Finally, we have real data showing a shift to Romney. Both Quinnipiac and Rasmussen show a clear trend in the data (comparing polls from the same pollsters over time – apples to apples). Prior claims of a shift, as I noted previously, were not correct – just lucky.

So it looks like Newt is losing some ground. But how much?

Impossible to say because all these polls are all based on unreliable turn out models for “Republican likely voters in Florida”. How you define that class of poll responders depends on how accurate your poll is.

And how you typically determine the voter pool for any primary election is using historical turn out data. Which will not work this year.

Right now it is safe to assume Romney could win, but I would not lay more than a dime on the line for it. Because this election is not typical of past Florida primaries on many fronts.

First off, we still have the 2010 insurgent voter out there. This can be seen in the fact that the current GOP voters in Florida are not the same ones from 4 years ago:

Republicans have narrowed the Democrats’ registration edge in Florida since November 2008, when Barack Obama carried the state. And with the Jan. 31 primary still nearly two weeks away, more than 446,000 Florida Republicans have requested absentee ballots — far exceeding the 307,744 absentee requests for the 2008 GOP primary.

Figures released by the Division of Elections today show Florida has 11.2 million voters, with 40.5 percent registered as Democrats and about 36.2 percent as Republicans. The gap of 4.3 percentage points between Democratic and Republican registrations compares to a 5.8-point gap that favored Democrats heading into the 2008 presidential election.

“The gap is closing due to the enthusiasm people have to oust Obama,” says Republican Party of Florida spokesman Brian Hughes. “People are hurting. The economy is turning around in Florida, but slowly, and they see at the national stage there’s not enough momentum and they’re ready for a change in leadership.”

This means the voter models used by pollsters are likely not accurate to what the turn out will be Tuesday. How many of these new registrants are insurgent voters who have no history of voting in Florida Primaries but took the time to register since Obama took office? My guess is this new GOP voter is likely to fail the ‘likely voter’ screens. They have no history of voting.

This is what caused many to underestimate the 2010 backlash wave. The mood of the electorate was so energized it defied all historical trends. This is the Achilles’ Heel of polls – they rely on stability in the voter pool to bring confidence to their turnout models.

The second big change for Florida is their role as kingmaker. Florida moved their primary date up again this cycle (cutting their delegates from 99 to 50, with no super delegates) to move off of one of the Super Tuesdays. One thing is true, if voters don’t feel their vote counts, they don’t take the time to vote. Florida has never been in this position, where their vote will make a huge difference in who takes on Obama. So voters are going to come out in historic numbers (like they did in SC).

This ALSO destroys turn out models. Primaries are the most volatile of elections to gauge in terms of turn out, since for Presidents seeking a 2nd term their party primary is a fate compli. This means half the historic record is inaccurate from the beginning.

Given the completely unique political environment we have today, a surge in GOP voter ranks in Florida and a primary that actually matters forget the turn out models in these polls. If their statistical Margin of Error is 3-4%, their actual margin of error due to turn out model uncertainties could range from 5-10%.

Be prepared to be surprised.

Update: Hot Air poses a question with some answers:

And with another day we get another fresh round of polling showing one of two things: either the good citizens of Florida are prone to fits of multiple personality disorder or the pollsters are just having some fun with us.

Or, the Florida race is unmeasurable by pollsters for the reasons I gave above.

Addendum: Watch for one other phenomena that might arise. The Santorum and Paul voters may realize their only hope of stopping Romney (and RomneyCare) is to get with Newt. If the vote is to stop the establishment at all costs, this could easily happen. In some polls 30+% are open to changing their minds. In SC that late deciders broke to Newt in a wave. Paul has been signalling he has not interest in the White House any more, so his supporters should shift to someone more viable given the meaning of this race.

Tags: Florida Primary, Gingrich, Paul, Polls, Santorum

Yes, I deliberately mangled the Star Wars analogy. I know it is hard to detect when I deliberately do that versus my penchant for typos and dyslexic writing. My apologies – but I love strategery

Today we see another lame effort by the GOP establishment to take out Newt – by calling on the Ghost of GOP Past: Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Unmentioned by Gingrich then, or in any of the 2,414 debates during this campaign, was his 1985 criticism of President Reagan’s historic meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev as “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with (British Prime Minister) Chamberlain at Munich in 1938.”

I’m unimpressed. A young and cautious Gingrinch was schooled on politically bold moves by one of the masters of using his beliefs to guide his path.  Similar to the successful behavior of George W Bush, who won his goals and the support of the people by sticking to principles, not saying one thing and doing another.

But why cry foul now because Newt did not always agree with Reagan back then? Is this piety to the image of a man of the people who rose to the Presidency going to impress anyone but the slavish Reagan Groupies (think Hannity here, who wants to be like Reagan but is not even close)?

Does the GOP establishment think Reagan was the reason they rode road to victory in 2010? Talk about your misfire.

I will say it again – this year’s key voters are the same Tea Party insurgents who swept away the old-tired guard in 2010. They hitched their cart to the small-government GOP and are taking the Republican Party by storm. They are going to change the GOP party through the age old art of democracy. Because they are going to change DC.

The other GOP establishment attack strategy has been to (1) claim Newt is too volatile, too bold and (2) Newt is impure. In fact the Reagan swipes are part of the “Newt is impure, too imperfect” gambit.

Let me take the 2nd issue first. The 2010 insurgent voters sees all of DC as dirty and conniving. No one is going to win by trying to convince these voters they are the least stained, or the others are more stained. Romney has RomneyCare, Bain Capitol and his liberal, big government dark side. Newt has no claim to fidelity and honor at home. As the WSJ noted previously, the best way to look at this field is:

As for the current GOP field, it’s like confronting a terminal diagnosis. There may be an apparent range of treatments: conventional (Romney), experimental (Gingrich), homeopathic (Paul) or prayerful (Santorum). But none will avail you in the end. Just try to exit laughing.

We are swimming in imperfections, so this impure and imperfect attack mode is a none starter.

So what will work? Well generalities won’t because the 2010 insurgent voter is not stupid nor naive. Vague and empty phrases only repel this upper middle class, successful voter (once know as the silent majority). They (or we) see things differently. We don’t want cautious or conventional (Romney). We want action. And that answers why the first kind of attack is failing.

We don’t want prayers or new age promises of instant success (Santorum and Paul). We want bold experimentation with an eye to shrink government to its minimum size (note well I did not say optimum size). Now that has some serious appeal!

I noted yesterday that I was going to explain why Romney and Bain are not the paragons of the free market so many Romney supporters want to claim. Bain is, and was, part vulture capitalism. Newt’s documentary on the wreckage left by Romney and Bain after pulling millions of dollars out of corporate carcasses is spot on in this regard. He did not do it universally, but he did do it a lot. Too much.

The defense has been “it is legal and he paid his taxes”. Well let me introduce you to a legendary business man who made is wealth legally and paid his taxes. He too was a big fan of destructive capitalism:

Yes folks, it is the fictional character Ebenezer Scrooge. The worst of the corporate raiders to be known by so many around the world. He has his real life contemporaries like robber barons and sweat shop owners. He is an example of what no business owner or manager should ever want to be associated with.

Now, if any of you Romney backers are thinking I am comparing Romney and Bain to Scrooge chill down. My only point here is you can be a legal, tax paying businessman and rightfully despised. Sadly for Romney, his actions at Bain allow a connection to this well known image of businessmen who forget or ignore the human factor when chasing profits.

In Dickens’ A Christmas Carol there was the counter example to Scrooge, the image of an admirable and loved businessman. This is embodied in the character of Mr. Fezziwig:

Fezziwig is one of the few people to whom Scrooge is thankful, for he says, “He has the power to render us happy or unhappy; to make our service light or burdensome; a pleasure or a toil…The happiness he gives, is quite as great as if it cost a fortune.” Scrooge is reminded how much he once appreciated Fezziwig. Since Fezziwig is the elder Scrooge’s opposite in many ways — in kindness, generosity, affection for his employees, relationship with family, and apparent happiness — Scrooge is thus confronted with the fact that his own choices have diverged greatly from those of someone he admires.

Now I would say, on the home front, Romney is closer to Fezziwig. But on the corporate front he is definitely tilted to the Scrooge side of the spectrum. And when we look to someone to dismantle Big Government, we are not looking for someone who takes an ax to the deal. There are still lives, careers and families to deal with.

So is there a Fezziwig in the race? Not any more. Herman Cain was playing that role (which is why he was succeeding so well). But there are Fezziwig like examples out there – and they exist in small businesses (not Big Government).

The best example I can come up with I think people could connect with is a man named Chef Robert Irvine and his uplifting show Restaurant Impossible.

I love this show because it is admirable on so many levels. Here is a successful man answering the calls of desperate small businesses (many family owned and run). Chef Irvine comes in with 2 days and $10,000 and literally saves people from ruin and despair. He does not walk away with millions. He does, however, try to save every job. He gives secrets, talents and skills he has learned away to the needy.

He teaches the people how to fish (or run a restaurant), he does not hand out fish.

This show is an example of what 2010 voters cherish and admire – and why Romney will never connect. He is not this kind of corporate re-builder. These people work their butts off to help others. And many of these people are below rock bottom. Savior versus profiteer.

Does Irvin and his folks get some financial return? Of course. But his goal is to salvage the company at all costs, not savage it for all potential profits.

2010 voters instinctively know the difference. They know Big Government is incapable of such actions (though the big government types strive to be Robin Hood, while they decide who is ‘worthy’). They know the difference between a Romney and an Irvine (or the Fezziwig verses Scrooge class).

Is Newt imperfect and radical? Yes. Is that bad? Not to a 2010 insurgent voter.

Is Newt an impure conservative? Yes. Is that bad? Not to a 2010 insurgent voter.

Is Newt pissing off the GOP establishment? Yes. Is that the primary goal of the 2010 insurgent voter?

You Betcha!

It is really disturbing when your side loses its objectivity and shows signs of deep political denial. It makes them look just like liberals.

For example, the Romney camps are singing “Amen!” at a bunch of new polls out. Just check this out at Hot Air:

This makes three new polls showing him [Romney] either tied with Newt or back in the lead after Gingrich’s big post-South Carolina surge.

I am simply stunned at these claims as I showed in a comment on this post.  The part I emphasized is mathematically wrong. Dead wrong.

Here is my comment on how ridiculous all this high-fiving really is:

Good lord folks, It is not the snapshot number but the trend [that matters]. Go to RCP and edutate [deliberate misspelling] yourself:

CNN/Time 1/13-17/12 = Romney +24
CNN/Time 1/22-24/12 = Romney +2

Losing 20% points in less than 2 weeks is not a good sign. And +2 is well within the Margin of Error (MoE).

Check out PPP:

PPP 1/14-16/12 = Romney +15
PPP 1/22-23/12 = Gingrich +5

Hmm, another 20% drop and outside the MoE. Are we all seeing the TREND now?

Rasmussen 1/11/12 = Romney +22
Rasmussen 1/22/12 = Gingrich +9

Wow – 30% point drop….

Are you political experts really going to stand by the idea Romney is coming back? Do you mind if we all have a good laugh at your expense????

Let me add one more nail to this coffin:

Quinnipiac 1/4-8/12 = Romney +12
Quinnipiac 1/19-23/12 = Romney +2

All data points to Romney losing ground, not rebounding.

Tomorrow I will post on why Romney – even as a legitimate and successful business owner – can still not be admired by Main Street voters and small business owners. It will expose another method for denial – generalities. Sadly for all these people, ignoring the inconvenient truths will not garner a win, it simply means you miss the coming wave and the ability to take it on.

Tags: 2012 Election, Florida Primary Polls, Mitt Romney, Newt Gringrich

Update: Even the WSJ is beginning to see the light:

That’s the real lesson of South Carolina’s Saturday primary, where Newt Gingrich, the Che Guevara of the right, always interested in leading a rebellion, smashed Mr. Romney, the Harvard M.B.A. interested in carefully calibrated, data-driven change. The South Carolina story—and the story going forward from here—isn’t so much Newt vs. Mitt as it is the insurgents vs. the establishment.

In fact, that has been the story of the Republican Party since the tea-party uprising began in 2009. The drama now will play out anew in the remaining Republican primary calendar.

Sort of obvious, but I am glad others are beginning to wake up and smell the frustration. BTW, the WSJ also garners the best summary of this primary election cycle:

As for the current GOP field, it’s like confronting a terminal diagnosis. There may be an apparent range of treatments: conventional (Romney), experimental (Gingrich), homeopathic (Paul) or prayerful (Santorum). But none will avail you in the end. Just try to exit laughing.

Sadly, I can’t laugh off this mess.A great opportunity ws offered up by the serial failures of Obama, Reid and Pelosi – only to squander it with The Damnable 4. - end update

No wonder Mitt Romney hesitated to disclose his income tax returns. Technically he does not work since nearly all his income is through investment profits:

Mitt Romney offered a partial snapshot of his vast personal fortune late Monday, disclosing income of $21.7 million in 2010 and $20.9 million last year — virtually all of it profits, dividends or interest from investments.

Emphasis mine. Clearly, this is not someone who represents Main Street. He is currently unemployed, but not in  way that connects with Main Street. They guy is set for life and for generations to come. Must be nice. How do I get  Big “FILL IN THE BLANK” out of my way so I too can reach my personal end of the rainbow?

Romney is not like Herman Cain, who worked his way from the lower middle class to the upper class. Cain is someone I can relate to and assume he understands how hard it is to break free of the legislative chains that hold entrepreneurs downs. Romney is a corporate raider who made millions the easy way – the Haarvaaard way. He bought out struggling companies, leveraged their assets with massive debt, took his profits and left ruin and destruction in his wake. I want no connection with him. I am a small business owner, not a corporate raider.

Romney is a vulture, not a creator. Vultures have their purpose in nature and economics, but they are not what someone wants in a national leader.Will he dismantle big government, or twist it to help Wall Street? Does he even understand what the average person has to deal with? Not likley.

Sacrifice? Others sacrificed for Romney to gain his riches.

Innovation? Others provided the core product and services for those rare instances when Bain turned a company around instead of using it as a vehicle to collect millions and then run (what a great ironic coincidence to have Mitt’s Bain actually be his political ‘bane’)

Olympic Savior? I guess if it were not for him none of those dedicated athletes would have been able to compete?

I hear echos of Al Gore and his infamous Internet every time Romney lays claim to Olympic success.

In this instance, Romney is the epitome of Bullying Big Business who likes to implement Big Government solutions when in office. So how is this model going to beat Big Government Obama and his Bullying Big Business connections???? This is just not computing. It definitely is not uplifting and energizing.

Romney is about as far from the Tea Party ideal candidate as you can get without being a liberal Democrat. The Tea Party is a Main Street USA (small business, not big business) phenomena. It is opposes Big Government and is barely tolerant of Big Business (and their hooks now embedded in our political process). The Tea Party movement also distrusts Big Labor. Big is bad – individual is good. Helping others is good, destruction and suffering is to be avoided at all costs.

The Tea Party is all about enabling the individual, protecting the small business from Big Labor, Big Government and Big Wall Street conglomerates. It is Libertarian movement.

It is not Romney. And that is why he is failing. The disconnect between the establishment candidate (Romney) and the 2010 electorate is wide and glaring. And that is why Newt is gaining. Because as far as he is from the Tea Party ideal, he is miles closer to the 2010 backlash voter than Romney ever will be.

Good lord, Mitt really is in trouble. It is not that Newt did great job (not even close to his performance in the last SC debate), but Romney blew it. He had no spark, no intensity.

The best answers actually came from Santorum, who in my mind won the debate technically. He was spot on every question posed. The big problem with this debate, Santorum and Paul were not given equal opportunities to discuss issues. Paul suffered from his usual foreign policy blind spots, but I cannot think of a single Santorum mistake. Newt was good in a general sense but nothing stood out. Santorum had the sharpest conservative response.

Romney, came in last with his usual bland and vague responses. Romney likely fell further behind after this showing. Might have even fallen behind Santorum. I got the overall feeling pandering seems to be is modus operandi.

Newt was fairly good, but I think Santorum bested him. What will be interesting is if Santorum actually takes Romney.

NBC sucked. Their questions sucked.  Their preference to Newt and Mitt sucked. NBC’s comparison of political operatives to our military on the front lines was horrific. What a horrible debate from a host sense.

On a note close to home, Mitt’s answer to the NASA/Space Coast question was moronic. NASA needs to keep leading the exploration into space until it becomes commercially viable. Mitt’s idea to build a committee of bureaucracies to explore space was moronic. The last bureaucratic approach to space was a billion dollar disaster:

The White House decided the cancel NPOESS after numerous delays and cost overruns that made the program the subject of Congressional ridicule and high-level government investigations.

NPOESS satellites would not have begin launching until 2014, at the earliest. The projected cost of the NPOESS program had more than doubled to $13.9 billion at the time of the Feb. 1 announcement to scrap the system.

NPOESS was replaced by another program that focused on getting instruments into space. What got me was how no one, except the news media, noted how America today cannot get its astronauts to our own Space Station thanks to Obama.

To miss this key fact is to miss the core problem right now in DC. Mitt lost Florida by not understanding what is happening on the Space Coast and how it is boarding up jobs because the Obama administration preferred a dumb train in CA over space exploration.

Romney failed again. Gringrich expanded his momentum from SC. But Santorum performed best. Look for Rick to pull support from Romney.

Tags: Florida Debate, Gingrich, Romney, Santorum

For those frustrated voters who sent a wave of new faces to DC in 2010 – to only see them stymied and gagged by the Democrat run Senate and the impotent Super Committee – Newt Gringrich’s campaign represents something important.

He is a poke in the eye to the Political Industrial Complex, a signal that the voters really mean business – not business as usual.

I and many other libertarian/Tea Party types expected a lot more from the GOP House than the crap we saw over the last year. From their failure to achieve major spending cuts to the instantiation of the Super Committee which basically gagged the new representatives of the voters, DC has acted as if the voter backlash would dissipate and go away, and then everyone in DC could get back to business as usual and screwing everything up through Big Government solutions.

Which are always Big Government disasters. As we saw with the economic implosion caused by the Democrats messing with home loan requirements, as we saw with the Democrats and their mythical shovel ready jobs, as we saw with the Democrats and their ridiculous spending spree that has double our national debt.

Gingrich is a poke in the eye to the establishment. Look no farther than Ann Coulter and others to see how his successes are having an impact:

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter stopped by Fox and Friends Sunday morning and gave a spirited analysis of Newt Gingrich‘s decisive victory over Mitt Romney in the South Carolina primary. “Apparently, South Carolinians would rather have the emotional satisfaction of a snotty remark toward the president than to beat Obama in the fall,” Coulter zinged.

Governor Christie actually was the worst offender on the Sunday talk shows, belittling all those GOP primary voters (who remain the majority, even when split across 3 options):

“I think Newt Gingrich has embarrassed the party, over time,” Christie (R), who has endorsed Romney, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Gov. Romney never has.”

Apparently South Carolina voters are fed up with the current political class – Coulter and Christie included. Left and right, these supposedly seasoned veterans have helped lead this country into the ditch. Through a combination of unbending arrogance to their pet peeves and risky brinkmanship, left and right have split America so they could try and gain power and control of her. Not since Reagan has anyone brought us together (with the exception of 9-11, and it should never have to come to that).

Well, for these people to gain the power they crave  the American voters will need to feel so desperate they turn to DC for help. Interestingly enough, while DC is the problem the better solution is to drain the swamp and start over. And that means all the way over.

Something the political elite punditry, professional consultants and the well-connected have not figured out yet. Even conservative mega-blog sites are struggling to understand what is happening:

So, congratulations to Newt, and on to Florida. Let’s just pray that Barack Obama’s second term didn’t start today. If Gingrich does get the nomination, this may turn out to be a year in which Republicans more or less ignore the presidential race, ceding Obama his second term, and focus instead on trying to hold the House and, if possible, picking up a seat or two in the Senate, along with doing the best we can in state races where the wipeout at the presidential level doesn’t swamp all efforts to elect Republicans.

And that was supposed to be a congrats to Newt post! Oh the Humanity.

The doom and gloom around Newt is as interesting as it is pathetic. Newt has a good chance to win Florida and take the nomination now. As someone pointed out (lost the link) the Florida primary is closed to Republican voters, who are much more conservative and Tea Party supporting than the voters in South Carolina. And I think the voters are truly fed up with being told by the establishment who to vote for, so Newt is their man.

The more the DC insiders complain about a candidate, the more the voters are going to rally to that candidate. That is, in essence, how Obama won. Sadly he did not mean what came off his teleprompter. Cain was riding the same wave until he bowed out.

Gingrich looks to be staying in and staying on message. I have never thought Obama could win against anyone – his electability is as much a myth as anyone’s. So I am not seeing Romney that more electable than a ham sandwich.

Gingrich looks to be heading for a big win in Florida:

Less than two weeks ago,  Mitt Romney had a 22-point lead in Florida, but that’s ancient history in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. Following his big win in South Carolina on Saturday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich now is on top in Florida by nine.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Florida Republican Primary Voters, taken Sunday evening, finds Gingrich earning 41% of the vote with Romney in second at 32%. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum runs third with 11%, while Texas Congressman Ron Paul attracts support from eight percent (8%). Nine percent (9%) remain undecided.(To see survey question wording, click here).

That is a 30% swing in 2 weeks. That is momentum with enough inertia (force in one direction) to blow this primary completely in a different direction. It is because of the GOP elites Newt has become the standard bearer for those who are desperately trying to get DC to wake up and pay attention. It’s not like we haven’t given them plenty of chances to stop screwing around. They should have listened.

Update: Readers have begun posting new polls showing a surging Newt. Reader Trent_Telenko links to a poll with Newt up by 8, while reader Frogg1 points to a PPP Poll showing Newt tied with Romney.

BTW, if the establishment tries to replace Gingrich, the backlash will only grow. If they are that dumb, they deserve the results.

Update: Make sure to check out Ed Morrissey’s take on Florida and Newt. A sample:

Romney might have hoped for a 20-point lead in early voting, rather than the 11 points indicated here.  That’s not too large for Gingrich to overcome through the rest of the early voting, especially if he can maintain a double-digit lead.  Thanks to the new momentum, Gingrich may have already begun eating into Romney’s head start among early voters

More Morrissey and  polls here.

Tags: Florida Primary, Gingrich, Romney, South Carolina Primary

As I expected, Newt must have just walloped Romney in SC. Fox News called it before 1% of the vote was in and based on exit polls only. The exit polls must be so one sided to be amazing given the way the media is reacting. The talking heads are acting as if Romney’s candidacy is just about toast.

Update: CNN is now acting as if Romeny might lose FL. The talk across the dial is this was devastating loss for Roomney.

Update: Krauthammer notes that 2/3rds of the voters decided this week and went with Newt. Can’t wait to see the final tally. It really is becoming anyone but Romney and Obama.

Update: Exit Poll data here, and a big hat tip to Hot Air. Romney’s ‘concession’ speech is a real snorer….

He’s boring his own supporters in his own campaign room.

I am looking forward to tonight’s election results, because it looks like Newt Gingrich is going to have a big night. Nate Silver at Five-Thirty-Eight provides a solid analysis on what is happening:

Much of the reason for the relatively clear lead for Mr. Gingrich is that he has very clear momentum in the race. In a survey conducted by Public Policy Polling, for instance, Mr. Gingrich led Mr. Romney by 4 percentage points in interviews conducted on Wednesday night, based on a detailed breakout of nightly results provided to FiveThirtyEight by Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling. But Mr. Gingrich’s lead expanded to 6 points in interviews conducted on Thursday. And Mr. Gingrich led by 14 points in about 700 interviews conducted on Friday night, after the Thursday night debate in North Charleston and the interview given to ABC News by one of Mr. Gingrich’s ex-wives.

In primaries, especially in the early-voting states, momentum is a strong predictor of the results, and it is usually correct to give considerable weight to the most recent data.

Polls this week indicate a big shift towards Newt and away from Romney. This actually makes sense in that I think most people are fed up with politics in general. Many are disappointed that the 2010 backlash wave has been largely ignored by the parties, congress and news media. The Political Industrial Complex has been steadily marching over the cliff, leaving voters flummoxed as to how to further emphasize their distaste with Big Government.

As their frustration grows, the voters are more willing to go outside the bounds of normal behavior. That is why I think, as in 2010, the polling numbers will be way off (since their turnout models rely on average voting behavior as seen in past races).

Anyway, tonight could be another attempt by voters to send a signal to the establishment elites in both parties.

Update: The Hill (the political establishment’s own news outlet) is concerned Romney may be blowing it:

Romney seems to have gone into a defensive crouch, leaving many Republicans feeling like football fans who watch their team move to a ‘prevent defense’ to protect a fourth-quarter lead and dread losing all of it. Their nerves are being jangled even as they acknowledge that outright disaster has so far been averted.

…

Even if he were to lose Saturday’s South Carolina primary, he would  likely remain the overall favorite to clinch the nomination.

But the procession of errors has been striking nonetheless — and it has raised concerns among many in the GOP about his vulnerabilities in a general election contest with President Obama.

Romney’s inevitability is all he ever had to go with. Once that is gone, he could easily sink back down to the ‘almost won’ category.

Tags: 2012, South Carolina Primay

After sleeping on it a bit, I think it was generally a good debate last night. Newt seems to have skated past the media’s muck-raking, can’t say the same for Romney on tax havens in the Cayman’s.

Things that made me cringe:

Ron Paul’s awkward reminders of his military service. His segues between his service and issues seemed like pandering.

Santorum’s back-stabbing of Newt as Speaker on right to life and other topics. We all know Newt has switched positions, sometimes at convenient times. But somehow Rick’s delivery comes off as if he is superior to all.

Romney’s evasion on tax returns and continued denial that RomneyCare was a bad idea.

Newt’s comments on SOPA and Hollywood smacked of favoritism.

Admirable moments:

Paul’s comments on abortion and taking it out hands of the federal government was a good push back on Santorum. His comment about having two patients when dealing with pregnant mothers was spot on.

Santorum did well on the RomneyCare issue, really nailed it with facts and problems.

Romney had very few topical strong points that set him above the rest. His best moment was early on when he showed Santorum how to deal with the Gingrich marriage issue – move onto the real debate.

Newt really blasted the media over its muckraking, always a winner in conservative circles. Probably a winner with centrists as well. Was on average better than the rest on each topic.

I think overall Romney took more hits. He just did not look smooth but more elitist in his responses. That gap is beginning to widen. Paul and Santorum did OK, but their supporters seemed to think every answer was gold. This gives their campaigns a cult feeling and turns off the average voter. I would have to say Newt won the night here.

Overall good debate. Can’t wait to see the results. Romney did not skate and failed in many places (tax returns). Newt is back as is Santorum. Paul …..

Update 13: King ends on a great exit question: should SC push Romney forward or slow the train down. After a horrible start this is a good end for him.

Paul: Sort of good,  but wonkish.

Newt: Priority one – defeat Obama, since he is the most dangerous president. Also need a big team win across the spectrum. Newt is right as someone who could debate Obama.

Romney: Agrees with the critical nature of the election. But then goes to vague buzz words, which sort of proves Newt’s point. A litany of rah-rah sound bites is not enough (because Obama can do that too). Ending with a steal from Reagan.

Santorum: Who is the best? Santorum says a conviction (or convicted?) conservative is best. Santorum has a point, but he cannot carry the water. Santorum goes back to Rick (its always about him and not us), and pretends a social conservative is like Reagan – which Reagan was not. However, he resonates with evangelicals, so watch him in SC.

Update 12: Paul wins abortion topic. Yes, when a woman is pregnant a doctor has two (or more) patients. And yes, our culture has destroyed the sanctity of life. Santorum is losing this because no one wants a intrusive government in the family decision process. Paul does a good knock on Rick.

AJStrata: And yes I KNOW life begins at conception (scientific fact provable in any court of law with DNA testing). Paul is also right to move it to the states where Santorum is wrong.

Update 11: Illegal worker question – how do we make sure Americans get first cut at jobs. King mangles this to be about amnesty.

Newt: Rightly says we need to remove all barriers to control borders. Also fix the laws so it is easier to get here legally instead of making it easier to be here illegally. English as primary language – yes. Silly comment about Mastercard being able to run a guest worker program (something we need so we can keep track). Yes, long term residents of our communities can stay here as long as they were not felons. Many aspects silly (going out of country for reenry) and a pure waste of money.

Romney: Answer weak. A magic card will solve all the problems. Then begins echoing Newt’s nonsense about leaving and coming back later.

AJStrata: Look, we don’t need this cost, If they have been in our communities for decades, let them stay and pay fines – and get at the end of the citizenship line. Not that hard.

Santorum: Another fail. A misdemeanor does not result in losing home and family. Santorum thinks all illegals steal SS numbers. Losing moderate voters. We can fine people for their violations. We don’t need to cause families harm who have been here for decades with NO violent crimes. Most people want a rational answer, not a vindictive answer.

Paul: Good answer regarding punishing people who employ illegals to work. This is not a simple problem. I agree with Paul that providing support to illegals is not right because they are not paying in. Then he wanders off to Afghanistan … Incoherent.

Update 11: SOPA question.

Newt: Blows it on this initially. Even Hollywood deserves their IP protected. SOPA is wrong and over the top. Newt is right, use the patent laws to deal with this.

Romney: Newt got it right (yes, sort of obvious what is wrong with SOPA).

Santorum: blows it – no one said anything goes. Looks like he is not listening (or understanding).

Paul: OK, I guess.

Update 10: Apple as Pinata?? Gimme a break!What do with so many workers in China?

Santorum: Cut corporate taxes so we don’t lose jobs! Great and strong answer.

Paul: Newsflash – Paul noticed foreign care factories in the US. Well spotted.

Paul – Santorum: Paul loses the battle because he wants Federal dictate over states decisions.

Update 9: Romney will not let primary voters see his taxes until he is elected. Bad answer. Santorum’s answer is weak.

Good lord, did Romney screw this up or what? Who needs another rich guy in politics? Romney does not respect GOP primary voters if he cannot show us his income. He is not afraid of Obama, he is afraid of GOP primary voters,

Update 8: Santorum’s attacks on Newt are dumb. He attacks Newt and then says he will go after Obama. Newt’s connections to Reagan just shows everyone how long he has been rattling around DC. However, as he said big ideas are needed. Santorum’s attack on Newt is not working. Big FAIL for Santorum. Really, really dumb.

Every Conservative is cringing and screaming “remember Reagan’s 11th Commandment!”

They all fell into the trap of letting a liberal give them a chance for the circular firing squad.

Update 7:  Question from audience: Can ObamaCare actually be repealed? (Of course King asks it through a loaded question)

Romney: Executive decision is not going to end ObamaCare (moment of honesty). Yes, it will take Congress and President to end the silliness. And here is where Romney shows his big government ghosts. He wants to REPLACE ObamaCare with RomneyCare II! Wrong….

Newt: Great answer “who could trust DC?”.  Can it be repealed – yes. Newt again leans on the “replace’ bandwagon, Great line: kids on parents health care because Obama can’t get them jobs.

Santorum: Hits RomneyCare hard (and rightly). Surprised Santorum was the Pit Bull here and not Newt. Again, good answer with lots of RomneyCare details.  Nails Newt on his individual mandate position. Great response

Get’s Romney to admit RomneyCare did not do much for MA. Newt answered well, because he did fight for a lot of good ideas. Newt is doing well tonight. He admits he was wrong – which neutralizes Santorum and Obama.

Paul: Plays doctor card (and military card again – ugh). Paul throws cold water on pulling back Obamacare – so why vote for him? Loses ground big time here. Instead of pulling Obamacare he wants to pull troops home. Someone look up ‘incoherent’ and you will find Paul’s pic.

Update 6: King – great question on out of work vets (know this one since it is close to home).

Paul: Hisresponse is not to do much for them. Goes back WW II (because we all remember that so well …). Agreed, cut taxes and open the economy. Paul is leaning too hard on his veteran status. VA support for returning vets an obvious answer – not a discriminator.

Santorum: Yes, give those who serve some preferences. I agree, for both my father the WW II Navy vet and my son, who will be a US Marine veteran sometime in the future. Obama cuts are an insult. Good answer.

Romney: In our state we gave vets a ‘free ride’ – insulting? Leave veteran support to the state level? And put them in RomneyCare??? Sorry, but the military is clearly a federal responsibility, so going to the states for this is a bad idea.

Newt: Going after Paul’s version of history. GI Bill was huge (for Newt’s dad and my own). Everyone who serves should get a college degree and we should have aggressive again.

Update 6: Santorum responds well – capitalism for everyone (not just the Bain’s). Workers feel abandoned by both parties (true!). Santorum is doing well here.

Update 5: Bain try 2 – Romney flailing himself. Newt is ready to pounce. Nothing wrong with profit, unless it kills Main Street jobs. Let’s see if Newt strikes.

Update 4: Newt get’s another softball against Romney/Bain. Again, dealing to Newt’s strength. Romney babbles about marginal issues and then goes onto Obama’s ‘crony capitalism’ – as if Bain was not exactly that! Dumb move.

Update 3: Paul: Solution to jobs is getting government out of the way. A bit wonkey in the details. Newt: 3 solutions. Kill Frank/Dodd bill; go after America’s energy sources; fix the Corps of Engineers.

Update 2: King leaves Santorum a trap and he sort of kind of dodges it. He should have taken Newt’s lead and slapped King. Weak response. Romney nails the response (“move on to real issues”). Paul slips sideways to a irrelevant component about corporate media. CNN and media lose big, Newt gains and Romney follows.

Update 1: John King, flails and fails by trying to “splain”. He earned this shellacking and gave Newt a softball.

Original: CNN Leads with the muckraking. And Newt nails CNN for leading with this stupidity John King stepped right into it and deserves the shellacking he is getting. Way to go Newt!

Interesting day leading up to the SC debate tonight. I am actually glad I did not have a chance to post this morning when the Newts’ Soap Opera broke. Initially I thought this would be a devastating event since I expected a bitter ex-spouse to unload on Newt the Pol. But Newt the Jerk is not really going to be big news. Newt cheated on his wife. The details are irrelevant and only a few lefties are going to care. If you like or dislike Newt, this is  not going to change things since the story basically is Newt is a cad as a husband but a good politician.

Well, duh. As one caller noted this morning on the local AM show: Newt is being interviewed by the voters for the job of President, not boyfriend or husband. ABC News looks to be the big loser hear, dredging up personal history in an attempt to make Obama look good somehow.

Rick Santorum’s bizarre response is more disturbing than anything Newt did:

Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum told a Spartanburg crowd Wednesday that the only woman he’s ever sat on a couch with is his wife.

I don’t even want to analyze this one. Is the guy so uptight and prude he can’t sit on a couch with a mature woman without worrying about a random sexual event? Has he avoided sitting with his Mom, Sister, Daughter, Mother-in-Law, etc? Does he stand when the only seat in a room is next to a woman other than his wife? It is these bizarre comments that make you wonder if we should give him the power of life and death over so many Americans.

On the flip side, Santorum did eek out a win in the Iowa caucuses – which will be the subject of some interesting discussions at tonight’s debate. Watch how Romney handles this subject, it is full of land mines.

Romney’s elitist albatross around his blue-blood neck is getting larger with the news he helps other rich people hide their money from the IRS. If only everyone had the ability to make money on tax exempt or low tax international investment schemes. The chasm between Romney and Main Street just keeps growing. Again, tonight will be a test of the silver-spoon-sucking Romney. We’ll see if Romney botches this like he did his Bain escapades (see here).

And finally the the silver-t0ngued cowboy from Texas has bowed out of the race. Romney still has a chance to win this by simply splitting the opposition vote, but I think a lot of primary voters are in no mood to let him run any tables on the road to the convention. It will be interesting to see how the debate plays out tonight, with just four now standing. Each will have more time to make an impression, which for most of them is not a good thing.

Hey folks, so sorry for the lack of posting. Work, leave, family ….

Who has time to breathe! But I will be posting this PM after work (eastern). Hope to touch on the Gingrich family drama and the fascinating turn of events now that Santorum has won Iowa (though the news media wants to now call a 34 Santorum vote win a tie, while an 8 vote Romney win was going to be a route). Also, if some folks are interested in my views on any topic (why they would is beyond me) let me know in the comments. I am well rested and ready to go.

Thanks for hanging in there!

OK, want to see people randomly turning red, giggling for no clear reason or coming completely lost in a meeting in mid-sentence. Transmit spam mail to their eye glasses so only they can see the erctile-dysfunction ad:

It could be extremely useful as a portable GPS system, but there are concerns that it could be distracting for pedestrians who can often be seen walking round with their heads buried in mobile phones.

One commenter, Erin Altman, wrote in a technology forum: ‘Bad idea alert! Just like hands-free devices for cell phones, these things will give people a false sense of security. They will THINK they can still see what’s going on around them but will be way too focused on the display instead.

This really is a bad idea, and a step towards the WALL-E world. As if this is not already beginning:

Romney keeps plowing forward with his silver-spoon, blue blooded bumbling. His Highnessness (yes, that one is deliberate) has taken pity on one of the lesser types:

Amid shaking hands and signing campaign posters, Mitt Romney did something he has never done before on the ropeline: He took out his wallet and handed a wad of cash to a woman waiting to shake his hand.

Ugh. Are we now left with Daddy Warbucks as our solution to big government? Is this not the most crass political stunt you’ve ever had to digest?

According to Williams, she followed the campaign bus to the Columbia airport on Wednesday, the same day Romney was arriving from New Hampshire. When Romney wasn’t on the bus, aides told her to go to the rally scheduled in Columbia later that day. When she showed up, Romney found her to say hello and pulled over South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley to say “hello” too.

In other words, tipped by his political handlers Romney tried to put on a little skit showing how the rich can help the poor with a hand out. Pathetic. What she needs is a good job.

This is turning out to be one of the worst election cycles in memory. The GOP seems hell-bent on promoting Wall Street over Main Street – which is of course just as much out of favor as Big Government.

So we have a choice in 2012??? Not from what I can see. We have the anti-contraceptive, insecure around gay coulples Santorum. We have Newt the self-imploding Nuke. And we have Paul, playing your crazy old uncle who would surrender to the smallest island nation in a guilt ridden panic (does he have French ancesters?).

Lord save us.

I am a small business owner and fiscal conservative. I am pro-business and bullish on America’s economic engine: small business. I am all for smaller government (actually, the smallest possible government). I support the Tea Party and Libertarian goals. I would take the free market over central government controls any day of the week.

And I cannot support the kind of person portrayed in this 28 minute documentary about Romney and how  he made his millions. It may be one sided, but I doubt he and his fellow vultures created enough good to offset a fraction of the pain and suffering they put people through. This is not the free market of small businesses, this is bullying and pillaging.

In 2008 the Democrats elected an image and never once looked behind the spin to see who Barack Obama really was. Now the GOP is promoting an image, and we cannot afford to make the same mistake again.