[quote]ZEB wrote:
“The former Massachusetts governor now earns 35% support from likely South Carolina GOP Primary Voters, according to the latest telephone survey in the state. ThatÃ???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??s up from 28% late last week. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich remains in second place with 21% of the vote, followed by former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum and Texas Congressman Ron Paul, each with 16%.”
35% is the highest that Romney has been in SC. For you Paulies what’s going on in SC? How come Ron Paul can’t do better than 4th place?
The millions spent calling Romney a flip-flopper didn’t work. So now they’re going after tax returns. When that goes no where will they concede defeat and actually ban together and try to beat Obama?
Stay tuned![/quote]
Oh Jesus.
Florida is a winner takes all state and it would cost the Paul campaign an estimated 10 million to campaign there.
Therefore, they concentrate on states where they can stage a successful campaign for 1 mill or less AND keep their delegates.
And while I’m on the topic Florida is looking even better for Mitt Romney! The following data is a culmination of four polls which gives it high degree of accuracy.
And it looks like the great isolationist Ron Paul will finish 4th in Florida as well.
I guess it’s no wonder that his detractors are getting desperate. Romney will sweeep the first four primaries and with such momentum the race will be pretty much over.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
And while I’m on the topic Florida is looking even better for Mitt Romney! The following data is a culmination of four polls which gives it high degree of accuracy.
And it looks like the great isolationist Ron Paul will finish 4th in Florida as well.
I guess it’s no wonder that his detractors are getting desperate. Romney will sweeep the first four primaries and with such momentum the race will be pretty much over.[/quote]
And all he has to do then is to convince Santorum, Gingrich and Bachmann delegates to vote for him.
Here are some interesting figures on who is voting for Romney. One reason that I give him a 50/50 chance of beating Obama is that women seem to like him a great deal more than the other republicans. And I feel he will poll high with women vs Obama as well.
Among Women
-Mitt Romney 56%
-Newt Gingrich 14%
-Rick Santorum 8%
-Ron Paul 8%
-Rick Perry 6%
-Undecided 6%
The majority of women have voted for a democrat for President in every recent Presidential election with the exception of Ronald Reagan in 1984. And I believe GW Bush was very close with John Kerry in the quest for the female vote. And as long as I’m on the topic one (more among many) reason that Ron Paul will never get the nomination is because women will not allow it. He polls very low across the country with this very important demographic group.
[quote]orion wrote:
And all he has to do then is to convince Santorum, Gingrich and Bachmann delegates to vote for him.
No challenge there I guess. [/quote]
Which is not the strangest thing that could happen though sadly it will only be to see Obama reelected.[/quote]
It is very common to “release” your delegates once you have been defeated. If you were a student of Presidential history you would know that there have been many contentious Presidential primaries in the past. And the winner never had a problem picking up the losers delegates. Often times deals are made to include various things in the platform to make the various losers happy. This year will be no exception.
This is not rocket science it’s politics…A—B—C…Done deal!
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Here are some interesting figures on who is voting for Romney. One reason that I give him a 50/50 chance of beating Obama is that women seem to like him a great deal more than the other republicans. And I feel he will poll high with women vs Obama as well.
Among Women
-Mitt Romney 56%
-Newt Gingrich 14%
-Rick Santorum 8%
-Ron Paul 8%
-Rick Perry 6%
-Undecided 6%
The majority of women have voted for a democrat for President in every recent Presidential election with the exception of Ronald Reagan in 1984. And I believe GW Bush was very close with John Kerry in the quest for the female vote. And as long as I’m on the topic one (more among many) reason that Ron Paul will never get the nomination is because women will not allow it. He polls very low across the country with this very important demographic group.
[/quote]
Yes we already know that trends are set in stone. That’s why we call them trends.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Here are some interesting figures on who is voting for Romney. One reason that I give him a 50/50 chance of beating Obama is that women seem to like him a great deal more than the other republicans. And I feel he will poll high with women vs Obama as well.
Among Women
-Mitt Romney 56%
-Newt Gingrich 14%
-Rick Santorum 8%
-Ron Paul 8%
-Rick Perry 6%
-Undecided 6%
The majority of women have voted for a democrat for President in every recent Presidential election with the exception of Ronald Reagan in 1984. And I believe GW Bush was very close with John Kerry in the quest for the female vote. And as long as I’m on the topic one (more among many) reason that Ron Paul will never get the nomination is because women will not allow it. He polls very low across the country with this very important demographic group.
[/quote]
Yes we already know that trends are set in stone. That’s why we call them trends.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Here are some interesting figures on who is voting for Romney. One reason that I give him a 50/50 chance of beating Obama is that women seem to like him a great deal more than the other republicans. And I feel he will poll high with women vs Obama as well.
Among Women
-Mitt Romney 56%
-Newt Gingrich 14%
-Rick Santorum 8%
-Ron Paul 8%
-Rick Perry 6%
-Undecided 6%
The majority of women have voted for a democrat for President in every recent Presidential election with the exception of Ronald Reagan in 1984. And I believe GW Bush was very close with John Kerry in the quest for the female vote. And as long as I’m on the topic one (more among many) reason that Ron Paul will never get the nomination is because women will not allow it. He polls very low across the country with this very important demographic group.
[/quote]
Yes we already know that trends are set in stone. That’s why we call them trends.
err, ummm, wait…[/quote]
Trends are all we have and you should know that.[/quote]
And if you could figure out what makes them change you could be a quadrabrazillionaire.
Two new developments threaten to shake up the South Carolina primary!
Today Rick Perry announces his withdrawal from the republican presidential race. And from what I’m hearing he will endorse Newt (I’m a mean… but smart… bastard) Gignrich. And also later today or tomorrow a Mrs. Gingrich is calling a press conference to attack the character of her former husband. What she will say no one knows but I’ve heard it has to do with wife swapping (oh my). Then again it could be something entirely different but equally bad.
This is now a real nail biter. Will all of Perry’s supporters blindly move to Newt (sure I’m fat old and grey and can’t win in the media age) Gingrich, or will Rick Santorum gain some of those supporters? Or…will some of the female Perry supporters vote for Romney as he does well among women.
[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Curious how much Gingrich’s former wife was paid?[/quote]
You obviously don’t know much about former wives and the potential hate that is already naturally there. Sure she could have been paid, but then again she might hate him so much that she would actually pay to destroy him.
[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Curious how much Gingrich’s former wife was paid?[/quote]
You obviously don’t know much about former wives and the potential hate that is already naturally there. Sure she could have been paid, but then again she might hate him so much that she would actually pay to destroy him.
[i]“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”[i]
William Congreve[/quote]
Well luckily I don’t. Nonetheless, her pockets are lined. For the record, the bastard deserves it.
[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Curious how much Gingrich’s former wife was paid?[/quote]
You obviously don’t know much about former wives and the potential hate that is already naturally there. Sure she could have been paid, but then again she might hate him so much that she would actually pay to destroy him.
“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”
William Congreve[/quote]
Technically speaking, Gingrich destroyed himself by his own behavior.
She would just be doing those that would be tricked into voting for him a service by calling out his character flaws.
[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
Curious how much Gingrich’s former wife was paid?[/quote]
You obviously don’t know much about former wives and the potential hate that is already naturally there. Sure she could have been paid, but then again she might hate him so much that she would actually pay to destroy him.
“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”
William Congreve[/quote]
Technically speaking, Gingrich destroyed himself by his own behavior.
She would just be doing those that would be tricked into voting for him a service by calling out his character flaws.[/quote]
I think this might be a first…I agree with every word that you’ve written!