Althouse: "Mitt Romney won Saturday’s nonbinding caucuses in Washington State, handing him a symbolic victory..."

March 3, 2012

"Mitt Romney won Saturday’s nonbinding caucuses in Washington State, handing him a symbolic victory..."

"... in his quest for the Republican nomination as he heads into the critical 'Super Tuesday; contests just three days away."

27 comments:

Jana said...: I was expecting so many more Ron Paul supporters at my metro Seattle-area caucus today. It was mostly a lot of sedate Mitt Romney supporters, with a few Santorum stickers here and there.; 3/3/12, 9:35 PM
edutcher said...: A win is a win is a win.

Since Captain Tin Foil came in second, does that make him the new challenger?; 3/3/12, 9:39 PM
Andy said...: This is going to make it even harder for Republican rubes to find a way to prevent the elites from making Romneybot the nominee.; 3/3/12, 9:45 PM
Tyrone Slothrop said...: Andy R. said...
This is going to make it even harder for Republican rubes to find a way to prevent the elites from making Romneybot the nominee.

No worries, Andy. We could nominate Bullwinkle J. Moose and still defeat The One.; 3/3/12, 9:51 PM
Andy said...: We could nominate Bullwinkle J. Moose and still defeat The One.

Then why is the number one reason people say the Republicans should nominate Romney is because of electability? Why do people say not to support Perry/Cain/Bachmann/Paul/Santorum/etc. because of electability?

The over-riding message of this primary is that the Republicans are worried about Obama and the number one concern needs to be who stands the best chance against him. Which makes sense, because there aren't any other good reasons for the Republican rubes to go along with Romneybot.; 3/3/12, 9:55 PM
Tyrone Slothrop said...: Well, Andy, I don't know how to explain this to you if you don't get it already, but it's kind of the point of primaries to nominate the most electable candidate, don't you agree?

By the way, what motivates you to use such intentionally offensive language? Republican rubes? I don't call you a Democrat dickhead, although you clearly are one.; 3/3/12, 10:18 PM
crosspatch said...: I think what is more amazing is what happened in the Washington Statehouse yesterday:

http://www.washingtonstatewire.com/home/14193-backfire_%E2%80%93_senate_democrats%E2%80%99_effort_to_pass_a_partisan_budget_results_in_takeover_from_the_middle.htm

Absolutely amazing!; 3/3/12, 10:19 PM
write_effort said...: Seems to me Mitt Romney's entire campaign strategy is to lie. Lie now, lie later. As a Dem I had no opinion of him coming into this campaign. Still, what choice does the GOP have? Santorum and Gingrich will mire them in the mud of social and personal issues all the way down the ticket.; 3/3/12, 10:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Write -- How about hope and change, though? How about that truth that Obama laid on you?

And how about Obama's awesome truth that he was going to cut the deficit? Tell us about how that was not a lie.

I mean, you are just sad, dude. Your mind is mush.; 3/3/12, 10:27 PM
Jason said...: Im hoping Romney seals this on Tuesday. Its time for the general election season to get going.; 3/3/12, 10:31 PM
Andy said...: Tyrone 2: "We could nominate Bullwinkle J. Moose and still defeat The One."

Tyrone 1: "but it's kind of the point of primaries to nominate the most electable candidate"

If anyone could beat Obama, why be concerned about electability? Why not vote for the most honest candidate? Or the most conservative one? Or the most principled one?

On the one hand, conservatives here are fond of saying anyone could beat Obama. Then they say that everyone needs to vote for Romney because he is the most electable and stands the best chance of beating Obama. Do you really not understand the contradiction?

And not all Republicans are rubes, just some of them. How else should I describe the people who are supporting Santorum and think there is any chance they will be allowed to pick frothy as the nominee?; 3/3/12, 10:31 PM
edutcher said...: Tyrone Slothrop said...

Well, Andy, I don't know how to explain this to you if you don't get it already, but it's kind of the point of primaries to nominate the most electable candidate, don't you agree?

The Demos really skipped that one last time. If the markets hadn't crashed, they'd be stuck with him in the Senate forever.

Andy R. said...

And not all Republicans are rubes, just some of them.

From the biggest rube of all.

PS Seven, don't forget the masthead of Zero's campaign website, "I'm asking you to believe".

Nothing about thinking, however.

I guess that was a kind of truth.; 3/3/12, 10:36 PM
Anonymous said...: not all Republicans are rubes, just some of them

Not all leftists are anti-religious bigots and ass clowns, just some of them. Definitely Andy. How does it feel to be a bigot, worse than any racist? Are you proud of your bigotry? Ass clown.; 3/3/12, 10:37 PM
Jason said...: On the one hand, conservatives here are fond of saying anyone could beat Obama. Then they say that everyone needs to vote for Romney because he is the most electable and stands the best chance of beating Obama. Do you really not understand the contradiction?

I believe Santorum could beat Obama. But I also believe Romney is a more electable candidate. There is a difference. Its not a contradiction.; 3/3/12, 10:41 PM
Jason said...: ...and let me just add that you could look at Andy's statement from the Dem point of view back in 2008. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both would have beaten John McCain. The Dems chose their most electable candidate.; 3/3/12, 10:43 PM
Anonymous said...: I believe Santorum could beat Obama.

Santorum has consistently out-polled Obama nationally.

It doesn't occur to bigoted and sadly stupid Andy that Republicans support Romney because they support Romney. Like me, they see Romney as the best candidate. He is best for the economy. He is a decent person of obviously solid character. He has been a governor who worked with people who disagree with him.

Andy is mystified by Republicans. This is because he is a stupid, anti-religious bigot, worse than any diehard racist.; 3/3/12, 10:44 PM
write_effort said...: SM, Dude. Romney would lie about the color of the sky if need be. All campaigns are allowed a percentage of lying and whitewash. MR has far exceeded his percentage.; 3/3/12, 10:57 PM
Tyrone Slothrop said...: Seven Machos said...

It doesn't occur to bigoted and sadly stupid Andy that Republicans support Romney because they support Romney. Like me, they see Romney as the best candidate. He is best for the economy. He is a decent person of obviously solid character. He has been a governor who worked with people who disagree with him.

This is exactly the way I see it. It is really that simple. Santorum's a good guy, but polarizing. Newt's a great idea man, but a poor leader. Ron Paul is--Ron Paul. I will vote for whomever is the Republican nominee. I just hope it's Mitt.; 3/3/12, 11:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Romney would lie about the color of the sky if need be. All campaigns are allowed a percentage of lying and whitewash. MR has far exceeded his percentage.

We could spend an entire graduate course parsing this richly absurd statement for its hackery.

But, life is short, so just a couple points.

1. It is impossible to tell a lie greater than hope and change combined with Obama's farcical promises to reduce the debt and deficit.

2. What does it even mean that candidates are allowed to lie? What body allows it? Who determines this percentage?

You are a goofball. Your thoughts, such as they are, are a jumble of confused artifice. I urge you to educate yourself.; 3/3/12, 11:03 PM
crosspatch said...: I'm for Romney. I could have been a Pawlenty guy early on. Next cycle we will have a great crop of Republicans and who knows, Romney might turn out to be a great President. The arguments I am hearing against Romney are pretty much the same ones I was hearing against Reagan in '76 and '80.

Conservatives didn't care much for Reagan even in his first couple of years in the White House. What got Reagan through was that he held up the average American as his hero and did it in such a way that we actually believed he meant it. He believed in *us* and we responded to that. Listen to his speeches, particularly his first inauguration speech. Even when pundits didn't like him, he struck a chord with the average voters and we didn't do what the pundits said we were going to do or that we should do.

Romney hasn't found that angle yet. Maybe he is just too much of a business nerd to see it. He doesn't need Newt's fire and brimstone, but he needs Reagan's "main street heroes" angle.; 3/3/12, 11:13 PM
shiloh said...: Bullwinkle J. Moose

Rocket J. Squirrel

Willard mittens Rombot

mittens ~ mittens ~ mittens!; 3/3/12, 11:53 PM
Revenant said...: I still do not understand the point of nonbinding caucuses.; 3/4/12, 3:13 AM
Carnifex said...: You D's and R's are funny. All politicians lie. They lie to their families, they lie to their voters, they lie to their supporters. And they leave YOU to lie to each other about the other guy lying.

Can you handle the truth?

The truth is we are fucked. Obama and the D's are an unmitigated disaster, for the economy, for energy, for foreign policy, you can't name one success that the D's have done since Obama has been in office. You can point to a lot of failures, and places where they have actively hurt America, but no successes.

The R's are a disaster too. Even when they do get control we just implode at a slower rate. "Vote for me, I suck less" is not a winning strategy. They had the opportunity to really make the D's come out and say what they stood for, Communism and baby murder, but instead we get a crying Boehner caving in to pressure to keep spending like there is no tomorrow.

Well there is no tomorrow, the bill has come due. If you people would get your head out of your ass we might save this country, but you're too worked up about your penis size to realize that Washington DC is the problem... Not the people...It's the D's and the R's, it's the incumbents, stupid.

So, Andy R, go vote for Obama, get four more years of crony capitalism, and appeasing mideast dictators, and muslim terorists. And more TSA body searches of 3 yo children, and spydrones flying over your house, and your phonecalls being listened too, and your web postings searched, because if you don't toe the party line, why, you must be either a terrorist, a racist, or more than likely, both.

And Seven Machos, yes lets vote for Mittens, who wholly endorsed Obama trying to co-opt private insurance. And inflicted it on the people of Massachusetts. And then has the audacity, the sheer hutzpah to try and frame it as it's different because it's just one state, not the whole country. Or any moderate R who has voted for extending the debt ceiling just a few more times. Or voted to bail out one more bank, or one more Wall street company, or one more worthless piece of crap federal agency like the NEA, or the EPA, or the TSA.

Why would seemingly intelligent people throw into this stupid debate? Both parties suck. Both parties lie. Both parties care only for one thing, the party.

That's why when a real maverick comes along they don't have a friggin' chance. Just ask Sarah Palin. Or Allen West.

I will give the R's one thing. They have more people willing to buck the system. The D's are only about one thing. More power to the people who have power.; 3/4/12, 6:36 AM
Cedarford said...: Good win for Romney.
Think he will take a few losses in Jesusland next Tuesday (Georgia, Tennessee, and OK where the evangelical Fundies rule the roost). Newt will have 1 win, Saint Torum 2.

But Romney will take Idaho, N Dakota, Vermont, Mass, Wyoming, Virginia, and likely Ohio.

And the people in Jesusland, like black welfare Mommas, really have no where else to go. They will dutifully file in to vote for the Republican same as black welfare mommas board the church bus and vote 95% Democrat at the polls. No one believes that the evangelical fundies will hate the idea of Romney more than Obama and stay home, or prefer Obama's militant black liberation church creed over a nice heretic like Romney.

Romneys challenge will be with other groups - moderates, independents, hispanics, Ron Pauls libertarian backers that want no more Neocon nation-building adventures - after America got sucked into 9 wars since Reagan left office.

PS - Nothing is more laughable than Saint Torum and Newt calling Romney the DC establishment candidate and themselves the rebel outsiders. Saint Torum has 20 years inside the Beltway as a Senate mucky muck and a private influence peddlar making a million plus a year from his accessibility to open the doors for money. Newt is worse. 30 years inside the Beltway as a pol and influence peddlar, making 100 million as an unregistered Lobbyist since he quit his seat in the House.; 3/4/12, 7:55 AM
PaulV said...: Republicans have not been so excited about voting since 1994. Bad news for democrats. Clinton made an about face after defeat of HillaryCare, Obama did not learn from that lesson.; 3/4/12, 7:59 AM
Cedarford said...: Carniflex - And Seven Machos, yes lets vote for Mittens, who wholly endorsed Obama trying to co-opt private insurance. And inflicted it on the people of Massachusetts. And then has the audacity, the sheer hutzpah to try and frame it as it's different because it's just one state, not the whole country.

The difference is called the 10th Amendment, Carniflex.

Romney and Paul want the voters of the States free to craft their own solutions. That is what happened in Massachusetts. It is approved of there 3 to 1 and had bipartisan contribution to the plan. Neither side got what they wanted. Romney warned all the bells and whistles the Democrats wanted would make it cost more than it should.

And rabid people against the madate - mainly the blue hairs and those already in a nice private insurance program they think of as their due have failed to come up with a good argument about how they would address "Free Riders" paying nothing and passing their costs on to others.; 3/4/12, 8:10 AM
PaulV said...: Cedarford,
Health insurance was becoming unsubstainable in Massachusetts because it was a must issue state. That sorry state of affairs existed befoe MR bacame governor. Your lack of historical knowledge is reflected in your opinion. A reform was necessary and the democrat controlled legislature was difficult to deal with. After 50 vetoes overridden by the legislature the fault is not Romney's/; 3/4/12, 9:04 AM