...Romney can’t close the deal

[ProSense]

The Morning Plum: Romney can’t close the deal

By Greg Sargent

They don’t like him. They really don’t like him.

Mitt Romney’s surprising trio of losses to Rick Santorum in Minnesota, Missouri, and Colorado shows once again that he simply can’t get core GOP consistuencies to come to terms with him as the party’s nominee. Nate Silver does the dive into the numbers:

Mr. Romney has had deep problems so far with the Republican base, going 1-for-4 in caucus states where turnout is dominated by highly conservative voters. Mr. Romney is 0-for-3 so far in the Midwest, a region that is often decisive in the general election. He had tepid support among major blocks of Republican voters like evangelicals and Tea Party supporters, those voters making under $50,000 per year, and those in rural areas.

Meanwhile, polls show that a large number of Republicans have tepid enthusiasm for their field. And this has been reflected in the turnout so far, which is down about 10 percent from 2008 among Republican registrants and identifiers.

These are not the hallmarks of a race with a dominant candidate.

The loss of Colorado, which should have been a lock for Romney, is particularly interesting: The state will be key in the general election, as Obama is hoping that holding the western states will offset expected Rust Belt losses.

Even if Romney is still likely to win the nomination, expect a fresh round of panic among Republicans over whether his showing yesterday signals a likely lack of GOP enthusiasm for him this fall that will make it marginally tougher to win in the most closely contested swing states.

I continue to wonder whether Romney’s weaknesses as a general election candidate have been papered over by the far more glaring weaknesses of his rivals. Republicans may look at yesterday’s results and see that paper peeling back a bit.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum-romney-cant-close-the-deal/2012/02/08/gIQAhChnyQ_blog.html

Democrats Pour Salt On Romney's Wounds

DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz commented on Romney’s losses Tuesday night, pointing out that the losses showed voters had serious reservations about Romney:

Tonight was a bad night for Mitt Romney, plain and simple. What should have been a night where he began to consolidate Republican support instead has shown that Republicans are reluctant to get behind him. Republicans are giving the field of candidates another look, demonstrating that the more people get to know Mitt Romney, the less they like him. They know he'll say anything to get elected, and they don't want a candidate they can't trust...

No candidate embodies that dissatisfaction more than Mitt Romney, who hasn't managed to lock this nomination up. The presumed front runner of the GOP field lost two of tonight’s contests so far – that math speaks for itself. He is losing support from independent voters nationally, and tonight we saw he's not gaining the favor of Republican primary voters either. They clearly don't appreciate being ignored as Mitt Romney did to Minnesota and they know his failed record as Governor of Massachusetts on the key issue of jobs, his background as a corporate raider, and his economic proposals would leave the middle class behind.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/democrats-pour-salt-on-romneys-wounds

[rhett o rick]

1. I dont believe it really matters what the grass-roots

repubicons want. The republicon machine wants Rmoney. But it will make for an interesting convention.

[ProSense]

3. No

"I dont believe it really matters what the grass-roots repubicons want. The republicon machine wants Rmoney. But it will make for an interesting convention."

...it doesn't matter, which is why the MO delegates went unawarded after the primary.

[CAPHAVOC]

5. I think they want Jeb Bush. The machine that is.

Bush would be better at keeping the Graft up.

[rhett o rick]

6. I agree. The only question is whether this is the time. If not, Rmoney's got it wrapped. nm

[ChairmanAgnostic]

13. When you have $100,000,000, you can certainly change the rules,

Especially when the GOP is involved. Willard best look in his mirror more often.

[renate]

15. this is why I'm losing my sense of giddy excitement at all of Romney's failures

I'm nervous about the convention. I know all the experts say Jeb won't be drafted, but they didn't predict that the primaries would shape up like this, either. The Republican powers that be know that they don't currently have a candidate who has a chance against Obama and I have a hard time believing that they'll just accept the situation.

[rhett o rick]

18. I am very suspicious that they did expect this chaos and are counting on it.

What better than get the poor republicon voter so discouraged at the current field of clowns, then bring in the savior on a white horse. ONe who has not been tainted by this terrible process. The republicon grass-roots would be ecstatic. Now they would be able to vote against Obama w/o holding their noses.

[A Simple Game]

22. I believe you are exactly right.

Whenever one of the Republicans seem to be getting too far ahead of the rest the establishment Republicans send out 4 or 5 heavyweights to knock them back down. The establishment is keeping them down, not the grass roots.

The establishment doesn't want any of the candidates currently running to get the nomination, and that includes Romney. The convention will give them a new and untainted candidate.

[uponit7771]

24. +1

[TheWraith]

20. I have no real doubt that the nominee will be one of the three current clowns.

Trying to nominate someone from the floor, who none of the base had previously supported or had any part in picking, would be a disaster. There's a good reason that that's simply not done. Imagine for a second how DU would have reacted if in 2008, because of the Obama/Clinton battle, they were suddenly tossed out and the convention forced to nominate, say, Mark Warner? It would be the metaphorical blood in the streets.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

11. At some point, tho, the Kochs and others will see that their chosen is doomed.

In fact, I'll bet they have that conversation now.

No panic yet. But soon. Another silly gaff, or even worse poll numbers, and they will cut him faster than they cut out Sarah.

Romney has the real quandry- if he hides, his numbers don't cave as fast. But if he runs hard, and in public, as he is being ordered to do, he will look even lamer, and lose more support. Doing nothing in a hot campaign? How risky is that?

[great white snark]

2. This is fun to watch especially the conservative media's coverage.

You can almost smell the panic.

Thanks and good morning ProSense.

[ProSense]

4. Romney's

past is haunting him and he keeps saying things that alienate one group or another, repeatedly.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

7. This is key...

"I continue to wonder whether Romney’s weaknesses as a general election candidate have been papered over by the far more glaring weaknesses of his rivals."

For a long time, I've been saying that the worst news for Romney is that he faces a weak opposition. This means that he should've been wrapping up this nomination sooner and with more enthusiasm. The bar is set very low for Mitt Romney and he STILL can't close the deal? That says more about him than about anyone else.

[Spazito]

8. This is quite fascinating....

On one of the shows on MSNBC last night, someone commented on how the Citizen United decision has resulted in some unintended consequences for the repubs. With SuperPacs able to keep funding various candidates with enough money to keep them in the race, it is prolonging the primary longer than it might go otherwise. Candidates like Santorum would have more likely dropped out by now as might have Gingrich but because they keep receiving SuperPac money they can now stay in, delaying any coalescing around one candidate.

The longer this circus primary goes on, the worse the repubs look to everyone, even their most avid supporters.

The law of unintended consequences is in full force and I love it.

[surfdog]

9. The deal was closed years ago

It's always been mitt Romney

[SoapBox]

10. Poor Mittens...oh so limp...

hehe

[WCGreen]

12. It's pretty simple folks...

It is really hard to takeout a sitting president.

Even though it has happened twice in the last 30 years, it is still very hard.

Romney is useful for the GOP in two ways, a) he can raise money on his own and it won't divert money from the more important House and Senate seats and b) if he should win, he is at least fairly acceptable to the party.

All the money being thrown at the campaigns just shows the rest of us meer mortals that thre is far oo much money concentrated in the hands of a few egomaniacal personalties.

[Johnny2X2X]

14. Throwing the election

Obama is a strong incumbent, if the economy continues to improve even slightly he is a lock no matter who the Rpubs would have run, they saw the writing on the wall months ago and their top candidates are sitting this one out. It's all about 2016 for the Republicans.

[stockholmer]

16. I have said this for a long time too, but if a 'black swan' event (Iran war gone horribly wrong, or

perhaps a massive systemic banking collapse triggered by EU defaults) rears it head, I would then lean towards a brokered convention candidate like General Petraeus (if there is a war going bad or a massive false-flag terror attack inside the USA) or Bob McDonnell or Chris Christie coming to the fore.

Jeb Bush would perhaps even take a VP slot for 2012, if he thought that the brokered candidate at the top of the ticket had at least a chance of winning or making it close, as this would lock him in for 2016 (in the event of a close 2012 Repug loss) or 2020 (in the godawful event of a Repug victory in 2012).

I do not think the Jebster wing of BushCo would allow a strong (in their calculations) 2012 GOP ticket (unburdened by the bruising primaries) of say McDonnel/Christie, as this would (if that Bushless ticket won in 2012) lock Jeb out till 2024 (at which time he will be getting pretty old) and his son George P will be the prime heir to the demon throne.

A closing, truly scary thought (granted with a lot of huge 'ifs'):

If Jeb was the winning VP in 2012 and 2016, then won at the top of the ticket in, 2020 and 2024, then over a 48 year period, from 1980 to 2028, the USA would have had a Bush as either POTUS or VPOTUS 36 of those 48 years. Even if Obama wins in 2012, then if Jeb wins in 2016 and 2020, you still have a Bush for 28 of 44 years. And that doesnt even count George P, who could make it (given a 2024 Democrat victory and his victory in 2028) 36 out of 56 years.

How much Bush can one world take?

[DallasNE]

17. What This Overlooks

Is the really bad week Romney had. More bad news on the tax front where we learn that a trust set up for his kids is worth over $100 million and none of it was taxed. We also had the thin skinned Romney that fired his debate coach that helped him so much in the Florida debates because Romney thought the coach was taking some of the credit for the turnaround. Then there was the CNN interview that was a total disaster. Voters took it out on a discombobulated Romney.

[rhett o rick]

19. Is it possible that what we are seeing is a battle between the overlord titians?

Dont the Koch Bro support The Newt? and the Bush Crime Family supports Rmoney? The interesting thing about greed, is that there is not much room at the top. And power trumps all (and I dont mean Donald).

[TNLib]

21. I think this says more about the GOP Base and the irrelavance of the GOP in General

Mitt Romney is the only candidate that may be remotely be palitable to independents and moderates. There are not enough crazy, ignorant knuckle draggers in the US to vote Sicktorum or Newt in the general. The GOP establishment knows this and is trying to Shove Mitt down there throat but the base is too fucking looney to vote for someone semi normal in the primary.


I really do think this the begging of the End of the GOP except for in the South.

[Scurrilous]

23. K & R