Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

Romney Camp Preemptively Brushes Off Tonight’s Results

Facing the prospect of winning only one of the three states (Colorado) voting tonight, the Romney campaign is working to frame tonight’s results as irrelevant.

“It is difficult to see what Governor Romney’s opponents can do to change the dynamics of the race in February,” writes Romney political director Rich Beeson in a memo sent out to reporters today. “No delegates will be awarded on February 7 — Colorado and Minnesota hold caucuses with nonbinding preference polls, and the Missouri primary is purely a beauty contest.”

Romney, Beeson adds, is likely to do well in Arizona and Michigan, which vote on February 28. Their delegates (29 and 30 respectively) will be bound after the primaries are held.

“The rules for the March states offer even less comfort to Governor Romney’s opponents,” Beeson writes. “With so many states and territories voting, organization and resources are key. Ours is the only campaign to be active in all of these states, and we have the resources and organization to maximize delegate totals according to each state’s rules.”

“Speaker Gingrich and Senator Santorum have no plan in the majority of the March states (although the Paul campaign has waged a systematic effort in a number of them),” he continues. “Governor Romney is the only candidate prepared to compete in simultaneous contests across the country.”

Beeson also took aim at Gingrich’s suggestion this weekend that he could make a comeback by sweeping the Southern state primaries.

“This is a flight of fancy and not grounded in reality,” writes Beeson.

“Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Mississippi offer a mix of proportional allocation, proportional allocation with vote thresholds, and winner-take-all by CD rules,” he adds. “The bottom line is that it will be difficult for Speaker Gingrich to take large delegate prizes from any of these states. More likely, the delegates will be split among multiple candidates.”

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   17

EXPAND  

Jerry Brown
   02/07/12 12:06

So the argument is we have more money so we should win? Boy that sure is a principled and motivational line of reasoning.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 14:23

And it hardly even dove-tails with the negative image of the guy.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Augie the Prospector
   02/07/12 16:59

Ya beat me to it!

I was going to copy from the Romney quotes - but the bragging about their money lead is essentially everything they said.

They need to hire me to write their spin for them though - here would be my version, much superior to their uninspiring pap:

`My name is Ozyromnias, King of Candidates:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'

... and the Captcha keeps on keepin' on: "Moon Cheese" - which is, of course, what Romney is offering the Republican base to get their votes.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 12:51

How refreshing it would have been for him to say instead,

"While we'd love to win every race,
we wish Rick and the others well."

Noblesse oblige? The casual deference of #1? Simply straightforward? Civility?

[Captcha: be nice]

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 12:58

For a campaign that's supposedly wrapped this thing up, why put out such a dumb statement dissing voters in three states you'd like to carry in November? That's a sign of arrogance or thin-skinned incompetence.

Romney seems perpetually terrified of some electoral Grim Reaper shuffling onstage to announce, "Mitt, you've blown it again". It's not an appealing quality.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 13:15

Mitt is also dissing the voters in every state that has yet to participate in the primaries.

He's telling them that his winning the nomination is much more important than their getting a chance to influence the outcome.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 14:11

New Hampshire was HUGE, though.

And in 2008, MN was a real big deal, at least according to Romney.

This is some pretty convincing stuff, Mitt.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 14:37

It makes perfect sense, if you're the current leader in delegates and the guy with the campaign infrastructure to downplay these contests today. After all, there will be absolutely NO change in the delegate count today. So, I don't see how bashing Romney for stating the obvious makes any sense.

On the other hand, who can blame Santorum for blowing his own horn should he win a state or two today? Sure, he won't gain any ground in delegates, but he has nothing else going and needs to steal some support from Gingrich if he's going to gain any traction at all. So, in my mind, both Santorum and Romney camps are doing/saying what one would expect.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 15:16

Two points. One, though technically non-binding, what are the odds that the elected delegates in Missouri, Colorado and Minnesota will buck the will of their voters if Santorum especially catches fire and the establishment especially actually gets it through their head that he, not Romney, is the most electable?

Two, Yes, NH, Florida, Arizona, Nevada & Michigan are all good states for Romney and their place in the calendar will help him with momentum. Yet all but Nevada will have their delegate count cut in half by the new rules. The states with full delegations starting March 6 are much friendlier to Santorum & Gingrich and some are winner take all. This calendar may not be so friendly to Romney when it comes time to actually count votes at the convention.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 17:06

Good, informative analysis. My own (no doubt imperfect) prediction is that Santorum will not only win the Missouri preference tonight, he will also eventually do well in the eventual delegate selection there.

Ron Paul seems to be winning handily in the Maine small towns that have already caucused, but Romney may do well there this week, as the more populous towns and cities caucus. My money is on Paul (organization and persistence).

The Minnesota beauty contest looks like it is up for grabs in a 4-way free-for-all. My money (as far as actual delegates selected for the next higher level goes) would be on Paul, with Romney second.

Colorado: Romney would be favored, but Santorum and Paul may beat expectations.

Btw, Romney got about 50% of the caucus vote (way down from 2008) in Nevada, but only got 14 delegates. Non-Romneys got exactly the same number: 14. A weak result in one of Romney's stronger states.

Romney's campaign in recent weeks has reminded me of the cliff-side trail scene from that wonderful 1992 film noir version of James Fenimore Cooper's 'The Last of the Mohicans.' The bad guy (Newt?) was sent, mortally wounded, over the cliff, but at a heavy price to the Mohicans (Romneyites? But then such a comparison would be unfair to the brave and worthy Mohicans).

So who gets to survive as Hawkeye? Ron Paul? Rick Santorum? Or will the 'villain' somehow survive his wounds and his long fall? Stay tuned.

This GOP campaign is once again showing potential of being a lot of fun.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Dai Alanye
   02/07/12 16:47

Besides, those grapes are probably sour.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/07/12 18:05

This is breathtaking in its arrogance and yet another reason I will not be voting for Mr. Romney tonight.

This is not a coronation, it is an electoral process. Shame on Mr. Romney's campaign.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
valleyforge78
   02/07/12 18:29

This is some transparently bad spin. Minnesota and Colorado will choose local delegates tonight which, just like in Iowa, will later choose the national delegates through a multi-step county/district/state convention process. So if Romney loses Minnesota tonight he will likely lose the delegates - at 40, that's more delegates than any state up until Super Tuesday except for Florida. Romney also is at risk of losing Maine to Paul on Saturday, and possibly Washington caucus on March 3rd. Plus, Paul is organized to win delegates in all of the caucus states by electing local delegates even if he doesn't win the straw polls. That means Romney cannot pretend he is going to win those delegates at some later convention.

The Southern state delegates that Gingrich is counting on largely went to the state winners in 2008 despite the complex CD winner-take-all and proportionality rules in some. Romney knows this because he largely got shut out of Southern delegates by Huckabee and McCain. So Newt or Santorum could win all or nearly all the delegates in Georgia, TN, Oklahoma, Alabama, Missisippi, and Louisiana. Texas is truly proportional, but that's not until April 3rd. Virginia will be interesting too - Newt and Santorum may support Paul in that state to prevent Romney from winning, and it also has those complex CD rules that could steal delegates from Romney.

If Santorum and Paul have a good night tonight, Romney will be viewed as a wounded frontrunner into Super Tuesday and have to spend tens of millions to win Ohio, Tennessee, Georgia, and Virginia if he wants to wrap up the nomination.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
JoeyDavis
   02/07/12 21:07

If I knew I was going to get beat, I'd downplay the outcome too. But reality is reality. If there is an election and you get beat, it gives the other guy momentum. It proves that you can be beaten and it crushes your inevitability argument.

Romney's real problem is he knows EXACTLY how well he is organized. He really has no idea how well Santorum is organized. Some of us old party chairs sitting in states down the line know when and how to run our horses.

Romney can have all the paid staff he wants. They can make all the phone calls he can pay for. They can hang all the door knockers they can hand out. It won't matter. I own my county. When it's showtime, I'll ring the bell and my horses will run. And I'll guarantee they won't be outrun any fly--by-night show ponies.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
TeaPartyPatriott4ever
   02/07/12 22:18

Romney is no Ronald Reagan, and never will be, period. In fact, he is the antithesis of Ronald Reagan and Reagan Conservatism.

Romney and his policies, are liberal to the core. So in fact, he, Romney, is exactly like Obama in almost every aspect. More so than Hillary is. In fact, Obama, Hillary, and Romney are the exactly same political liberal socialist animal, with the exact same liberal policies and agenda-Obamacare, Romneycare, and Hillarycare. ie; each of them created their force mandated State Socialized Medicine program- all of their own liberal socialist making. And of all the politicians running for the Republican Party Nomination, only Speaker Newt Gingrich stopped it.

Romney said publically on the record, that he was and is, an independent progressive Republican, who disliked and did not support Reagan and Reagan conservative policies, political and economic. In other words he is liberal Republican Party establishment RINO elitist.. and that is NOT like President Ronald Reagan, period.

So Romney's so called pretentious, disingenuous and disgustingly absurd attempt to portray and paint himself in the light of President Ronald Reagan, is without a doubt, the most egregious and outrageous disgusting display of hypocrisy and fraud, I have ever seen in anyone, let alone in this Political Republican party race.

Romney is not only a liberal politician, but he is truly a political pariah.. He runs his politics, like he ran Bain Capital.

Romney and his lies, makes me, and every true patriotic Reagan Conservative in America, want to puke from the disgusting stink of hypocrisy and propagandist lies, that Mr Romney reeks of.

With that being said- Why is it, and how is it, with an anti-Obama electoral atmosphere so high, from his ultra liberal socialist policies, that have all but bankrupted the nation.. why in heaven would anyone in the Conservative Republican voting public, would want to elect Romney, whose policies are almost exactly the same as Obama's, almost to verbatim. Why..

This is the troubling question that seems to be so troubling, as the reason and logic of it, just escapes any and all reason and logic. In other words, it make absolutely no sense at all.. It's the same as saying Hillary would be better for the nation, because she is Hillary, regardless of her exact same political policies and ideological philosophy. Just like Romney and his liberal socialist policies and agenda, which are all on public record for all to see, but the media refuses to report on.. It just make absolutely no sense whatsoever..

It's not their words so much, as their actions of public record, not their public persona and perception, which is opposite of the truth. Romney created and signed into law, a forced mandated State Socialized Medicine program, aka, Romneycare, before there was even an Obama and Obamacare..

Newt stopped the very same State Socialized Medicine program in the 1990's called Hillarycare, under Bill Clinton.. not to mention Newt balanced the Federal Budget 3 years in a row, also forcing Bill Clinton to reform welfare, as well as cut taxes across the board, lowered govt. spending, and so on..

Newt’s actual record, to his public persona, he is actually conservative and a great leader, just different in his style and tact, who has accomplished so much for this nation, second only to Ronald Reagan. That's why the GOP RINO establishment hates the Tea Party Reagan Conservatives, because we are not their puppets on a RINO Party string, who toes the liberal GOP RINO Party line, like Romney..

So why would anyone believe that Romney would repeal Obamacare, let alone believe he is a conservative.. because he said so..

They are is so naive and gullible, it's almost laughable,, if it weren't so tragic. Well, I guess if you have enough money and the political machinery behind you, you can deceive anyone.. How easily the majority of the voters can be fooled, as evidenced with Obama, and now Romney.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Oceanlake
   02/08/12 00:04

Could it possibly be that Republicans won't follow the money? That seems to be the Romney argument: WE HAVE MONEY AND HIRELINGS.

First comment and reply made much the same point.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/08/12 10:01

Look here now. Middle of winter. Non-binding primaries. A so-so race without any sparkle to it, just a dreary slog through platitudes by three guys who are acting like guests who have stayed way too long. Nothing else of local import to get the voters het up and interested in casting a ballot. One must believe that Mitt's constituency is way to sensible to participate in all the fuss. It is a fearsome thing to contemplate the fact that Santorum might become the flavor of the month.

I have listened to Mr. Santorum and can discern no compelling reason why he is running for president. The man is a scold and a whiner and so far, has suggested absolutely nothing of substance. I understand that he is a conservative patriot who keeps saying he loves America. hooo-ray. ya-hoooo. Good for him. He also does his level best every day to scare away independent voters.

The R's chances have evaporated too early. Obama is surging and there is no answer from the right except to try and show that optimistic economic indicators are either not to be believed or are temporary. What fools decided that the Denial of Good News is now a rhetorical strategy? Thus ushering in the era of the R's as not only crabby old white men but as buzz-kills of national caliber.

Where is the optimism? Where is the forward looking policy? Is this truly all the R's have going on?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact