The Mitt Romney campaign just let out a great big sigh of relief.
After threats that he could possibly lose one or both of the Arizona – Michigan primaries yesterday, Romney pulled out a win in both! “We didn’t win by a lot, but we won by enough,” Romney told cheering supporters in Michigan.
As of this writing, here are the election results from last night:
ARIZONA (87% reporting)
Romney – 47.4%
Santorum – 26.4 %
MICHIGAN (97% reporting)
Romney – 41%
Santorum – 39.9%
Until recently, Romney was considered extremely vulnerable in his birth state of Michigan. But a poor debate showing from Rick Santorum, combined with some rather bizarre statements regarding Satan wanting to overtake America, seemed to blow Santorum’s chances and give Romney a much needed win.
In the all important delegate count, Arizona was a winner-take-all state, while Michigan split their delegates. 1144 delegates are needed to secure the Republican nomination. Here is the most up-to-date delegate count:
ROMNEY – 152
SANTORUM – 72
GINGRICH – 32
PAUL – 19
Next week is the much anticipated “Super Tuesday” contest, with voting in 9 states including Georgia, Ohio, Massachusetts, Tennessee and Virginia. Newt Gingrich is counting on southern states (including his home state of Georgia) to give his campaign a lifeline. Romney is hoping his dual wins yesterday will propel him into a major victory next week, while Santorum is hoping to recapture momentum from his Colorado and Nevada victories. Ron Paul is just along for the ride.
Some additional facts:ABC News: "Democrats Shake Up Michigan Primary, Exit Polls Show"In the closest primary to date this year (excluding more lightly attended caucuses), Santorum easily won the groups he’s targeted, including strong conservatives, evangelicals, strong Tea Party supporters and ardent abortion opponents. Union voters, fleeing Mitt Romney, helped Santorum. And so did Democrats.Exit poll results found that nearly one in 10 voters in Michigan’s open primary were Democrats. That was off their peak – 17 percent in 2000, when they tipped the contest to John McCain. But they influenced this year’s outcome nonetheless: Santorum won 53 percent of Democrats, versus just 17 percent for Romney. Without them Romney would have had a fairly comfortable win. With them it was closer.Romney relied on some of his customary support groups, notably well-off voters and senior citizens – effective elements, if not necessarily the most compelling ones for a national campaign. He won senior citizens, but no other age group. He won $100,000-plus voters, but no other income group. He especially won $200,000-plus voters, a group around which it’s hard to build a slogan for the masses. […]Read: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/demo…Democratic participation was about 9% of the total vote.
A few observations….First: Romney winning his "home-state" by 3% (up against Santorum no less) is not a huge win by any stretch of the imagination. But it IS a significant win because, as WE here at Ok Wassup had been saying FOR DAYS leading up to the Michigan primary, it was a "MUST win" for Romney. Period. The margin of Romney's Arizona win is a HUGE win. And as DJ pointed out, these 2 wins having given Romney some breathing room. The wins also keep the "inevitable nominee" narrative alive. 2nd: Romney remains a very weak front-runner. In fact, as per exit polling yesterday, over HALF of all Repub voters said that their votes could be swayed if they had a better choice. But since NO such choice is available, Romney remains the strongest of a very weak field. And despite the very real probability that he'll lose a few more state primaries, he's still most likely win the GOP nomination. 3rd: I am thoroughly DISGUSTED with any Democrat who crossed party lines yesterday and voted for Santorum simply for the purpose of causing chaos in the GOP primary process. I mean really?! Since WHEN did Dems start following in the footsteps of a cretin like Rush Limbaugh!?! (SEE Limbaugh's instruction to Repub voters to cross-over and cause chaos in the Dem Primary process in 2008). Fourth: Santorum, Gingrich and Paul = Amateurs.
I didn't expect Romney to win both. I thought he'd lose Michigan but oh well. A win is a win but three points ahead doesn't say much for his chances looking forward. Now I wanna see if Repubs still wanna throw somebody else in or go ride or die with Romney
looks like romney and santorum is splitting delegates in michigan which means romney didnt win there after all.<a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/02/mitt-romney-michigan-delegates-rick-santorum-/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29#.T04x6phi9G8" rel="nofollow"> <a href="http://;http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/02/mitt-romney-michigan-delegates-rick-santorum-/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29#.T04x6phi9G8” target=”_blank”>;http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/02/mitt-romney-michigan-delegates-rick-santorum-/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29#.T04x6phi9G8
<span>Dan Balz: "Mitt Romney survives Michigan primary, looks to Super Tuesday" His Michigan comeback — he fell behind Santorum earlier in the month — showed his resilience as a candidate and underscored the advantages he holds in the nomination battle — more money, a superior organization and the ruthlessness to attack anyone in his path. Still, his advisers fretted that he would not get enough credit for turning around a campaign that only a week ago had party strategists speculating about the possibility of another candidate getting into the race. Yet even in victory, the campaign in Michigan highlighted Romney’s <span>flaws</span> as a candidate. That he had to fight as hard as he did in a state he won four years ago was a reminder that he is still struggling to connect with a portion of his party’s base, even against what party strategists regard as relatively weak opposition. While Tuesday reinforced again that he has the clearest path to the nomination, the way he won suggested that he still might have to <span>scratch his way</span> there, which is not how a front-runner is supposed to win. […] Read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-sur…</span><span> IMO, Mitt's "comeback" in Michigan was mostly due to the sheer STUPIDITY and fanatical ramblings of a Mr. Rick Santorum. Heading into Michigan with a bit of wind in his sails, Santorum had a good chance of winning Michigan. AND THEN he opened his mouth and proceeded to p*ss it all away. </span>
Forgive me. An *off-topic*_but important_bit of GOP related news:CNN: "Citing partisanship, Maine's Snowe says she'll leave the Senate" Snowe, who turned 65 last week, was first elected to the U.S. House in 1978 and then to the Senate in 1994. She is the first woman to serve in both chambers of a state legislature and the U.S. Congress.Snowe was known as a moderate who sometimes sided with Democrats in the increasingly partisan environment of Washington politics.Her statement cited the partisan divide."I have no doubt I would have won re-election," Snowe said, describing her political service in Maine and Washington as "an indescribable honor and immeasurable privilege."While her motivation and sense of responsibility remain, she continued, "I do find it frustrating, however, that an atmosphere of polarization and 'my way or the highway' ideologies has become pervasive in campaigns and in our governing institutions.""Unfortunately, I do not realistically expect the partisanship of recent years in the Senate to change over the short term," Snowe said. "So at this stage of my tenure in public service, I have concluded that I am not prepared to commit myself to an additional six years in the Senate."The White House released a statement praising Snowe's bipartisan efforts. […]Read: http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/28/politics/senate-sno…Not a big fan of Sen. Snowe (her self-serving brand of politics). But I would take her ANY day over the ignorant and extremist nuts now running her party.
Yesterday I posted a passage from an article written by David Brooks (Repub) which I think dovetails perfectly with Olympia Snowe's decision to retire_AND with the way Romney's twisted himself into a pretzel trying to appeal to the GOP *base.* Here's a little more of that article:WashPost: "The Possum Republicans"In the 1960s and ’70s, the fight was between conservatives and moderates. Conservatives trounced the moderates and have driven them from the party. These days the fight is between the protesters and the professionals. The grass-roots protesters in the Tea Party and elsewhere have certain policy ideas, but they are not that different from the Republicans in the “establishment.”The big difference is that the protesters don’t believe in governance. They have zero tolerance for the compromises needed to get legislation passed. They don’t believe in trimming and coalition building. For them, politics is more about earning respect and making a statement than it is about enacting legislation. It’s grievance politics, identity politics.Of course, the professional politicians don’t want to get in the way of this torrent of passion and resentment. In private, they bemoan where the party is headed; in public they do nothing.All across the nation, there are mainstream Republicans lamenting how the party has grown more and more insular, more and more rigid. This year, they have an excellent chance to defeat President Obama, yet the wingers have trashed the party’s reputation by swinging from one embarrassing and unelectable option to the next: Bachmann, Trump, Cain, Perry, Gingrich, Santorum.But where have these party leaders been over the past five years, when all the forces that distort the G.O.P. were metastasizing? Where were they during the rise of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck? Where were they when Arizona passed its beyond-the-fringe immigration law? Where were they in the summer of 2011 when the House Republicans rejected even the possibility of budget compromise? They were lying low, hoping the unpleasantness would pass. […]Read: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/opinion/brooks-…
Reax from right-wing world……Erick Erikson: "Three Percent"When you have a candidate few people really like, whose support is a mile wide and an inch deep, whose raison d’etre (a 4am fancy word) is fixing an economy that is fixing itself without him, and who only wins his actual, factual home state by three percentage points against a guy no one took seriously only two months ago, there really is little reason for independent voters in the general election to choose him if the economy keeps improving.Seriously, putting it bluntly, conservatives may not like Barack Obama, but most other people do. And when faced with a guy you like and a guy you don’t like who says he can fix an economy that no longer needs fixing, you’re going to go with the guy you like.If Republicans in Washington are not panicked and trying desperately to pull Bobby Jindal in the race tomorrow, or someone like him, the party leaders must have a death wish. <span></span>Mitt Romney continues to run an uninspiring campaign only able to win by massively outspending his opponents to tell voters how much worse the other guys are. That may work in the primary, but it will not work in a general election where the President of the United States won’t be outspent 5 to 1.Three percentage points. In his home state. In his wife’s home state. In the state his father served as Governor. Three percentage points against a guy few took seriously two months ago and who just three weeks ago no one expected to give Romney a run for his money in Romney’s home state.And this is our nominee. [….]Read: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/02/29/three-pe…Redstate Commenter:This is personal now for EE. He has totally invested himself in a Romney defeat. Facts don’t matter. This is about him now, dammit.The reality is that there has been no credible Conservative candidate against Romney since this thing started. I looked up disaster in the dictionary and there was a picture of Rick F Santorum. Now Erick seems to be jumping on the White Knight bandwagon which is the last refuge of a losing strategy.I voted for Romney reluctantly in 2008 as an alternative to McCain. I am stuck supporting him again because nobody better has mounted a winning campaign. That is not my fault. But we all better get behind him now or we are looking at four more years of soft fascism. […]"…four more years of soft fascism"..??? Wow. The level of fear AND stupidity in that world really does boggle the mind…smh.
"It seemed like such a good idea at the time."TPM: "Who’s To Blame For The GOP’s Drawn-Out Primaries Nightmare?" The Republican primaries in 2012 would be their own version of Obama vs. Clinton, prompting excited conservatives to register to vote in droves, donate early and often to the candidates, and keep the attention solely focused on the GOP’s message instead of the White House’s bully pulpit. But only two years after deliberately retooling their primary rules to encourage a lengthier fight, Republican politicians are struggling to remember just what on earth they were thinking. […]Read: http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/whos-to…Friedersdorf: "The GOP's Extended Primary: It Isn't Like Obama vs. Clinton""The Democrats were deciding which historic nominee excited them most. Republicans can't decide who depresses them least."Read: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/…H/T: A. Sullivan