Current Events

AND THE WINNER IS…

Spread The Love

Mitt Romney!

The Iowa-New Hampshire-South Carolina Republican primary has finally been broken, although it still has not provided a clear front runner.  Mitt Romney won the Florida primary last night with a total of 46% of the vote.  Newt Gingrich came in 2nd with 32% and Rick Santorum had 13%.  Ron Paul was in last place with 7%.  Romney dipped into his deep war chest and spent a huge chunk of funds on negative attack ads against Gingrich to knock him down a few pegs.  It worked!

Although Romney won the night and broke the tie, the GOP is still far from conciliation. 1144 delegates are required to clinch the Republican nomination and although Romney is ahead of his competitors, the totals thus far are near evenly split.  Romney now has just under 80 delegates, which means he has a long way to go before becoming the nominee.  With several southern states coming up on the voting schedule, including Gingrich’s home state of Georgia, along with a huge prize from Texas, Newt could clean up and practically even up the race or possibly surpass Romney.

This race is far from over and will go down to the wire.  No other candidate is expected to drop out, since 1 or 2 states could easily turn the tide and propel any of the remaining men toward the nomination. So sit back and enjoy the show — the Obama campaign certainly is!

DJ

DJ is the creator and editor of OK WASSUP! He is also a Guest Writer/Blogger, Professional and Motivational Speaker, Producer, Music Consultant, and Media Contributor. New York, New York USA

Related Articles

8 Comments

  1. "Although Romney won the night and broke the tie, the GOP is still far from conciliation."Boy what an understatement!I still think it likely that Romney will *win* the nomination, for whatever it'll be worth when he finally crosses the finish line(?) Newt can continue to be a thorn in Romney's  side. And IF Newt stays in the race, he stands a good chance of wining several southern states. However, at the end of the day, I think Mitt will have the delegates needed.But here's the BIGGER problem for Romney. Enthusiasm among the "heart-and-soul" of the GOP's most loyal and active voting block (the right-wing Conservative base) is NOT there. A sizeable chunk still doesn't like OR trust him. Just look at voter turnout in Iowa: Down from 2008. Voter turnout in S.C. was up by 156,000+ but the voters (mostly conservative) went for Newt. Voter turnout was up in N.H. by 14,000 votes compared to 2008. But it was a state tailor-made for Mitt. He won that state with the majority of rich, and very rich, moderate Repubs and Independents NOT "conservatives" Repubs.  As for Florida: Voter turnout was down -15% compared to 2008 AND Mitt won primarly due to moderate Repub, and Cuban, voters residing in the southern part of that state which everyone acknowledges is the LEAST conservative (more diverse) part of the state. Newt won the northern pan-handle areas of Florida_the MOST conservative (LESS diverse) areas of the state. 

  2. <span>A lotta anger and angst among right-wing "True Conservatives" this morning:</span><span></span><span>Redstate Commenter:  I have voted in every eligble election, even the mid year / off year type elections. Donated money. Walked the beats. </span><span>I still get that chill when handed the “I Voted” sticker. </span><span></span><span></span><span>But this year, I sway between anger against my own party and just plain meh. This year is different, it really is. </span><span></span><span>I know, I know, every 4 years the same meme: “This is the most important election”, “the Supreme Court”,” Fear the other side”….. Oh, and this year add in, we are SUPPOSED to be all worked up about ObamaCare. So we’ve nominated its father!?! </span><span></span><span>But, Romney says he’ll get rid of Obamacare. I should believe him because he has never said things like this to get elected before??? </span><span></span><span>It won’t be Mitt vs BO, it will be Mitt vs Mitt. I am concerned about our base turning out.  </span><span></span><span>And yes, I am also concerned about myself and being able to even care enough to fight. […]</span><span></span><span>1. Redstate: "The Fat Lady Hasn't Sung But She's Warming Up"</span><span>http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/31/the-fat-…</span><span></span><span>They're serving notice, YET AGAIN, on the GOP establishment:</span><span></span><span>AmericanThinker: "The Republican Establishment's Strategic Blunder"</span><span>http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/the_republ…</span><span></span><span>While also clinging to ANY rey of hope regarding the Florida primary results:   FreeRepublic: "Among TRUE CONSERVATIVES, NEWT TAKES IT AT 46%, ROMNEY LAST AT 11%"  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2840812/…</span>

  3. Wow. It's not even 11AM and Mitt may have already blown much of the positive coverage he had been enjoying from winning the Florida primary. THIS is what is making its way through the politcal blogosphere RIGHT NOW at the speed of light!Romney says: ‘I’m Not Concerned About the Very Poor’prompting Jonah Goldberg over at The Corner (at NRO) to ask: "What is Wrong With This Guy?"[…] In a CNN interview this morning, Mitt Romney, stressed that it was the middle class, not the affluent or the low-income, his campaign was especially concerned about.“I’m not concerned about the very poor,” he said. “We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair , I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich…. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”In response to a follow-up question, Romney added, “We will hear from the Democrat party, the plight of the poor…. You can focus on the very poor, that’s not my focus"…. [….]Sources: CNN, NationalReview, NationalReviewOnline, HuffPost, The Atlantic, FreeRepublic, TalkingPointsMemo, WashingtonPost, AtlantaJournalConstitution, ThinkProgress, TheDailyBeast…You name the site, they're covering it. Po fella…smh.  

  4. A few right-wing Reax to Mitt's latest gaffeEd Morrissey @ Hotair:Earlier today, I said that only Mitt Romney could derail Mitt Romney this month.  Did my prediction come true already?  The media and Romney detractors have jumped all over this statement to CNN in which Romney says that he is “not concerned about the very poor,” but that slice of Romney’s statement is entirely misleading — although it’s certainly not adept for a front-runner.The Washington Post, to its credit, quotes the entire statement rather than just parsing out the controversial fragment.  …..   this is still a gaffe and a worrisome misstep for someone who has been on the campaign trail as long as Romney.  Candidates are supposed to express concern for everyone, not just one particular class, which gets to the more substantial error Romney makes. […]Romney “not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net”http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/01/video-romne…1. Hotair Commenter:"And this is the best candidate the non-conservative right-wing of this country could find to put up against Obama. How is the employment situation in Iceland these days?"2. NRO Commenter:"Man, where are his handlers? It will be taken "out of context", but the DNC attack ads practically write themselves. I thought that he was the "smart candidate"…3. NRO Commenter:"THIS is the guy that NRO has been pining for?!?!?!?!"4. FreeRepublic Commenter:But, but, but, the Establishment says he is the most electable.Congrats to President 0bama on his re-election. […]

  5. I see your on top of it as usual Truth. He has problems since nobodys excited about Romney. Then he goes and makes a dumb arse statement about poor people????? This is almost not even funny amymore.

  6. Lol. The key word being: "ALMOST" not funny……..because I have to tell you BD: When it comes to the GOP these days_and especially Mr. "electable"_I find it darn near impossible to keep from laughing!   

  7. A new day and a new suprise (at least for me).Despite the best efforts of the GOP, aided greatly by the American news media, to IGNORE what is becoming quite OBVIOUS (even to people around the WORLD), confirming what I've posted about several times since the GOP's Iowa Caucuses:The Telegrah – UK News:"What Mitt Romney's victories have in common: a low Republican turnout. Terrific news for Barack Obama"  The New York Times's election and polling analyst, Nate Silver, has done some number-crunching using the exit poll data from the four states that voted in January and finds that there is a pattern. In Iowa the number of self-identifying Republicans was down by 11%, in New Hampshire 15% the reduction was 15% while in Florida overnight it was 16%. I wonder whether we are seeing the impact of negative campaigning. A number of pundits are suggesting that this has been the most negative campaign ever with an estimated 92% of all the advertising in Florida being designed to undermine an opponent. It's estimated that the Romney campaign and its associated bodies spent $15.3m on on TV spots in Florida in the past month alone. To put that into context John McCain spent just $11 million on ads during his entire 2008 primary campaign. [….]Read: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/mikesmithson/10…Welp. Here's my take on it: First: Most rank-and-file Repub voters Hate the President. We know that. But ACTUAL voting numbers don't lie. A lot of GOP voters are NOT that enthusiatic about getting rid of the President afterall so they are NOT showing up to vote for a Repub candidate. But WHY would that be? (given that "Any of our guys can be Obambi")Oh. I know…lol.2nd: The GOP candidates SUCK. ALL of them. Rank-and-file Repub voters know it. And NO amount of money OR BSing can change that fact.

  8. <span>Lol. Just as I said, they know ALL the candidates SUCK.    More reax from right-wing world to Mitt's NOT so smart "gaffe" yesterday……   Erick Erikson:  It is days like today that make me thankful I think they all suck. At least I’m thankful I’m in the firmly not Romney camp.   Having told us only Romney was viable (with half-nods to Huntsman and Santorum) and having trotted out Elliot Abrams to smear Newt Gingrich with out of context quotes, even National Review is having trouble defending their candidate today. [….]   RedState: "The National Review’s Candidate Won’t Stop Digging"  </span><span>http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/02/01/the-nati Bethany Mandel:  To the left, it verifies the long held suspicion Republicans only care about people with money, callously disregarding the plight of the poor. This verification will be played over and over during a general election if Romney clinches the nomination. To the right, it verifies that Romney is as liberal as they fear, complacent with the welfare state as it currently stands. […]   Commentary Magazine: Romney and the "Very Poor"  http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/02/01/romn…</span><span> Ramesh Ponuru:  The Corner consensus seems to be that Romney’s remark—you know the one I’m talking about—was a foolish message badly expressed. I concur. […]   NRO: "Joining The Pile-On"   http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/289928/joini…</span><span></span><span>NRO Commenter:  It was not taken out of context. Romney said that because there are safety nets for poor their troubles don't concern him. It's not only a dumb political statement but it isn't a good conservative position to take, either. There is no reason for a conservative to be unconcerned that a large number of adults are living in poverty- regardless of whether or not they happen to get foodstamps. Indeed a small government conservative should be even more concerned about getting the poor to a point where they help themselves and can get off the dole. […]   </span>

Check Also
Close
Back to top button