That shouldn't really be the headline.
It should have been "Romney wins by a nose over a surging Santorum."
But Iowa is Iowa. Its a nice place to..um....buy fresh corn and catch a good college football game, but it's not the place to decide the outcome of the presidential race. Not yet, anyway.
Michelle Bachman has dropped out. Perry is "Reassessing" his candidacy. Huntsman is, well, no one really knows what he's doing. He's a good guy but running a stealth candidacy is not going to win him anything. And Crazy Dr. Paul is still along for comic relief.
But in the real world, It's now a 3 man race between Romney, Santorum and Gingrich.
The LA Times reports that a super PAC poured millions into Iowa to campaign against Gingrich. That money helped there, but we'll see what happens in the primaries to come.
It could emerge that Romney of Santorum ends up as the GOP nominee in 2012. But I haven't written the wily old Speaker out yet.
h/t American Power and Blazing Cat Fur
2 comments:
No, I think that you can count Newt out. Newt Gingrich's biggest problem isn't PAC spending - although it's hilarious to watch any Republican suggest that it is -it's the fact that he's Newt Fucking Gingrich.
If his ability to directly contradict something that he himself had said fifteen minutes earlier constitutes "wiliness", good sir, I admire your facility with the language.
The guy is a political suicide vest, who was bounced out on his ass by his own conservatives after he actually won five seats in an election. A Republican Congress found him in ethical breach to the tune of $300 grand, only because the Constitution or the rules of the House didn't allow for hanging.
Besides which, Santorum and Gingrich tend to negate one another as the anti-Romney, to the extent that a broke and hysterical Newt is a factor at all. Vote-splitting produces surprising results, as three Chretien majorities amply demonstrate. If Gingrich, Perry and Santorum all stay in the race through Florida, it becomes almost impossible for Romney to lose.
Moreover, who in the fuck starts a concession speech by bemoaning "negative" politics - before even getting to his own message - and then start going negative himself the next day? Well, Newt does! That's why professional poiticians have always hated Newt and why they always will.
Oh, and he's dead fucking broke, and went from front-runner to fourth in less than fourteen days. As a drunken, Canadian onanist, I have a clearer path to the Republican nomination than he does.
You could be right, Skippy. I hope not because of the current crop, there isn't anyone in this field of saggy saplings that is something to get excited about.
Of the lot of them, Gingrich would hold up the best against Obama in a debate, but indeed the fellow does come with a baggage train behind him.
It's interesting that the LA Times article suggests that Obama is more worried about Romney and all the money that his SuperPAC would have to spend in the general election. I don't hate Romney, but like just about everyone else in the world, I don't like him either. The big factor in November, barring Iran going ballistic, so to speak, will be the economy, but damn..Romney is so uninspiring and Santorum...I'l be honest, I just never gave the guy a serious thought until recently. I am going to have to take a closer look there.
But don't take this as a concession about Gingrich. He's like Dracula - everytime you think he's gone, he keeps rising from the grave.
Post a Comment