Jan 04 2012

Turmoil In Iowa

Published by at 9:27 am under 2012 Elections,All General Discussions

As I predicted yesterday, Iowa has really shaken up the GOP primary and demonstrated how weak Romne is. In a true surprise result, Rick Santorum has jumped to the head of the ‘anybody but Romney’ pack and tied the former Massachusetts Governor in the Iowa caucuses:

Romney won 30,015 votes, compared with 30,007 for Santorum, out of 122,255 cast.

Each of the men won 25 percent of the vote and proclaimed victory.

Ron Paul was third, followed by Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and Jon Huntsman.

That 8 vote winning margin means nothing in this non-binding caucus. What is important is how my predictions from yesterday proved to be accurate:

Whoever wins will win by such a small margin it will be seen as the one who was most popular among all the bad alternatives. It hopefully will not be Romney (Obama-lite)

Absolutely true in the sense we have no clear winner. And a tie is not a win. Romney would be crazy to try and play it as a win (it would show another pol who is deaf to voter concerns). Santorum is the latest to hold the mantle of ‘anybody but Romney’. Gingrich, Perry, Bachman and Cain all played the role. We are truly sifting through the list of bad options to find the least bad.

Romney’s total support (win or lose) will be a third of the combined “anyone but Romney” vote, continuing to illustrate how little support the man has among conservatives.

Again, absolutely true. Romney got 25% of the vote. So did Santorum. But the ‘anybody but Romney’ tally is 75% to Romney’s 25%. 25 is exactly one 3rd of 75%. The head wind against Romney among conservatives (fiscal and social) and tea party/libertarian voters is enormous. It will still be there in South Carolina, and may be building in New Hampshire

The GOP will look like a weak and possibly worthless alternative to Obama

Yep. Santorum, like all the other ‘anybody but Romney’ candidates before him, is weak in a lot of ways. His obsession with gay marriage is his Achilles’ Heal (another politician wanting to use the government to tell us all what to think, what is good or bad, etc). He has little organization and when the lights hit him, he will begin to stumble.

But a new dynamic is going to start up to help him – the drop outs. Perry and Bachman should be close to dropping out this week (Bachman maybe within hours). They know their presence in debates and primaries is only diluting the conservative cause. When they do drop out the anti-establishment conservative masses will probably go to Santorum.

I know, everyone says its Newt, but its clearly not Newt – as shown in Iowa. Newt’s job is to continue to tear down Romney so he can’t grab momentum. He will play the spoiler from 3rd place.

I get a lot of comments about how Romney is better than Obama, and I am not sure I buy it. Romney is Obama-lite. He thinks ONLY in terms of government solutions (see Romneycare). He has naively bought into the Catastrophic Global Warming mythology (as did Newt). He is not for the dramatic change required to reign in the Imperial DC.

I doubt his Supreme Court candidates will be any better the Bush the First’s moderate selections – as opposed to W’s selections and priorities which were as or more conservative than Reagan’s. George W Bush was willing to push to the right as far as it made sense to go without imploding his political capitol. I argue his two terms brought in more conservative wins than even Reagans.

  • He stopped the development of embryonic stem cell lines, but realized the genie that was out of the bottle could not be returned so he let the private research continue, but without federal funding. Not a bad compromise.
  • He pushed through massive tax cuts many times over, and kept them in place.
  • He deployed the first successful health care program that relied on free market competition (the Medicare/Medicaid drug program) as proof free market solutions could save money over government managed health care (a success only few understand since the GOP establishment in DC called it a failure – which it is not).
  • He did submit balanced budgets (the GOP Congress blew the bank).

I don’t think Romney would be much better than Obama, because a GOP Congress would be hesitant (or unwilling) to challenge a GOP President and his moderate ways. As if to underscore this concern, it seems McCain is going to come out and endorse Romney this week. And I am not sure Romney can beat Obama since he is so close to Barack. He hardly seems like enough of a option to create an up-swelling of voters willing to brace all to get to the polls. He is a deflating candidate in my mind.

Again, a GOP Congress using Obama as the epitome of liberal madness over 4 years of investigations into his failures would be educational – and set the stage for a real outsider to run in 2016.


34 responses so far

34 Responses to “Turmoil In Iowa”

  1. WWS says:

    I agree with a strong stand against abortion, but this view is just nuts. Imagine this quote played over and over on every channel if Santorum were nominated: (which is exactly what will happen)

    “One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country.” And also, “Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that’s okay, contraception is okay. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

    – Rick Santorum, last October

    Romney’s not great, but he’s the only one left in the race who’s not a total loon. I used to be a Perry fan, but if Perry performed that badly in the primaries he was bound to blow it in any national race. Pawlenty proved he had no nerve when he dropped out early. I’m now convinced that all Cain wanted to do was sell books and have a lot of fun on his campaign money’s dime, which is why he’s back out there traveling again. He never wanted to be President, he wanted to be a rock star just like the idiot who’s in office now. Newt will always destroy himself at the last minute, he can’t help it, it’s part of his character. Bachman’s out, Hunstman should be running in the Dem primaries, not the GOP. Ron Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney over John McCain and thinks our troops are evil thugs, ’nuff said about him.

    None of the others – Palin, Christie, Jeb Bush, several other names – has been willing to do the hard work of actually building a campaign staff and doing a serious run. It is hard work, and the people who haven’t been willing to do it don’t deserve our support, either.

    I do wish it hadn’t come down to Romney as the last viable choice – but there it is. He’s the last man standing.

  2. lurker9876 says:

    One concern with Mitt (in regards to what MSM will do to him) is his religion.

    Ron Paul supporters don’t care about his baggage, much like the Obama supporters not caring about his baggage. So Ron Paul will still get a few votes.

  3. jan says:

    The issue of abortion will rule the airwaves should Santorum take the nomination. Social issues will be dissected rather than the real issues of the day, such as jobs, the economy, Iran, over-regulation, etc. Santorum will basically offer a wonderful distraction away from Obama’s abysmal domestic/foreign policy record to divisive Roe vs Wade arguments in deciding who will be elected.

    That would indeed be sad.

  4. Redteam says:

    “If Obama did that people would rightfully be raising alarm bells about us become a 3rd world dictatorship.”

    That certainly applies to Obama’s no recess appointments. He should be impeached for that. It is a high crime.

    The congress should vote to not fund that office that those people were ‘appointed’ (and I use that word loosely) to. Congress can do that, but they won’t. That’s why all of them should be voted out.

  5. Layman1 says:

    Hi AJ:

    Did you like the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill that was passed in the House? Reid killed it in the Senate. Even if he had allowed a vote and it passed, Obama would veto it.

    So do you really think that any of these weak GOP candidates would veto it? Even Romney? Of course not.

    The key is going to be getting conservatives to take over the Senate, strengthening the House, and then supporting whomever the GOP nominee is so he can sign the bills that Obama and Reid are blocking.

  6. lurker9876 says:

    Congress cannot do anything to the new CFPB. Congress cannot even vote for or against funds for this new board. It’s being funded by the Federal Reserve at about 12 percent of the budget…indefinitely.


    Excerpted the bottom of the article:

    “The agency has the power to regulate any practices it deems “unfair” — primarily the practices of institutions and businesses that had nothing whatsoever to do with the financial crisis.

    Indeed, it has blank-check power to write the rules it wants to enforce. Worse, it cannot be reined in by Congress, because Dodd-Frank gave it a self-funding mechanism. It can simply take up to 12 percent of the Federal Reserve’s operating expenses to do whatever it wants. The power of Congress is ultimately the power of the purse. But in their finite wisdom, Democratic lawmakers gelded themselves. They also insulated the rogue agency from the courts, requiring that judges defer to the CFPB’s legal theories.”

    How about that?

    The next Congress is going to need strong majorities to repeal this Dodd-Frank.

    Guess what…the MSM ain’t gonna report this.

    Michelle Malkin writes: http://rightwingnews.com/column-2/obamas-super-czar-is-on-the-loose/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rightwingnews%2FhGmL+%28Right+Wing+News%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

    Already sworn in behind closed doors.

    And there’s nothing Congress can do. And if the House Republicans try anything, Obama already has a plan to weaken their power and influence. He’s indicated that in his speech.

    Emperor Obama has changed the illegal immigration rules again:


    My…those progressives sure know how to do a slow takeover of the government.

    John Yoo points out that the Americans are not required to abide by the CFPB rules. But then there’s that first amendment that can be used to fight this and NLRB. The unions are still too strong. So it’s going to take a lot of money to sue Obama, CFPB and NLRB.

    HHHMMM….they’ve granted CFPB immunity from lawsuits.

  7. Layman1 says:

    For all the Romney haters out there (hi AJ!) Powerline had a pretty good review of his record in Mass.


    He may not be perfect… but he’s not “Obama light”.

  8. Redteam says:

    “A few days ago, I endorsed Mitt Romney. In the course of that endorsement, I noted that he had “a solid record of conservative accomplishment as governor of Massachusetts,” but didn’t elaborate.”

    That’s the first sentence from that link to Powerline. That tells you all you need to know about what will follow. Anyone that thinks Romney is conservative is just not credible. He is way down the list of desirable candidates. It doesn’t really matter anyhow, there is absolutely no way he will be the Repub candidate. It’s already been shown that 75% of the people voting for the Repubs will be for AOTR (anyone other than Romney). We already know that more than 50% of the votes Romney got in Iowa was from Dimocrats. They would just love for Romney to be the candidate. He is the one that Obama would have the easiest time to defeat. (assuming Obama is the Dimocrat candidate, and that’s not a certainty)

  9. Layman1 says:

    Oh my! Redteam… some advice. The brainpower on this site is usually far above average. The posters make their points with logic and intellectual integrity. Try reading beyond the first sentence if you want to discredit my point. You did a great job of quoting the first sentence but neglected the rest of the post where they layed out Romney’s conservative record of accomplishment. Hate Romney all you like, but deal in facts regarding his record, not your personal revulsion of the man. And try answering my question. Do you think that a President Romney would veto or sign the Cup, Cap, and Balance legislation if forwarded to him by the a Republican controlled Senate?

  10. Redteam says:

    “Try reading beyond the first sentence if you want to discredit my point. ”

    I did read the whole thing, but didn’t really need to as the first sentence told us it was going to be a ‘glowing’ report on the alleged conservatism of Romney. And that’s all it was.

    So you think using insults is the way to swing someone over to your way of thinking?
    I won’t attempt to attack your intelligence, you didn’t display any to attack, so I’ll leave that avenue to you.

    I don’t hate Romney, I don’t even ‘hate’ Obama, I just think electing either one of them will be almost equally disastrous to this country.

  11. lurker9876 says:

    Looks like more and more people are starting to think that Romney has cinched the nomination. Watching this morning’s debate, I can see the odds increasing for Romney to win the nomination.

  12. Redteam says:

    Lurker, you can certainly expect a good vote for Romney in NH, the press wants him to win (they are all libs) so they see Romney as a push over against Obama. They will certainly push all the Dimocrats to vote for him in NH. Since no one is running as a Dimocrat they can all use their votes to vote for the lib Repub. So count on 50% of the voters(the Dims) to split between Paul and Romney and the other 50% to split between Santorum and Gingrich.

  13. Layman1 says:

    I have not seen any evidence that a President Romney will reject conservative bills sent to him by a Republican (and hopefully conservative) Congress. Is he the perfect conservative candidate? No. is he as conservative as the other GOP candidates? In some areas yes, in others no. Is he more conservative than our current, clueless President? Of course he is.

    To claim anything else belies a visceral dislike that makes me curious as to the source. Could it be a religious bias by “Christians” who do not condone his LDS faith?

    It is not an insult to ask someone to justify their position with facts rather than invective. I’m quite comfortable having someone insult my intelligence all they like if that is what’s needed to get them to answer my simple, yes or no question.

  14. Redteam says:

    layman: you were looking for an answer to this question?
    “Do you think that a President Romney would veto or sign the Cup, Cap, and Balance legislation”

    The answer is most certainly yes.

    You were the one that said:”Redteam… some advice. The brainpower on this site is usually far above average.”
    I was the one that said: “I won’t attempt to attack your intelligence, ”

    I don’t see the need or benefit of personal attacks, you apparently do.

    you said: “Is he more conservative than our current, clueless President? Of course he is.” While you seem to be sure of that, I’m not sure at all.

    Your question about Romney’s religion: “Could it be a religious bias by “Christians” who do not condone his LDS faith?” is truly strange. as far as I know the LDS are Christians, I have always believed this to be true, do you not believe it?