//
2008 Presidential Race

>Open Discussion: Super Tuesday Results

>A place where we can discuss tonight’s election results as they come in.

Advertisements

Discussion

58 thoughts on “>Open Discussion: Super Tuesday Results

  1. >Check out today’s developments in CRM’s new post today.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 7, 2008, 8:20 pm
  2. >Well, they Republicans for Choice really have nobody to choose. McCain has a 0 rating with NARAL.Also see Bill Bennett’s plea for conservatives to stop attacking McCain as a liberal and no better than Hillary:http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmI2YjE1Y2QxODI1ZGI1ZGNhNmQwOThlNWVlMmNlMTc=

    Posted by Jared Nelson | February 7, 2008, 1:24 pm
  3. >Republicans for Choice speaking of rebuilding the GOP. Wonder what that finished product would look like.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 7, 2008, 12:24 pm
  4. >Is this what Huckabee supporters were hoping to achieve on Tuesday?:”Republicans for Choice (RFC), a group of pro-abortion Republicans, has endorsed its second choice for president, Sen. John McCain, after former Mayor Rudy Giuliani bowed out.’He has time and again reached out and worked with people across the spectrum,” RFC said on its Web site. “We know we can work with him to create common ground that will allow moderates and conservatives to come together to rebuild the GOP.’”Link:http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000006457.cfm

    Posted by Chris Ross | February 7, 2008, 9:17 am
  5. >”And it was my own vote against the expansion of Babylonian/Persian occupation, something that McCain just seems to be itching for.”So you went with Mike “Gates of Hell” Huckabee?!

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 7, 2008, 1:44 am
  6. >Nathan P. Gilmour said… No, it was my own vote of no confidence in a Zell Miller-type who can be vocally pro-abortion in one election cycle and for one electorate and vocally anti-abortion in another election cycle and another electorate. I don’t trust Zig Zag Zell, and I don’t trust Maybe, Maybe Not Mitt Romney.My vote of no confidence in the Republican Party manifested itself as a vote for Ron Paul.

    Posted by mhgood | February 6, 2008, 6:06 pm
  7. >The funny thing is that I saw a similar drama play out four years ago, except the Vietnam Vet who didn’t really support the base’s policy desires was named Kerry. Perhaps we’ll see ABC (anyone but Clinton) buttons this time around. 😉

    Posted by Nathan P. Gilmour | February 6, 2008, 1:22 pm
  8. >Do explain! Was this a strategic vote to help the weakest candidate win the nomination? :)No, it was my own vote of no confidence in a Zell Miller-type who can be vocally pro-abortion in one election cycle and for one electorate and vocally anti-abortion in another election cycle and another electorate. I don’t trust Zig Zag Zell, and I don’t trust Maybe, Maybe Not Mitt Romney.And it was my own vote against the expansion of Babylonian/Persian occupation, something that McCain just seems to be itching for.As far as my students go, they think (rightly) that I don’t have any great loyalty to either faction, so when I told them I’d just voted in the Republican primary, they couldn’t put the pieces together. I figure I’ve given them another mystery to solve and given myself some Horowitz insulation, so why not? 🙂

    Posted by Nathan P. Gilmour | February 6, 2008, 1:21 pm
  9. >Can the conservatives (the sectarian ones) still come together and beat McCain? Together Romney and Huckabee have a big chunk of the delegates. If the conservatives are serious about what they believe about McCain it seems someone should step in and make it happen.

    Posted by Mark Mathews | February 6, 2008, 1:06 pm
  10. >I’m not hearing anyone say that they think Romney or Huckabee have a chance but last night they both said they were in it til the end. I knew the only play we had was to convince conservative Huckabee supporters to come over to Romney. Have the 3rd place people join the 2nd place people. Otherwise conservatives would be split and couldn’t hope to take on McCain. They weren’t interested so conservatives stayed split and McCain’s the nominee. There are no other plays to be made. Its pretty much over unless McCain has a serious misstep. Some kind of crazy comment or scandal type thing come out which won’t happen.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:00 pm
  11. >Is this just “try to keep positive” rhetoric? It looks like this thing is over. But you never can tell. Not in this election.

    Posted by Mark Mathews | February 6, 2008, 12:31 pm
  12. >Meant to say “And Huckabee says he can’t wait to start being President about this time next year.”

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 12:25 pm
  13. >”Jeff- you said Romney is staying in the race? Is that possible after tonight, especially if he loses CA?”Yeah, that’s what he said last night. And Huckabee says he can’t to start being President about this time next year. Right now the delegates are about 597 McCain, 240 Romney, 178 Huckabee.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 12:23 pm
  14. >It is a great day here in the UK and I agree with you Chris. Sometimes it so easy to get caught up in these temporal events and forget where our true citizenship is, where we have a great High Priest who is not elected, nor a politician! Whew! “If McCain is as great as some people think, we’ll see it proved over the coming months (or years). If he’s as unreliable a conservative as I and others believe, we’ll find that out too.” I think, however, it is more incumbent on the entirety of our government to make things happen once the election is over. The idea that the president has any real power on his own is unrealistic. His real power lies in the ability to persuade and unite. It just isn’t a one-man show.

    Posted by Mark Mathews | February 6, 2008, 11:08 am
  15. >BTW, Hylander, please call me the next time you have a BBQ with ale or Stout! I’m there … (read your profile page)

    Posted by Chris Ross | February 6, 2008, 10:35 am
  16. >Well, it’s morning here in the UK, and it looks like McCain has just about grabbed the Republican helm. I’m choosing to have a good attitude, though. If McCain is as great as some people think, we’ll see it proved over the coming months (or years). If he’s as unreliable a conservative as I and others believe, we’ll find that out too. In the meantime, I’ll remind myself that my American citizenship is temporary, but my citizenship in the New Jerusalem will never be revoked. I need to do more campaigning for the King of that place …

    Posted by Chris Ross | February 6, 2008, 10:25 am
  17. >Jared,That actor guy you made reference to does have experience as a legislator i.e. U.S. Senator. And, he was actually one of my primary fav’s along with Mitt and Rudy. I think Fred would make a better President than VP in my estimation. But, we’ll have to wait and see.I just hope and pray that Huck does the admirable thing to save the conservative movement in America and withdraw in support of Romney who has a better chance at winning the nomination at the convention, and who actually has a better chance in the General. Just my two bits anyways.Peace,hylander

    Posted by hylander | February 6, 2008, 6:38 am
  18. >Jared,I think that what the GOP needs to unite us is an opponent named Hillary Clinton. Nothing unites us like our disdain for Hillary Clinton.

    Posted by Matthew Bradley | February 6, 2008, 6:19 am
  19. >Jeff- you said Romney is staying in the race? Is that possible after tonight, especially if he loses CA? He was third in a lot of races according to ABC. Think he might change his mind if he starts coming in third in a few more races?

    Posted by Jared Nelson | February 6, 2008, 5:26 am
  20. >Seems a little early to be calling CA but FOX News called CA for Clinton and McCain. We’ll get that confirmed in the morning. Exit Polls in CA:Conservatives – Romney 46, McCain 30Mods & Libs – McCain 49, Romney 23Hmm…

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 5:18 am
  21. >I’m fascinated by Huckabee’s wins tonight. Perhaps we are seeing the fracturing of the Republican Party into the social Cons (Huckabee) the fiscal cons (Romney) and the national security cons (McCain). If McCain ends up the victor, he really needs a running mate that will unite the base, maybe someone who is both a social conservative and a fiscal conservative. Maybe that actor guy who dropped out…Second fascinating event: young voters don’t vote. Obama would have killed Hillary if young voters weren’t busy getting drunk or studying for school tonight. Instead over 65 voters got out of their rockers and voted for familar names. Oh well, Obama will just have to hope, hope, hope…

    Posted by Jared Nelson | February 6, 2008, 5:10 am
  22. >”He won Missouri which was big.”Oops, too soon on that one. McCain actually won that one. So the only real suprise for Huckabee was the blocking action against Romney in WV today.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 5:07 am
  23. >Wow, Obama just promised to end genocide and disease.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 5:00 am
  24. >Romney just said he’s going all the way to the convention. Huckabee says he’s going all the way to the convention. So its over. The conservative vote is split. McCain will eventually win and be the weakest nominee we’ve seen in a long time. It will be interesting to see if he reaches out to conservatives or not. As far as the rest of the night, Romney has to take much of the western states and CA is a must. Then he would have to take most of the states between this weekend and TX which won’t happen. Huckabee is sort an entertaining regional candidate. Fair Tax won’t happen and is totally unrealistic right now. It requires a Constitutional amendment. Telling immigrants to register with the INS within 120 days is totally unrealistic. Thinking that a road project along I-95 is going to stimulate the economy is unrealistic. These pie in thy sky, radical proposals show a lack of depth on these issues and a failure to offer credible, realistic solutions. He wasn’t supposed to win WV and he did. He won Missouri which was big. TN was a good win. I give him credit for winning those states.He still can’t and won’t win the nomination. He’ll probably still be in third place after tonight. He says there’s strong support for him out there. But who wins the nomination by losing NH, SC, FL, and CA? No one. I guess he is making a good showing for VP though.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 3:51 am
  25. >”And how about Romney taking a beating in the South where one would think he should have made a solid showing, given the argument that he is the conservative…”Before today:AL – McCain 37.5, Huckabee 33.3, Romney 18.5TN – McCain 29, Huckabee 25.7, Romney 23And, of course, he was supposed to win Arkansas. So form held with Huckabee doing better than Romney in the South.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 3:21 am
  26. >I don’t know if I’m more surprised by Huckabee’s showing tonight or the fact that he is beating Romney more often than not. And how about Romney taking a beating in the South where one would think he should have made a solid showing, given the argument that he is the conservative…I love days like this…

    Posted by Matthew Bradley | February 6, 2008, 3:08 am
  27. >Don’t try to stay up waiting for the CA results tonight:”California state officials received more than 3 million votes in absentee ballots by late Monday night, a figure that could account for up to 40% of the turnout. The laborious process of counting such votes by hand could continue on for days, delaying the official declaration. Up to 25% of the absentee ballots will remain uncounted tonight.”http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0,,2252867,00.html

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 2:52 am
  28. >This just in: Romney wins the CRM primary! No delegates though. Sorry.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 2:47 am
  29. >AZ Republicans only went to McCain 44-42 over Romney. Wow, in his home state. Does this tell us anything about McCain? In the CA debate McCain taunted Romney with getting the endorsements of the MA newspapers “who know him best.” The Republicans who know McCain best barely went for him.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 2:21 am
  30. >Way to go, Nate!

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 6, 2008, 1:59 am
  31. >”I threw in a Huckleberry here in Georgia, Wizzle. Just like I said I’d do. I particularly enjoyed telling my incredulous students that I’m a registered Republican primary voter now. ;)”Do explain! Was this a strategic vote to help the weakest candidate win the nomination? 🙂

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:47 am
  32. >I threw in a Huckleberry here in Georgia, Wizzle. Just like I said I’d do. I particularly enjoyed telling my incredulous students that I’m a registered Republican primary voter now. 😉

    Posted by Nathan P. Gilmour | February 6, 2008, 1:45 am
  33. >That is the way caucuses work. When candidates fail to get a certain percentage of the vote, they get knocked out and revote. That’s just the way it is. When they revoted the person who got the majority of the votes got the win.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 6, 2008, 1:38 am
  34. >Yup, if a majority of the people wanted a candidate and he doesn’t win because of wierd rules.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:35 am
  35. >So any win in a caucus state is an automatic faux win I guess.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 6, 2008, 1:33 am
  36. >”If Romney happens to win anywhere tonight I’ll be sure to call it a faux win.” If Huckabee wins on the first vote and then Romney wins on the second vote, go for it.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:31 am
  37. >I don’t get this. The results in NJ as of right now according to Politico.com has it:McCain 864Romney 402Huckabee 185Paul 72Other 624624 thus far went to other?! So they’re voting for Giuliani who dropped out, Thompson who dropped out, Hunter who dropped out, Tancredo who dropped out, etc. What’s the deal with these people?

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:18 am
  38. >Crack cocaine for political junkies:RealClearPolitics.comPolitico.comLive, most up to the minute results.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:06 am
  39. >”I think Romney has a “plastic” problem. True or not, he does not come accross as genuine.” Then NONE of the candidates should get our vote then.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:02 am
  40. >AL went Huckabee and GA might too.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 6, 2008, 1:00 am
  41. >Just as Romney has gotten anti-McCain supporters who don’t really love Mitt but hate McCain, I bet that when the caucus came down to Huckabee vs Romney, the anti-Romney people switched from McCain to Huckabee. I think Romney has a “plastic” problem. True or not, he does not come accross as genuine. NRO had some interesting commentary on the GOP Presidential candidates in previous debates all getting along, but none of them liked Romney. You could see it with McCain and Huckabee playing nice at the Reagan debate, but you can tell there is some true distrust of Romney within the GOP as a johnny-come-lately.

    Posted by Jared Nelson | February 5, 2008, 11:42 pm
  42. >”Faux win.” That’s funny! Ron Paul’s supporters went to Huckabee too, as I said before. If Romney happens to win anywhere tonight I’ll be sure to call it a faux win. Caucuses are all about supporters switching their votes to other candidates. In Iowa, when Biden failed to get a certain percentage of the votes I didn’t hear Obama complaining when the Biden supporters went over to Hillary. You may not like the caucus system, but that’s the way it is.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 11:27 pm
  43. >”You don’t think Romney would have done the same thing as McCain if he had the chance? Give me a break!”I totally agree! That’s why it’s silly to pretend that a deal didn’t happen whether it was on the state leadership level of the McCain campaign or the national level. Its smart politics. I wish Romney could have had someone to make a deal with.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 11:11 pm
  44. > ” I guess I can already see the writing on the wall if Romney doesn’t win the nomination…a lot of whining and excuses.” Man, Romney sounds like Gore! What’s up with that? You don’t think Romney would have done the same thing as McCain if he had the chance? Give me a break! Since when is Romney all squeaky clean? That’s what kills me about this guy. He’s too quick to bring accusations against others on things he would do himself if given half a chance. Greeeeeaaaaasy!

    Posted by Mark Mathews | February 5, 2008, 11:08 pm
  45. >”What I’m saying is that the supporters did this on their own.”So the WV Chairman of the McCain campaign made this decision on his own without consulting the national campaign team? OK. That’s pretty ballsy. I’m sure there was never a plan put in place as far as what to do in case Romney came in first place during the first round. It doesn’t matter. Its over. I’m just not gonna believe that each indiviual McCain supporter had a change of heart on their own with no coordination with anyone else and no communication between McCain HQ and WV HQ to all of a sudden switch to Huckabee because they finally realized that he is the better candidate. Be interesting to see who the WV delegates vote for at the convention.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 11:07 pm
  46. >These caucuses in West Virginia highlight a couple of the problems we have in the nominating process. West Virginians voted and Mitt Romney won with 41% of the vote. Pretty good when most of the victories thus far have been in the 30’s. It’s a winner take all state so he takes the delegates by coming in first and that’s it. But wait. It’s a caucus with obscure, outdated rules. So instead of Romney winning with the majority of the votes, they go to a second round of voting since no one got 50% of the vote. That’s silly.Second, the primaries and caucuses are still spread out too far. They don’t need to all be on the same day but they are still spread out too far. If four for five candidates were still in the mix this would have never happened. So not only do they go to a second ballot because they have a needless standard of 50% of the vote, they have a process open to election–day political manipulation and, yes, deal-making. Huckabee gets a faux win because two factions teamed up and decided to prevent another candidate from winning. That’s a joke. That’s a game. Its like not getting voted into the All Star game but the All Star got injured so he got to play instead. But the NBA fans didn’t really think he was up to All Star level. The people voted and the majority chose Romney. Then games started being played with the vote due to a ridiculous process that is open to such manipulations. If this is a system that still makes sense for us then let’s do it all the way. Let’s make the national convention real again. Let’s make the votes of the delegates at the convention truly matter. We’ll have the states choose their delegates. But that’s just the beginning. That’s just round one. Nobody won yet. If no candidate gets 50% of the vote, they work it out in back room deals at the convention. They horse trade until they can convince enough delegates to get behind someone with over 50%. I thought that’s the sort of thing we wanted to get away from. Ditch the caucuses. The Party penalized states who moved their dates up by slashing their delegate count. Do a similar thing with states that insist on sticking with caucuses instead of primaries. Bring the primary dates closer together. That’ll do away with a big chunk of the media’s undue influence and the momentum nonsense. We could split the states up into North, South, East , West. Or, West, Mid-West, South, and East. Pick a month to vote. Northern state vote week one, southern states week two, and so on. Next time the Southern states go first, next time the East, and so on. The process is done in one month. Campaign for as long as you want before that month. Have debates. During the voting month, have a debate in the East during the week of the Eastern vote, a debate during the week of the southern vote, etc. Another thing. If we’re going to stick with the states sending delegates to the convention, I think we should do away with the winner take all rules. They should be apportioned according to the percentage of the vote. Its been reported that a Giuliani operative convinced New York and New Jersey to switch to a winner take all approach because it was thought at the time that Giuliani would take NY and NJ handily. Didn’t work out that way because he’s not in it but McCain, who Giuliani endorsed, is going to come away with a big chunk of candidate’s because they changed their rules. Again, if this is what is best for us then let’s make all the state winner-take-all states but if its not let’s do away with this rule. No more caucuses, no more winner-take-all delegates, reduce it to a one month process. These are things I’ve thought of before today so I’m not having sour grapes over Huckabee winning WV and McCain winning NY and NJ. These are just things I think make sense and would improve our process of choosing a nominee. Huckabee won fair and square with the rules that everyone played by at the time. I think there’s something wrong with giving all the delegates to someone who lost on the first vote but that’s how they do it.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 11:01 pm
  47. >If Romney can’t handle the rough and tumble of the primaries, the Clintons will eat his lunch in the main race. I think they’ll eat his lunch anyway but that’s another thing……

    Posted by Jeff Bailey | February 5, 2008, 10:36 pm
  48. >And now even some on the Townhall blogs are bashing Romney for trying to say a “backroom deal.” Of course, it wasn’t Hugh Hewitt, though. 🙂

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 9:58 pm
  49. >No duh that many of the McCain people went to Huckabee BUT so did Ron Paul’s supporters. What I’m saying is that the supporters did this on their own. I highly doubt that there was a backroom deal. I just think that both McCain’s and Paul’s supporters liked Huckabee more than Romney. That’s the way it go with caucuses. There is no reason to make excuses for losing.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 9:54 pm
  50. >Look at this:”On the second ballot, Huckabee had 567 votes (51 percent), Romney had 521 votes (47 percent) and U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had 12 votes.”So McCain lost 1,100 to 12?! Of course the McCain people went to Huckabee. Romney was in first with 41% after the first ballot but he didn’t have the 50% to win. Once it was known that Romney was winning, the McCain people went to Huckabee on the second ballot. Pretty obvious. Its a winner take all state so McCain was going to get nothing from a 2nd or 3rd place finish.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 9:51 pm
  51. >OK, but from what I read today it looks like Huckabee got the majority of McCain’s supporters AND Ron Paul’s. I don’t think there was any back room deal. I just think they liked Huckabee more than Romney.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 9:47 pm
  52. >Politico: “His [Romney’s] campaign cried foul, saying the McCain campaign sent its delegates to Huckabee in order to undermine Romney.”You don’t think that this sort of thing happens? McCain was not going to win WV. He was going to finish behind Huckabee and Romney. Why vote for McCain when he can’t win? Vote for Huckabee, who’s out of it, to prevent Romney from getting the delegates. It makes perfect sense. Deals like that happen all the time. These guys are in it to win.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 9:45 pm
  53. >What if McCain does end up picking Huckabee as VP? So what? That doesn’t mean that they have a deal worked out. That’s just rhetoric. Even Hot Air blog is telling Romney to get over it. I guess I can already see the writing on the wall if Romney doesn’t win the nomination…a lot of whining and excuses.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 9:38 pm
  54. >”Just just goes to show that you can’t let the polls and media influence your vote.”I know. They had Romney tied or down one point in CA and now he’s ahead 7! 😉

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 9:35 pm
  55. >Maybe McCain should come out and make it known that Huckabee will not be his running mate so he can put the speculation to rest.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | February 5, 2008, 9:34 pm
  56. >Even some of the guys over at NRO’s The Corner (NRO endorsed Mitt) are saying that Romney is just being silly with his claim. It cracks me up because just recently he made a remark about Huckabee saying that there is no whining in politics. Ironic, huh?

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 9:10 pm
  57. >Huckabee won West Virginia (a state that was supposed to go to Romney). Just just goes to show that you can’t let the polls and media influence your vote.Romney is already crying about it and blaming it on McCain. Too bad Romney doesn’t realize that is how caucuses work. Both McCain’s and Paul’s supporters switched over to Huckabee in the second round so it’s kind of hard to say that it was some sort of conspiracy brokered deal that made Huckabee win.

    Posted by J.Wizzle | February 5, 2008, 8:55 pm

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

From the Vault

Friend of Grace

Photobucket
All articles © 2007-2011 by the respective authors of the Conservative Reformed Mafia. All Rights Reserved.
%d bloggers like this: