-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
1. CNN’s headline last night was “No knockout blow for Romney,” which is true but misleading. While Mitt Romney didn’t dominate Super Tuesday as completely as Bob Dole, who swept all seven states in 1996, and all four candidates remained reasonably competitive in states that played to their strengths, winning six out of ten states is far from bad. John McCain, who was seen as the inevitable Republican nominee after Super Tuesday in 2008, won nine states to Romney’s seven and Mike Huckabee’s five.
2. Romney’s performance looks even better when you focus on delegates won. He took all the delegates from Massachusetts, nearly all of them from Virginia, and won delegates even in every single state he lost. Although the popular vote in Ohio was close, the delegate allocation was not. The delegate math for Romney’s opponents has become daunting, to say the least.
3. Rick Santorum’s continuing strength leads to the inescapable conclusion that a better funded and organized conservative challenger would likely have mopped the floor with Romney. If Romney wins the nomination and a.) loses the election or b.) wins and fails to govern as a conservative, expect a lot of Rick Perry recriminations. Some will regret that Perry didn’t campaign better; others will be angry that fellow conservatives gave up on Perry so quickly. In any event, Santorum has done a remarkable job despite limited resources and not exactly fitting the Southern, evangelical profile of the states most resistant to Romney.
4. Newt Gingrich is invoking his Georgia win as a justification for staying in the race. But Gingrich didn’t finish better than third anywhere else. Ohio was the only non-Southern state where the former House speaker didn’t finish last. Santorum outperformed him in most of the Southern or border states where they were both on the ballot, and also in the caucus states. But Gingrich is still not that far behind Santorum in total popular vote, and he is Newt Gingrich, so I don’t expect any of this to influence his thinking.
5. Ron Paul’s caucus strategy for delegate maximization clearly isn’t panning out as hoped (even granting the Paul campaign’s contention that conventional counts are missing a lot of the delegates they are picking up behind the scenes). Given Paul’s improved numbers almost everywhere, one wonders in retrospect if they might have been better served by trying to gain momentum by running up their popular vote in key contests.
6. What happened in Virginia is nevertheless a pretty good example of what might have been for Paul: he was able to pull a sizeable anti-Romney vote. As the second-best campaign organization, it was not unreasonable to assume a Romney-Paul race at some point, and perhaps one will still occur while a significant bloc of delegates remains at stake. But super PACs and Gingrich’s ego have kept other non-Romneys with higher mainstream movement profiles and less divergent foreign policy views in the mix much longer. Still, don’t expect Paul to drop out before the others do.
7. If you couldn’t tell from my column this morning, I think Romney is starting to piece together a decent critique of President Obama’s record — one that will resonate with both conservatives and moderates. Serious questions remain as to whether he is the right man for that message.
View all comments (21) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/03/07/picked-up-pieces-from-super-tu
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Dai Alanye | 3.7.12 @ 9:30AM
Without huge funding, Romney would be running for mayor of Springfield.
With Rick Perry's kind of cash, Santorum would be running away with this race.
In November, which party will have the big bucks?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.7.12 @ 10:30AM
Isn't that the point? Romney is running a campaign and Santorum is following his campaign.
Linda Tomcsanyi| 3.7.12 @ 10:00AM
Our votes will go to Santorum and we are so sorry he lost Ohio. I want to see the numbers!
Linda Tomcsanyi| 3.7.12 @ 10:01AM
Our votes will go to Santorum and we are so sorry he lost Ohio. I want to see the numbers!
Linda Tomcsanyi| 3.7.12 @ 10:01AM
Our votes will go to Santorum and we are so sorry he lost Ohio. I want to see the numbers!
Linda Tomcsanyi| 3.7.12 @ 10:25AM
We are voting for you in Illinois!!! Go Rick!!!
CminGa| 3.8.12 @ 2:55PM
Say what? I thought you voted in Ohio for Santorum? Now you are claiming to vote for him in Illinois?!! Admitted Republican voter fraud! ;)
6. What happened in Virginia is nevertheless a pretty good example of what might have been for Paul: he was able to pull a sizeable anti-Romney vote. As the second-best campaign organization, it was not unreasonable to assume a Romney-Paul race at some point, and perhaps one will still occur while a significant bloc of delegates remains at stake. But super PACs and Gingrich's ego have kept other non-Romneys with higher mainstream movement profiles and less divergent foreign policy views in the mix much longer. Still, don't expect Paul to drop out before the others do.
This argument makes no sense. Yes, Santorum and Gingrich (who really does live in VA so what is up with that!) were so disorganized that they couldn't even manage to get on the ballot that you had a Romney vrs. not Romney primary. You get to be the second best organized campaign by managing to file to compete- pretty low bar you have set there. Paul went into this race with national campaign experience, former national staff, automatic credibility and a laughably weak field of contestants and has managed to do nothing. I think this primary has completely proven that Paul is nothing but a vanity candidate.
9thID| 3.7.12 @ 10:30AM
My worst fears are coming to fruition in that another Dole/McCain Redux looks inevitable. Hoping for the best is fast becoming; prepare to hunker down for another four of Comrade Barry. It may take another big loss for the GOP to go the way of the Whig Party...
Eric Dondero | 3.7.12 @ 11:13AM
Here's something none of the liberal or conservative-biases media will tell you about yesterday's results:
Brad Wentrupt, ran to the far-right of mainline Republican Jean Schmidt on the Islamo-Fascist issue. He advocated a beefed up War on Islamism, staying in Iraq, and doubling down our efforts to kill the Terrorist enemy in Afghanistan, and he won!! 49% to 43%. Beat a 6-year incumbent Republican Rep.
Now, you won't see that reported by Antle, or at AntiWar.com, or LewRockwell.com, Daily Paul or at Cato, Reason or any other left-libertarian media.
W. James Antle III | 3.7.12 @ 4:19PM
It's news that a Republican holds hawkish positions? I thought it was news when one doesn't.
W. James Antle III | 3.7.12 @ 4:31PM
I also notice he emphasizes a pretty light footprint, rather than invasion and occupation, on his campaign website:
http://usabrad.com/issues
CminGa| 3.8.12 @ 3:00PM
Actually I read about it on both HuffPo and TPM, so don't worry about the liberal media, they seem to still be working fine. Besides, once you call a triple amputee war hero a coward, it is pretty hard to be outed from the Right. Dr Wentrupt may be as reactionary and pro war, but he can't be more so. Also, I think people give Doctors the benefit of the doubt.
Casey Abell| 3.7.12 @ 11:24AM
"But Gingrich is still not that far behind Santorum in total popular vote, and he is Newt Gingrich, so I don't expect any of this to influence his thinking."
Okay, this is Santorum-For-President, er, the Spectator. But as even you admit, Gingrich is really doing about as well as Santorum with real live voters:
Romney 3,189,023
Santorum 1,956,090
Gingrich 1,826,700
Paul 898,936
Now this is the Spectator, so you have to peddle the myth that a "better funded" Santorum would "mop the floor" with Romney. Yeah, right. He can't even mop the floor with Gingrich. Once you get away from religious right social-cons, Santorum can't buy a vote with a trillion bucks.
As for Paul, he's just not popular with GOP voters. He can try any strategy on earth and it ain't gonna help. Most Republicans don't like the guy, as the vote totals show with painful clarity.
I am impressed with your admission that Romney did well. Hope it doesn't get you in trouble around here (wink).
W. James Antle III | 3.7.12 @ 4:28PM
1. You'd have to engage in some pretty creative reading to suggest that I'm cheerleading for Santorum. That's certainly not the impression many Santorum supporters have.
2. My reference to Rick Perry makes clear that I'm not necessarily talking about Santorum per se. Any conservative who was more even with Romney in fundraising and organization would probably beat him. The fact that Romney is having so much trouble against candidates he can outspend better than 6-1 suggests he would have even more trouble without that advantage.
3. I have said that Romney is the likeliest nominee so many times I would have to tattoo it on my face in order to make it any clearer.
4. Yes, I've noted that Gingrich's popular vote total isn't that far behind Santorum's. But that isn't how the nomination is determined. Are you ready to retroactively make Al Gore president in 2001? Gingrich's numbers reflect the fact that his few respectable performances, including both his wins, have come in relatively large states.
5. Nobody said Paul was going to be the nominee. But he is getting around 11 percent of the GOP popular vote, in keeping with his support in national polls, while underperforming his poll numbers in big states like Ohio. Yes, I definitely think he could improve his raw vote totals if that was his focus rather than small state caucuses. I also think he would win caucuses if Romney didn't also need to contend in them for delegates.
Drek| 3.7.12 @ 11:29AM
Over FORTY PERCENT of Virginians came out to vote for RON PAUL!
There were only two available selections, two choices, Romney and Paul. Yet before voting for Romney, OVER FORTY PERCENT decided to vote for Paul before Romney.
Yet we're endlessly regaled with pundits claiming Romney is the more "electable."
Our establishment must be draining gallons and gallons of uncut, undiluted Kool-Aid!
Casey Abell| 3.7.12 @ 11:45AM
Paul loses by twenty points and he's "more electable"? Well, hey, McGovern must have been plenty electable, too.
So far Paul is getting a whopping 11% of the votes from real live Republicans. Whatever Kool-Aid he's serving, GOP voters ain't drinking. I guess the voters are all "the establishment."
Drek| 3.7.12 @ 6:46PM
You missed the point Casey.
CminGa| 3.8.12 @ 3:41PM
I don't think Casey missed the point. His point is that a very Republican, very politically active state like Virginia had only two options: Romney or Paul. The only way a Gingrich or Santorum supporter could exert any influence on the process was to vote against Romney to keep the race going past Super Tuesday. Larry O'Dell has an article out of Roanoake about exit polls showing "One-third of the voters said they would have voted for one of the candidates who was not on the ballot had they had the chance, with Santorum receiving slightly more support than Gingrich." Romney may not be an ideal candidate, but his 60 percent is probably his honestly. Paul scooped up and extra third by not being Romney, not out of political advantage he possesses.
Any way you slice this, Paul is not a viable national candidate. He is a novelty item.
Doug| 3.7.12 @ 1:48PM
It doesn't do any good for the Republican nominee to be picked predominantly by blue states. It isn't like Romney will win the electoral votes for those blue states.
Drek| 3.7.12 @ 6:47PM
Exactly!
Who cares who won Vermont, Michigan or Massachusetts?
Areas where Romney is strong we're unlikely to take in the general.
Virginia revealed the depth and the scope of the inherent weakness in a Romney candidacy.
CminGa| 3.8.12 @ 4:28PM
Good point. Romney won in the cities that will most likely go for Obama in the General. But that doesn't mean those voters who went for Santorum tonight won't vote for Romney over Obama in the General. The problem is they will still get outvoted by the greater population in the cities