies what I said, or tried to say.


The party? The corrupt Republican establishment that is backing Romney? The fact is that the party does not deserve the White House. It would be business as usual and that is exactly why the special interests are backing Romney. Romney would be the same as George W Bush, Dole and George Bush. Democrats would take us over the cliff at 100 mph. Romney would take us over the cliff at 60 mph just as George W. and George Bush did. If Romney were real change, the establishment would treat him the way they treat Sarah Palin. I will not be supporting Romney and try for real reform in 2016.


106, Teemu. There are HUNDREDS of estimated delegate counts. I can't think of a more authoritative or indisputable source for a delegate count than the RNC, frankly. If you know of a more authoritative one, please feel free to point to it and make your case.


Romney/McDonnell. Brings VA and NC into the fold. FL is already red.

Electoral landslide.



RNC is fine, but if you want calculate proportions from them, it would make more sense not to count the delegates that are not allocate yet. Getting 40% is great if the max possible has been to get 70%, because unallocated caucus delegates and super delegates make up almost 30%. But just giving that 40% without the context does not give a good picture of reality.

My Man Mitt 4 President

108 That's what people said about McCain, in fact I didn't want to vote for him. However, in the end I did. We have who we have and we each legally get one vote, but if you think the United States has a better chance electing your kind of guy after 4 more years of Obama, I think you are deeply confused. Look at the damage to the constitution that he has been able to pull of in 3 + years.



If you're going to include the unbound delegates in the denominator, then you need to include the estimates of the unbound delegates in the numerator. This is all the delegates from IA, WA, MN, ND, ME, CO and WY. So include them or don't include them, but be consistent. Otherwise that 40% number does not mean anything. The official delegate counts for those states will come in April and June. So technically, they have not been determined and you could not include them in the denominator. That is why the RNC does not list them yet.


113, James from TX. No, I DO include such an estimate. And the estimate I am using is from the RNC, which is that they are ALL unbound. Are there other estimates out there that give different totals for the unbound? Sure. If I was using one of those estimates then my totals would indeed be different. I am not.


112 John McCain was the straw that broke the camel's back. I have been doing that since 1988 and I will not do it in 2012. Romney is business as usual. The fact is that the establishment Republicans are just as bad as Obama. They head in the same direction of Obama except at a slower pace. The fact is that 4 years of Obama would equal 8 years of Romney. The chice is clear. Try for a real conservative in 2016.


#107: Criggs: Of course Barack was in better shape in 2008. The point I was trying to make is the comparisons this year with these candidates are apple and oranges compared to last time. Obama had advantages last time, the racial component being one of them. If he had been a white, 1-year senator, he would have NEVER even been considered. If he had been a very black, 1-year senator, he probably would not have been considered.

But Barack was just right; remember what Biden said about Barack. Remember, that Barack originally demurred to his mentor Dashle because of Barack's lack of experience. Dashle encouraged Obama to run in 2008 BEFORE he had a record since Dashle's long voting record had ruined his own chances at the presidency.

Barack had ALL the MSM media pulling for him including Oprah. The Jeremiah Wright tapes and the black liberation theology stuff came out after it was too late for Hillary. And even people like me, who got it with the black liberation theology stuff were hoping maybe Barack would be better, smarter and more pragmatic that he's proven to be.

Mitt on the other hand has an uphill battle. (1) Barack has a record now and it will be used against him. In a way that hurts Mitt because Limbaugh et al are convinced that "anybody" can beat Barack--so let's go with the "most conservative" ie ABR.

That's been one of the reasons the Teavangelicals refuse to "settle" for Mitt; they believe someone more to their liking (not a rich Massachusetts Mormon) are just as able to beat Barack.

People twitterpated over Barack in 2008 blindly overlooked his obvious shortcomings while skeptics look under rocks to find flaws in Mitt. Mitt's had trouble winning over a large sector of the "very conservative." It would as if half of the 2008 Dems had refused to vote for black man no matter what.

So comparing wind-to-his-back Barack in 2008 to fighting-against-head-winds Mitt in 2012 are apples and oranges in my view. That's all I'm saying.

However, Barack will have his own head-winds this time around. It's called a record.


Jason, you liar! You said you were going away because you were tired of banging your head against the wall. Not cool to get us all excited like that.


116, K.G. Thank you for the clarification. I guess I thought you were disagreeing with my estimate that Obama was in stronger political shape at this point than Romney. As I understand you now, you're not really disagreeing with me on that point at all. Thank you for the clarification.


#118: Thank, criggs, for YOUR clarification.


As anticipated, we have the opportunity in CA to put Romney over the top!!!

Per the blog entry, TV political pundity is unwatchable as they scramble to poor mouth Mitt, and that includes FNS... especially disappointed in sourpuss Brit Hume...

Utah Conservative

Reading through these posts, I see that Jason has very thin skin, a tiny brain, and no common sense. What does he have going for him? Well, there is one poll that is highly dubious. And apparently he has a grandpa who is a genius, but his grandpa is not running for president.


Mississippi was a test. Romney, up in the polls, had to prove he could win the south. He didn't.


122 Yet Romney got as many delegates out of Mississippi as anyone. So the Zero net delegates Santorum got out of Mississippi won't help him catch up one bit.

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Tweets by @Racefour

Search R4'16