Iowa

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

they wont back romney becuause he is to the left of obama on key issues.

Huh?

romney was responsible for the blueprint of obamacare, the repubs biggest issue,

Actually the individual mandate, which Romney has never advocated at the federal level, was the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation.

he's squishy on immigration.

His position has moved to the right a bit erratically, but the furthest left it's ever been is still similar to President Bush.

He campaigned for the last 4 years and finished in Iowa EXACTLY where he was 4 years ago, he hasnt made any headway.

No, 4 years ago he finished a distant second 10 points behind Huck. This time he finished in first, over 4 points ahead of Paul who was expected to win.

He is getting votes because he is viewed as the most electable and the rest of the candidates are a joke. Unless the independants get behind romney, its 4 more years of O guaranteed. Im pretty sure I stay home on election day

Isn't that the point, to get elected?

Agree the field is weak overall but the lackluster support for Romney seems to be more about his moderate stances on some domestic issues more than his ability to be a strong executive. He may not rally the religious right, but unless you're really anti-Mormon Republicans and a lot of Independents will vote for Romney over Obama.

Romney will likely shift back to the middle and pick a moderate VP like Condi. If so he has a very good chance of beating Obama.

That's the entire point of the article I posted.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

Huh?



Actually the individual mandate, which Romney has never advocated at the federal level, was the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation.

as governor for a liberal state he passed mandatory healthcare legistlation. Repubs dont like that, period.


No, 4 years ago he finished a distant second 10 points behind Huck. This time he finished in first, over 4 points ahead of Paul who was expected to win.

No - In the 2008 Republican Iowa caucuses, Mitt Romney received 30,021 votes, 25% of the total, In the 2012 caucuses, Romney received 30,015 votes, 25% of the total. Not a lot of headway Spence.

GWB did a lot of damage to repubs and most dont believe he was convervative. I think repubs may stay home so not to risk further tarnishing their reputation.


-spence

taken from another article which sums up my view-
After 39 months of consistent public hostility to bailout economics, after the rise of the tea party movement, after town-hall opposition to "Obama care," after the long-shot Scott Brown win in Massachusetts, after the 2010 limited-government resurgence in the House of Representatives ... after all of these unmistakable signs of public -- let alone Republican -- sentiment, the alleged party of limited government may be on the verge of nominating someone who is running to President Barack Obama's left on Medicare, who helped pave the way for the Obama policy Republicans hate most and who has no real plan for cutting the biggest growth items in the federal budget.

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

s governor for a liberal state he passed mandatory healthcare legistlation. Repubs dont like that, period.

Very similar to what was proposed by a leading conservative think tank and subsequently applauded by the self described "most principled conservative" in the race.

What Romney enacted in Massachusetts certainly isn't Obama care.

No - In the 2008 Republican Iowa caucuses, Mitt Romney received 30,021 votes, 25% of the total, In the 2012 caucuses, Romney received 30,015 votes, 25% of the total. Not a lot of headway Spence.

Jimmy jimmy jimmy...

Ron Paul and Rick Santorum made serious investments to mobilize support across the entire state while Romney largely ignored Iowa until just before the caucus. Santorum made a late run because of some effective campaigning as well as being the only player left to pick up the evangelical support left by Bachmann and Perry.

So in context of 2012, Romney did pretty well. I don't think anyone expects Paul, Santorum or Gingrich to do well in New Hampshire. In fact, I think Gingrich will get knocked out or nearly out before he has a chance to gain some momentum with a success down south.

Huntsman could benefit from all of this coming out of New Hampshire, but Romney is clearly in the lead.

taken from another article which sums up my view-
After 39 months of consistent public hostility to bailout economics, after the rise of the tea party movement, after town-hall opposition to "Obama care," after the long-shot Scott Brown win in Massachusetts, after the 2010 limited-government resurgence in the House of Representatives ... after all of these unmistakable signs of public -- let alone Republican -- sentiment, the alleged party of limited government may be on the verge of nominating someone who is running to President Barack Obama's left on Medicare, who helped pave the way for the Obama policy Republicans hate most and who has no real plan for cutting the biggest growth items in the federal budget.

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Who ever wrote it clearly knows nothing about Romney care or his quite detailed economics plan.

-spence