Wednesday, January 4, 2012

On Iowa

Well, the "votes" are in, and it looks like Governor Romney won a close one in Iowa over Senator Santorum,.  Santorum ran a classic insurgency campaign, and he did it superbly.  Iowa is tailor-made to produce someone like him, and it did not disappoint.

Trouble is, he doesn't scale up.  Watch what happens in New Hampshire.

What truly surprised me was that Ron Paul didn't do better.  I was certain he'd win.  Coming in third does not bode well for he of ill-fitting suits.

Rick Perry is toast, as is Michele Bachman.  Newt appears to be getting fired up for a scorched earth run, but he simply doesn't have the money to pull it off (being negative costs money).

No friends, things are looking mighty good for Governor Romney.  I know, I know--some of you will cry "he only got 25% of the vote".  Yes, but he did that in Iowa, which showed its colors by delivering second place to Santorum.  "He got fewer votes this time than last time in Iowa".  Yes, that's true.  But last time, he was the "conservative candidate".  He's moved to the right since.  Iowa moved farther and faster.  "But CW, it is a weak field".  Perhaps, but what made it that way?  The weakness of Chris Cristie, Mitch Daniels, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and every other White Knight who considered Barack Obama unbeatable and decided to sit this one out.  Romney never wavered, he soldiers on.  And he will win.

Get out those checkbooks, folks.  Donate to Romney for President.


NavyAustin said...

"Romney never wavered, he soldiers on. And he will win."

Win what? The GOP nomination? Likely. The general election? Hope so, but not sure.

I'm not worried about a Ron Paul independent run splitting the vote a la Perot/92 or Nader/00. I think Perry, Bachmann will dutifully fall in line.

Gingrich has the potential to go down swinging, landing some stinging blows that will energize Dems and give mainstream republicans more to kvetch about.

Obama, meanwhile, will have the troops out of Iraq, Bin Laden dead, and a bunch of stimulus money that magically will be spent this spring. And the economy isn't rosy, but it's stable-ish -- and we're accustomed to the new normal. Sucks if you made RVs in Elkhart, Indiana or are just out of college. But elsewhere, we've adjusted and the world isn't ending.

And then, there's Mitt. Being the last man standing, the second-place finisher who outlasted the flashes of Cain, Perry, Newt, Santorum and Paul is good, but a lot of people still don't know or love him. He's still the redder shade of purple half-brother of Sen Kerry. Still the vaguely smug Ivy League MBA smarter than thou that can't connect with average Joes. The CNN piece on his lack of warmth and humor may have been a hit piece, but to say that in 2011 your comedic faves are the Three Stooges does smack of being out of touch at best and a safe, defensible, tested and calculated answer at worst.

Vote Romney? Consider it done.

But give Mitt my money? Get involved with his campaign? Being the "invevitable" nominee, Mitt still hasn't made me feel he wants or needs me. Yet.

Here's hoping the kvetching stops and the excitement starts. The winner of 2012 stands to be the party of 2016 and 2020 due to a likely cyclical recovery. Too much at stake (including important SCOTUS fills, big decisions on defense, economy and infrastructure) to lose in 2012

Go Romney! (I'm still getting my damn boots I'd planned to wear for the Perry Inaugural Ball)

Tom de Plume said...

The line of the day came from the clever rascal who pointed out that Santorum got the same number of votes in Iowa as he did in his last Senate campaign.

"The Hammer" said...


The Conservative Wahoo said...

Bite your tongue, Hammer.

Sally said...

Newt is really making an ass out of himself today. These debates on Saturday night and Sunday morning are really going to be something if he keeps up the Grumpy Old Man routine.

And why is 25% among SEVEN candidates so bad?

Newer Post Older Post Home