Fox News Channel contributor Dr. Charles Krauthammer is a pretty smart guy. Last night he offered some analysis of Super Tuesday that didn’t make much sense to me. Dr. K opined that Romney was weak because he kept winning these primaries, and thereby the delegates, in such a slim fashion, sort of like a hockey game that ends 2-1.
He pointed to MI again noting that a 3 point victory there, in what was touted as one of Romney’s three home states, showed his lack luster support among Republicans. There’s one big problem. Romney won the Republican vote in MI by 7 points. It was the P-BO’s union lackeys that made an easy Romney victory a closer Romney victory. In Ohio the Demo-Dopes were at it again. 5% of the voters in the Republican primary were Demo-Dopes. They broke overwhelmingly for Santorum.
Now here’s the real problem. Had the oh so smart crowd that runs the Republican party been smart enough to not let Demo-Dopes choose our candidate, and had they been smart enough to maintain a winner takes all strategy in the early primaries, the race would be pretty much over. Instead the Republican ruling class decided that having a bunch of unwashed criminals (aka Occupussies) and SEIU thugs organize a movement to disrupt their nominating process would be a good thing. After all they are the smart people, right? And who the hell decided on 20+ debates moderated by Demo-Dope leaning MSM hacks?
And I think it’s worth pointing out again, so I will, that Romney came from way back, double digits in both cases, to win in Ohio and MI. That might tell an outsider with no real political experience that Romney has the political (and dare I say it) managerial skill and where-with-all to get things that need to be done – done.
The smart people said that MI was a must win for Romney. He won. Then they said OH was a must win for Romney. He won. Now, after two must wins, they say he’s weak. YGBSM!
Then Dr. K goes on to complain about the VA primary. Santorum and Newt couldn’t get on the ballot. So Dr. K translates that into a poor showing for Romney. Lemme ask you this Dr. K.: Who wants a president running the free world who can’t even figure out how to get himself on a ballot for an election? They can’t get on the ballot, but it is Romney who is weak in VA? Puleeeeze.
And here’s something else, for what it’s worth. Conservative icons, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sara Palin have all sided with the not-Romney candidates. Rush says he’s neutral. Then he spends three hours a day trashing Romney and touting Santorum. Those are quasi endorsements from some Republican heavy hitters.
I listened to Santorum’s long tedious speech last night. He touted himself as the big winner and then, as he ALWAYS does whined on for another 20 minutes or so about not having the resources Romney does. Continuing in full whine mode Rick directed his assault on Romney and let the real dope in this equation, the 5th candidate if you will, off the hook.
By contrast Romney came out looking like someone out of central casting to play the role of President of the United States. With good will, he congratulated his rivals for their efforts. Then he took direct aim at P-BO for about 15 min. He was positive, up beat and dynamic. In spite of what Dr. K thinks, Romney was indeed the big winner last night. He won the most states. He won the most delegates. He looked and sounded the best doing it. But I guess in political speak that makes him weak.
And, here's the $64,000,000 question. If winning makes Romney look weak, what does losing make the other candidates look like?
1 comment:
From the Griffin,
If the NHL banned fights they would lose half their audience. The media want a fight every minute and screw having a puck on the ice. Newt can start a fight but can't win it, Santorum wants the puck but not the hits, and Paul wants to argue with the refs.I would take any of them over P-BO though.The continual P-BO sin is to throw his team mates under the team bus. No leadership. Mitt wins the game in a shootout.
Post a Comment