Florida Primary Predictions

What's your prediction for the outcome of today's Florida Republican primary?

Time Magazine says Newt Gingrich is bracing for a loss and in the process of reinventing himself as a grass-roots insurgent. It says Newt is floundering because he was outstumped and outspent.

Gingrich is unlikely to get the chance to implement this vision. But he is shaking things up within his schizophrenic campaign. After skipping from message to message in recent days, he has apparently decided his best shot at knocking off Mitt Romney is to embrace Tea Party populism. And so he has reinvented himself as a grassroots gadfly, ready to dog the GOP “all the way to the convention.”

CNN says the latest polling which includes the 600,000 voters who voted early has Mitt Romney ahead. [More...]

[A]ccording to an American Research Group survey released Tuesday morning, 36% of people questioned said they already voted, and among those, Romney led former House Speaker Newt Gingrich 51% to 29%, with former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania at 12% and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas at 10%.

Overall, 43% of likely Florida Republican primary voters said they were backing Romney...with Gingrich at 31%, Santorum at 13% and Paul...at 9%. The ARG poll is the fifth survey released over the past 48 hour hours to indicate Romney holding a double digit lead over the rest of the field.

More from CNN here. Will a win in Florida cement Romney's nomination? According to CNN:

[E]ven after Florida's 50 convention delegates are claimed in the winner-take-all primary, neither candidate will have more than 10% of the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination at the August convention.

I think Newt's candidacy is history after today.

< Facial Recognition May Replace Online Passwords | Mitt Romney Wins Florida Republican Primary >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Newt is off of his meds.... (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by rise hillary rise on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:37:57 PM EST
    this is textbook mania. kinda like Charlie Sheen without the cocaine and meth. he's like a rogue hot air balloon. expect an epic crash and burn-the longer this keeps going, the bigger the implosion will be.

    You mean a hot-air Noot balloon (none / 0) (#47)
    by Towanda on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:11:52 PM EST
    like this?

    ha! (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:18:13 PM EST
    crazy funny site too - have not seen a reference to The Urantia Book for a long long time

    By God I just saw him and he's (none / 0) (#66)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 09:18:43 PM EST
    completely nuts, and he's talking about what he's going to do on his way to the inauguration ball.  He's basically got his whole first day in the White House planned out and he's giving us his itinerary.  

    Mittens will win (5.00 / 6) (#9)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:11:57 PM EST
    and then strap Newtie on the roof for the ride home. ;o)

    just please (none / 0) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 04:40:37 PM EST
    dont sing

    you can be the nominee.  really

    just stop singing.


    Newt and Mitt: thank you for your money (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:08:13 PM EST
    Now go home.

    I was blessedly away for a 4 day weekend so missed the media barrage, which I hear was unbearable.

    Water cooler conversation from my GOP co-workers today tells me Newt is toast. Descriptions bandied about ranged from "used car salesman", "space man", "pandering" to the more complimentary "worse of two evils".

    I fear he has done the impossible - made the GOP love Mitt Romney. Obama beware.

    Indeed indeed you are so right. (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:14:06 PM EST
    Newt has managed to run a significant number of Tea Party members from being ABO to being pro Romney.

    Maybe he should stick around for a while.


    Independents (none / 0) (#19)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:19:26 PM EST
    however have given a huge smackdown to Romney's Favorable ratings with them. Down to 23% now according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll.

    more (none / 0) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 04:25:14 PM EST
    than that IMO the base is not happy with what has happened to Newt.  I think this could be the beginning of the split we have been waiting for in the republican party.  the inevitable split has arrived and its name is Mitt Romney.

    Ruffian (none / 0) (#20)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:22:10 PM EST
    I'd love to have Florida say, sorry we have to be legal and have a do-over again the first week in March, and let them all come back and spend again.

    However... (none / 0) (#22)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:56:43 PM EST
    now that Romney is the pace horse again, everyone will be reminded how utterly unlikeable he is.

    By the next Brand R primary it'll be "man that Romney is a real jerk-*ff, I guess I'll vote for Newt."  Rinse and repeat.  


    I don't know.... (none / 0) (#56)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 07:08:53 PM EST
    We'll see of course.

    Exit polls quoted on Young Turks say that now 66% of florida GOP voters would be satisfied with Mitt as the candidate. I gotta believe that is better than it was a month ago. I dont get the impression that  the negative ads against him hurt him that much.

    I still think Obama will beat him though, barring some catastrophe. But I dont think the GOP base is going to stay home.


    I think you are wrong about loving Mitt Romney (none / 0) (#24)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 04:22:33 PM EST
    he may have convinced some people not to vote for Newt but that wont be because they love Mitt.

    Mitt may win tonight.  he has dumped the most epic tub of sh!t in campaign history on Newt.  he could also win the battle and lose the war because we now have the republican establishment vs republican talk radio.  with the latter feeling they have been called everything from morons to inbred in the last few days.  because they have.

    Newt is now an insurgent fighting the establishment in the eyes of many tea partiers and they are pi$$ed.  

    he has probably turned Newt from an rival in Iowa to a blood enemy in FL.  I have a feeling Newts very reason for existing now has something to do with destroying Mitt Romney.  and after tonight even if he loses he has no reason to get out of the race.  he has delegates and with no winner take all tonight that wont change much either way.
    also after FL less than 5% of delegates will have been awarded.  why get out?


    I think FL is a winner take all (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 04:59:02 PM EST
    Correct (none / 0) (#33)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:07:16 PM EST
    Even with all the shenanigans

    From Wapo

    So,to clear things up,here's where we stand:

    A new Republican National Committee rule says that no state holding its presidential contest before April is allowed to award its delegates to the national convention on a winner-take-all basis,unless it is one of the four early carve-out states (Iowa,New Hampshire,South Carolina and Nevada).

    Many states see the winner-take-all as being preferable to a proportional format,because it provides for bigger swings in the delegate race and makes their states more important. Thus,the RNC created the new rule to make it less appealing for states to move their contests earlier in the year.

    But here's the catch: Florida is already in violation of RNC rules because it moved its primary into January. And the RNC,which has already docked Florida half of its delegates for moving its primary up,says it cannot punish a state twice.

    Therefore,the states that are already in violation of RNC rules for setting their primaries too early (Florida, Arizona and Michigan) were allowed to go winner-take-all.

    from your article (none / 0) (#38)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:15:27 PM EST
    Alas, the RNC says it's not true, and Florida remains winner-take-all, at least until this situation can be hammered out at the convention.

    Which, of course (none / 0) (#73)
    by jbindc on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 09:26:06 AM EST
    Will be settled way before then when Romney wins and Newtie / Santorum drop out.

    And at least (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 09:28:14 AM EST
    The Republican Party of Florida says it's settled:

    The Republican Party of Florida thought this was all worked out: When the state made its primary early, it was penalized with a loss of half of its 100 delegates, the people who technically nominate the party's nominee at the national convention.

    And that was all.

    So RPOF decided Florida would be a winner-take-all state. The winner would get the 50 delegates. They wouldn't be proportioned by the state's 25 Congressional districts.

    "It's winner take all," said RPOF spokesman Brian Hughes. "We have a letter from the Republican National Committee's general counsel affirming that."

    I just don't think anyone is going to be (none / 0) (#57)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 07:11:27 PM EST
    paying much attention to Newt after tonight.

    I was exaggerating about the 'love', but I don't think the GOP base is likely to stay home just because of dislike for him.


    Him meaning Romney. In November. (none / 0) (#58)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 07:12:40 PM EST
    Pretty interesting article (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:19:24 PM EST
    That argues while Newt and Mitt are "unelectable", so is Obama

    It's understandable that the focus would be on Republican candidates in the midst of a GOP primary. But we shouldn't forget that the general election -- like all incumbent elections -- will largely be a referendum on Barack Obama. And, under current conditions, Obama is every bit as unelectable as the Republicans supposedly are.

    He lists why (with details):

    1) Obama is still unpopular. Almost all models of presidential elections examine presidential approval ratings (very few use challenger favorability, incidentally), as presidents rarely win many votes of those who disapprove of their performance in office. In other words, Obama probably needs to be pretty close to 50 percent approval on Election Day to secure re-election. (In 2004, George W. Bush was at 49.7 percent in the RCP Average on Election Day.)

    As of this writing, Obama's job approval in the RCP Average is 46.8 percent. For the last month, his job approval in Gallup has bounced around between 42 percent and 46 percent, averaging 44.7 percent.


    2) The economy is still a millstone. As I noted above, there has been some good economic news lately. But the flip side of this is that we've heard it before: Late 2010 and early 2011 were filled with bullish reports on the economy, as was early 2010 (remember "Recovery Summer"?).

    The bigger problem for the president is that things are improving too slowly for him to really reap the benefits.


    3) The president's domestic agenda is unpopular. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, the DNC's vice chairman, recently stated that Obama's national message "will be that he passed the health-care law, single-handedly saved the car industry, ended the wars and has had 22 months of job growth."

    Selling this will be a very difficult task. Almost two years after the health care law passed, only 37.6 percent of Americans are in favor of it, one of the lowest measurements RCP has found. The 22 months of job growth is a nice statistic, but such an argument, made vigorously, risks sounding out of touch to a public that believes that the economy is still in dire straits.

    As for the auto bailout, we haven't had much in the way of recent polling, although close to 60 percent of Americans fairly consistently opposed the bailouts when they were pending before Congress, and a January 2010 Allstate/National Journal Poll suggested only 34 percent of Americans believed the administration's actions with the auto industry had helped the economy. As for the stimulus, Obama's other major domestic achievement, in January 2010, 75 percent of Americans said they believed a majority or more of stimulus funds were wasted. Rybak doesn't mention that achievement, but Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich will.

    The only clear winner here for the president is ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The problem is, most voters don't care that much. In the past year, I couldn't find a single poll where more than 9 percent of adults named the wars as their top priority; that distinction consistently belonged to the economy.

    In other words, Obama doesn't have a major popular domestic initiative to run on. The foreign policy issues where he is strongest are of low salience. This is not where a politician wants to be nine months before Election Day.

    4) Head-to-head polling. This is of limited utility this far out, but it is worth a brief mention. Obama leads Romney by only a 47.5-45.1 margin in the RCP Average. His lead against Gingrich is large, but he's still only at 51.9 percent, about where his approval rating maxed out after bin Laden was killed.


    5) We've heard it before. Finally, most of the arguments for why the president is electable should sound vaguely familiar. They were mostly made in 2010 and offered as reasons why the election wouldn't be so bad for the Democrats.

    Obama has time to change things, for sure, but he's got an uphill battle to fight - especially if voters are in the mood to try something, ANTYHING new.

    here's a little more (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:45:47 PM EST
    (different source) from the same author - he gets some things right, but it should be noted that Sean Trende is a conservative political analyst who sees Obama as an "extreme liberal":
    Bill Clinton . . . bequeathed to his successors a Democratic Party rebranded as the party of balanced budgets and fiscal rectitude. . . . Clinton's efforts to rebrand the party set the stage for the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006, as well as the election of Barack Obama. This point is critical: Barack Obama's coalition was not novel. It wasn't even that broad. It was a narrower version of Clinton's. Obama's election saw the final collapse of Democratic voting strength among Democrats in Appalachia and in those states settled by Appalachian Scots-Irish, areas that had been voting Democratic since Andrew Jackson. He was the first Democrat since Lewis Cass in 1848 not to carry Floyd County, Kentucky, and the first ever to lose Knott County. For perspective, in 1996 Clinton carried Floyd County by 45 points and Knott County by 55 points. Even George McGovern carried these counties by double digits. . . . Judis and Teixeira's emerging-Democratic-majority theory was written in the immediate aftermath of the Clinton presidency, and was expressly dependent--though many chose to overlook this--on the Democrats remaining only a moderately progressive party. Few seemed to question what moving away from this "progressive centrism" would mean for this coalition.

    There was a "Recovery Summer"? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Towanda on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:05:55 PM EST
    Who knew?

    I don't (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by lentinel on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 04:46:10 PM EST
    know which of these wonderful candidates to root for.

    Romney has a presidential jaw. And a Presidential hair cut. He must have some degree of intelligence but he sounds stupid.
    On the other hand, Gingrich has gnarled lips and very shifty eyes. He is very stupid some people think he is an intellectual. Reminds me of the late Mr. Buckley, the darling of PBS.

    Perry, Cain, Trump - all gone.
    They wuz me foist cherses.

    OMG someone just call it please (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:08:16 PM EST
    And get these commercials off my local TV.  Most pathetic commercials ever when Newt, Santorum, or Mitt attempt to do the President gazing into the distance stance.  Just make it stop.

    Ball park? (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by BTAL on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:53:35 PM EST
    How about we shoot for the "not above 8%" if the stimulus is passed?

    That would have been a win for the country and your candidate if he had met that promise/expectation.

    Obama owns every .1% over 8% for every month its there.  That's the sucky part of leadership, people actually believe and hold you to your words.

    Thread cleaned (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:06:05 PM EST
    of off topic comments.

    ABG, stop hijacking threads. Either put your off-topic comments in an open thread or stop commenting. This thread is about Florida, it's not for you to post "queries" about other topics.

    as you wish (none / 0) (#63)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:16:19 PM EST
    I never predict elections in ... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:14:56 PM EST
    Florida.  ;)

    Just sayin'.

    I'll go with PPP (none / 0) (#2)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:15:16 PM EST
    which says Mitt 39, Newt 31.

    I predict that the winner of Florida (none / 0) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:42:58 PM EST
    will be smote by Obama without Obama even being winded.  Which is a damn shame, because Obama deserves to be slightly winded explaining a couple of things.  But talking to the voices in your head crazy has never been able to hold mostly sane accountable for mostly sane's actions :)

    Romney by 9 (none / 0) (#5)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:45:13 PM EST

    Romney Dollar Figure (none / 0) (#6)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:58:11 PM EST
    out today. He has spent more in the first four states than McCain did through all the primaries in 2008.

    I've still only seen one Romney commercial in Florida that mentions Romney. The other 30-40 I've seen are attack ads. That's obviously the full time go to method now to win with the GOP.


    This is peanuts (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:20:01 PM EST
    As to what is about to be spent by both sides bombarding us with stuff in Obama v. Romney for the next 9 1/2 months.

    So glad I live in a battleground state.  Not.


    And my apologies jbindc (none / 0) (#7)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 01:59:25 PM EST
    that shouldn't have been linked to your prediction comment.

    The State of Florida reaps a bonanza (none / 0) (#11)
    by Anne on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:41:50 PM EST
    from monies spent on advertising, and on the care and feeding of the phalanx of campaign workers and media types; probably the best thing to come out of the Florida primary - certainly better than whichever of the candidates actually garners the most votes.

    Newt appears to be in a semi-florid state, and I predict that his head may actually explode on the air when the results are in - which may be followed by the first-ever, on-air (and not on one of the p@rn channels) orgasm by a political candidate - Romney - thrilled because he knows that the more volatile Newt is, the crazier he talks, the more he eases Mitt's path to the nomination, and closes the door on even being considered as anyone's running mate [look out, Callista - a Newtie with a bruised and battered ego is a Newtie who may feel constrained by his marriage vows and handcuffed by his newfound commitment to Catholicism. Don't say we didn't warn you!]

    The losers?  Us - there's no way another 9+ months of this doesn't constitute cruel and unusual punishment.

    But, hey - I bet alcohol sales go way up before this is all over!

    I can't say that I can track everything you wrote (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:52:31 PM EST
    But it doesn't matter, you had me at a genuinely repulsive candidate will win the Florida GOP primary

    I guess newt's saying something (none / 0) (#14)
    by CST on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:56:26 PM EST
    about mitt eliminating kosher foodbanks while governor of MA, or something.

    He did veto funding for kosher nursing home facilities while governor.  It was overridden by the legislature though.  Like most of the cr@p he tried to pull.


    Because the pack was even loonier (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:11:34 PM EST
    before this, I would like to apologize for not showing appropriate sympathy to anyone who survived the Republican primary campaign commercials before I did.  I had no idea what you guys were going through.  I'm sorry.

    Today (none / 0) (#13)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:53:44 PM EST
    Today will be known at my house as "Florida Primary and I Transplanted My Indoor Lettuce Day"...


    Which is more important?

    Let's just say, I won't be putting the Florida Primary results in my plant journal....

    Prediction: Mittens will win by a crate.  And nobody will care in a week.

    Question.... (none / 0) (#23)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 03:58:31 PM EST
    does Fla really reap an advertising windfall of cashish?  I would think advertising firms and the networks make the real cash off the deal, and the corporate office is out of state.

    Local media buys (n/t) (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Towanda on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:13:41 PM EST
    The right answer (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 07:05:53 PM EST
    in few words is always welcome.

    Are the local outlets gouging? (none / 0) (#72)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 08:30:21 AM EST
    I've never seen a local affiliate go dark with advertising, if it wasn't "1% for Romney" buying commercials somebody else would, no?  

    I must be missing something.


    Can (none / 0) (#29)
    by lentinel on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 04:47:50 PM EST
    one smoke cashish?

    Not directly...n/t ;) (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 08:27:11 AM EST
    Wow, this a cogent statement (none / 0) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:15:49 PM EST
    I want to give it a five.


    MT (none / 0) (#42)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:27:39 PM EST
    [High Five]

    Numbers (none / 0) (#43)
    by Addison on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:28:45 PM EST
    Mitt 43, Newt 29, Rick 16, Ron 11

    That's what I said last night. The prediction bets on Santorum doing 3-4% better than the polls, as people run from Newt but don't quite want to go with Mitt. But I don't think that's actually going to happen. I'll stick by these numbers, but Mitt looks like he's gonna be getting 3% more than this, and Rick 3% less.

    I think the difference between this (none / 0) (#44)
    by Anne on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 05:48:43 PM EST
    election season and 2008 is that unlike 2008, we now have a context for assessing Obama - he has a record that's out there for all to see and hold up against what he said and promised then.

    But, what I'm seeing is the same kind of 2008 support being resurrected, but that now seems to have to divorce itself from that record, or put a lot of spin on it, and there's a high level of anger directed at anyone who dares to say or do anything that harshes their mellow.

    I mean, what do you say to people who just flat out tell you that it doesn't matter to them what Obama does, whether they like what he's doing or are opposed to it, because they will vote for him no matter what?  

    "Okay" seems to be about the only thing one can say, and then change the subject to puppies or ponies or something that everyone can feel all warm and fuzzy about.

    4 years ago (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:16:08 PM EST
    i think the anger was about not jumping on board the Love Train (& about a not inconsiderable level of misogyny)

    this year i think the anger masks real, clammy fear

    i can understand that because, bad as Obama & the Democrats have been, i'd rather have Democrats than the GOP in charge of all the agencies of the executive branch - that, not the Supreme Court or anything else, is my reason for supporting Obama's re-election

    i won't actually vote for him unless California threatens to turn red OR Obama himself starts talking about, well, change i can believe in - a good kind of change


    A lot of people here ... (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:38:39 PM EST
    had Obama pegged accurately back in '08.  

    The real Obama was hiding in plain sight.  If you bothered to look.  But most didn't bother.  They preferred the smoke and mirrors.


    What will be interesting to see is how (none / 0) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 06:48:16 PM EST
    Romney does in the panhandle.

    yeah (none / 0) (#67)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 06:34:24 AM EST
    he lost the pan handle.  They want a conservative, particularly on religious matters.  That's going to be a big issue for Obama in November.

    Looks like Romney won the Miami-Ft Lauderdale (none / 0) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 07:09:38 AM EST
    and Tamapa areas and Newt took everything else except for one county in the panhandle. I'd guess that was the Pensacola area.

    Looks like my theory of forgiveness of Newt by the religious Right is holding up.


    Nothing to "forgive" (none / 0) (#75)
    by Yman on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 12:12:47 PM EST
    Actually, Mitt took the lower 2/3 of Florida - with the exception of a cluster of 5 counties in central FL east of Sarasota, plus 3 counties in the panhandle.

    But more importantly, they have no need to "forgive" Newt, ...

    ... since their hypocritical standards of morality don't apply to fellow Republicans.


    Romney win (none / 0) (#59)
    by loveed on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 07:42:52 PM EST
    the leaderships wins. Repub. voters lose.
     58% of repubs. voter not happy with either. The repub. voters still don't like Romney. And don't feel he can beat Obama.
     Newt is such a flawed candidate, it's amazing the large support he has. It reflects on Romney. Per fox news almost 40% of Romney voters wants someone else. Newt won the conservative vote.
     The repub. leadership reminds me of the dems. leadership in 08. they think the party will fall in line. We will see.
     Why is the news media and the repub. leadership pushing for Newt to quit? 95% of the delegates remain. This also reminds me of 08.
     Romney will probably loose the south,and Newt will win. Unless Newt drops out, this might go to the convention. But the repubs. still will have 2 flawed candidates. And the repubs. voter are not happy.

    Very good point (none / 0) (#62)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:15:17 PM EST
    This is a mirror of 2008.

    Then as now, many want the losing candidate to quit for the good of the party and to avoid months of fighting amongst the party.

    And they are right.  All of us want newt to go far because we want to see them candidate who wins damaged.

    The GOP wanted Hillary to go far because they wanted Obama as damaged as possible.

    When those here wonder why Newt is being asked to carry on a fight he would lose, we have only to look at 2008 for our answer:

    Cold hard reality takes a back seat when the candidate losing is someone you really like or the candidate winning is someone you really hate.

    The GOP race ended tonight, and every day newt and santorum stay in is a benefit to the dems.

    If newt, santorum and Paul put policy over ego, they'd drop out tonight.


    The difference being, of course, ... (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Yman on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:51:58 PM EST
    When those here wonder why Newt is being asked to carry on a fight he would lose, we have only to look at 2008 for our answer:

    Cold hard reality takes a back seat when the candidate losing is someone you really like or the candidate winning is someone you really hate.

    The GOP race ended tonight, and every day newt and santorum stay in is a benefit to the dems.

    If newt, santorum and Paul put policy over ego, they'd drop out tonight.

    ... none of that applied in 2008.


    Yes, a flawed candidate continued in 2008 (none / 0) (#65)
    by observed on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 09:00:36 PM EST
    all the way to the White House.
    Your point?

    except (none / 0) (#68)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 06:41:23 AM EST
    Hillary was the winning candidate.  Had the DNC followed it's own rules, all the paid off super delegates in  the world couldn't have "won" the nomination for Obama.  Hillary was the choice of the people and the vote total winner.  

    Oh well, never trust the voters is the new bi-partisan motto I guess.


    I'm ready to post my prediction (none / 0) (#61)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:11:51 PM EST
    now.  Is that ok?

    lol (none / 0) (#69)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 06:43:24 AM EST