Super Tuesday – The Aftermath

Joe Bono writes from Washington:

Now that the votes have been tallied in one of the most publicized “Super Tuesday” primaries I’ve ever witnessed all that’s left to do is scrutinize the results and embrace the inevitable: Mitt Romney will be the GOP’s nominee for President of the United States.

By this time in 2008 John McCain had recieved enough delegates to secure himself a spot as his party’s nominee. So why, after wins in key states like Ohio and Virginia, is Romney still struggling to do the same? The answer is simple – Because the people love a horserace (and because the press is more than happy to give them one).

Super Tuesday is a focal point of every primary election. Traditionally as many as ten states (sometimes more) send the electorate to the polls on this day in early March. The collective delegate count (those designated to support a candidate in the summertime convention) is higher than any other single day of the primary season. In addition, battleground states indicate the strength of a candidate against the incumbent opposition (in this case President Barack Obama).

A few highlights from yesterday’s results are worth mentioning. First, the Ohio results put Romney 12,000 votes ahead of Santorum, giving him the win. The Santorum camp would argue that this is barely a solid victory but considering it was a four-way race with less than a million votes cast I’d say it’s significant enough. Second is Romney’s 72% turnout in Massachusetts (the former governor’s other home state). This could put Mass. into the coveted “swing state” category for the general election thus threatening an overall win for Obama. Third (that which I found most surprising) is Mitt’s 31% victory in Alaska over second place finisher Ron Paul (25%). Alaska is considered America’s “Northern most Southern state”, where state’s rights authority and big government opposition is sacrosanct. If Romney can convince Alaskans that he’s their candidate then the rest of the country should be a snap.

The criticism I generally hold for the GOP through these exercises is that they inevitably tend to choose the candidate which they think “deserve” it. A candidate who’s exhibited steadfast support for the party as a whole tends to be given a chance over the one who can actually pull off a win (see: McCain ‘08, Dole ‘96 & G.H.W. Bush ’92). There have been few exceptions to this rule where the “deserving” candidate actually ends up in the White House (Nixon ’68 & Reagan ’80). There is another rule to Republican politics concerning their candidate, though. You don’t need to fall in love but you will fall in line.

Romney’s campaign has proven itself to be better organized, better funded and better positioned to win in November than any of the other three. Come Tampa we’ll see him accept his party’s nomination and the rest of this horserace will be but a distant memory.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Super Tuesday – The Aftermath

  1. “A candidate who’s exhibited steadfast support for the party as a whole tends to be given a chance over the one who can actually pull off a win (see: McCain ‘08, Dole ‘96 & G.H.W. Bush ’92). There have been few exceptions to this rule where the “deserving” candidate actually ends up in the White House (Nixon ’68 & Reagan ’80)”

    Great point, I always hated this retread situation of either rewarding loyalists or basically kingpinning the 2nd place candidate. Besides Nixon 1960(who was still liked because of law and order, promised to end Vietnam, LBJ did not run, the three anti-war candidates split the Dem vote to Humphrey, and Nixon barely lost in 60 and 62). Reagan was a two term successful governor who saved California from bankruptcy and many left the convention thinking they should nominated Reagan in 76, not to mention Reagan hoped to be chose if they couldnt pick a winner in 68

  2. Axel says:

    Mitt Romney is naught but a shill of disreputable international bankers, and has supposedly ruthlessly asset stripped and foreclosed on individuals and businesses, via his Bain Capital enterprise. A number of trcent electoral results have allegedly been manipulated in his favour, contrary to the rules. He has flip-flopped on all the issues – Economy, Health, Gays, Climate Change, Power Supplies, Abortion & etc. He will change what he says to suit what the polls tell him, and has no firm views on anything. He is for war with countries of the middle east and elsewhere, and is an interventionist. Such a person would only be a Republican clone of Obama in that sense, and would likely not beat Obama in a contest even so, according to numerous polls.

    Naturally Mr. Bono, as a staffer for a member of the EU Parliament You will be largely unfamiliar with the chicanery that goes on in the name of so called politics in the USA. There is a presupposition by many in the USA that religion plays a vital role in the selection of candidates for POTUS. There are demands from LDS that their man should have a shot, since it is “their turn”. Yet Romney, although he and his wife have donated $2 million annually to LDS, has flip-flopped on issues which are in fact LDS dogma. How does he reconcile his political stance on abortion and gays, with that of the official LDS stance, for instance?

    As your British Tony Benn would say – He is like a weather vane, and he is not a signpost.

    It may well be the position that British Conservatives would support Romney, but is this the position of UKIP, I don’t think so? UKIP surely leans more towards the views of the unmentionable elephant in the room, Doctor Ron Paul. He is the ONLY candidate who has not flipped on these issues, and is anm advocate of sound money, small government & low taxes. Not only that, but he is the ONLY candidate who is NOT in bed with the military industrial complex war machine, and the ONLY candidate who wants to end the policy of USA foreign interventionism and imperialism.

    Doctor Ron Paul IS a signpost. He is consistant, and a thorn in the side of NWO banking shills. He has not been given fair coverage in the Press and on TV, and as revealed by US Commentator “Mancow”, results were indisputably fiddled before being broadcast, which he actually saw occurring. Dr Paul has complained and several State results are now under legal challenge, and even before the Courts. Why you should try to promote Mitt Romney is almost inexplicable, excepting that ignorance of USA political machinations, and Romney’s real agenda is the probable cause.

    Before interfering in USA politics, there are some problems in Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Ireland, and elsewhere in Europe for MEPs to sort out don’t you think? Clean out you own nest first is what many Americans would tell you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s