Romney Wins Decisively In Florida

By Loudoun Insider

Florida Board of Elections website here.


Comments

  • Pragmatist says:

    I guess that promised moonbase didn’t appeal to as many voters as Newt had hoped?

  • NateDogg614 says:

    Probably just as well that Romney won. While I would vote for Gingrich in the general, I just think he’s got too much baggage and skeletons in the closet to win. Now, that having been said, Romney needs to choose a running mate who can appeal to the conservative base and that ticket might have a shot of winning. Meanwhile, we in Virginia need to be sure that our 13 electoral votes go to the Republican column and we need to keep Obama’s lapdog — Tim Kaine — out of the US Senate. Last thing we need is another rubber stamp Democrat Senator from Virginia. (It still kills me — red state like Virginia two Democrat senators — if I wanted Democrat senators I could move to Massachusetts!)

  • Dan says:

    There were 15% fewer votes cast in the Florida Republican primary this year than in 2008. Any thoughts on why that may be?

    Was the turnout depressed by the amount of negative advertising that Romney blanketed the state with? That’s what negative ads traditionally are expected to do. Keep people from coming out and voting for the opponent you are targeting with your attack ads. Or is it symptomatic of lower overall enthusiasm among Republicans? Polls indicate they are even less happy with their choices than they were even a couple of months ago.

    Turnout was higher in the primaries in both New Hampshire and South Carolina this year as compared to 2008. Is there something unique about Florida I am missing? Or are these guys really starting to turn people off?

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    Who should be Romney’s VP? I am interested in others takes.

    Mine is Rubio. Gets conservatives, Hispanics.. Decimates Obama, sets up a future pres…

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Rubio would be perfect, but I don’t know if he will do it.

  • AFF says:

    Rubio?
    Sweet. I’m dying to hear about his family’s desperate flight from Castro again. Or not.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Hey, not many politicians are without fault! Jindal would be a good pick as well – cue the complaints!

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    “Now, that having been said, Romney needs to choose a running mate who can appeal to the conservative base and that ticket might have a shot of winning. ”

    That worked so well for McCain didn’t it? From my perspective, the wordt thing that could happen is for Romney to pick a non-rightwinger. Pick a rightwing to placate the conservative base will also alienate the independent vote and drive the liberal base to the polls – that would be a good thing from my perspective.

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    “That’s what negative ads traditionally are expected to do. Keep people from coming out and voting for the opponent you are targeting with your attack ads.”

    My recent understanding is that the negative campaign barrge is supposed piss off and motivate your base to turn out at the polls rather than keep the opposition’s base at home.

  • I love how the War Department (aka Mrs. Lloyd) described Gingrich’s never-say-die response to the shellacking: “He’s like the gopher in Caddyshack. You just can’t seem to get rid of him.”

  • Dan says:

    Lloyd, remember what the golf course looked like at the end of the movie as a result of trying to get rid of that gopher? That is the interesting question. Will the Republican party’s hopes of retaking the White House look like that golf course after they finish going after Gingrich? I expect (and hope) he will be every bit as persistent as that gopher.

    That was such a great movie too. Did you catch Bill Murray on Letterman?

  • NateDogg614 says:

    And then the country will look like that golf course after 4 more years of Obama running things.

  • The scary thing, Dan, is that in the end the gopher won.

    I hope that’s not the case here

  • Pragmatist says:

    I’m a bit confused by something NatDogg said…”4 more years of Obama running things.”

    Obama is but a single person. He is not a dictator. He has things he’d like to do, but in order to do them, he needs the Senate and the House of Representatives to take action (on most things). It seems to me that right now, given the stalemate in Congress, there’s not much “doing” at all.

    Here’s how I see the next 4 years playing out.

    1. Obama will get re-elected. The Republicans do not have a strong enough candidate to beat him and satisfaction with Congress is lower than satisfaction with the President.
    2. The economy will improve on its own about 18-24 months into Obama’s second term. The Democratic party will make substantial gains in the house during the 2014 election and will take back control of the Senate.
    3. Deficits will begin to drop as a result of an improved economy, reasonable tax increases and substantial cuts in military and other government spending.

    I’m willing to bet a cold beer on this!

  • Elder Berry says:

    Depending on what goes down in Europe Pragmatist I generally agree with you.

    Congress has been more useless than t*ts on a bull. I’m not sure why the Republicans on the Hill thought that being so completely obstructionist wasn’t going to backfire soon. All they did was give Obama a huge space to run in. Come on, pass something, pretend you’re a government. They managed to vote through Gabby Giffords’s bill and Speaker Boehner even cried over it.

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    “Come on, pass something, pretend you’re a government.”

    Come on, pass a budget. And then pass bills repealing thousands of laws and tens of thousands of regulations. And then go home and stop doing stuff.

    That is what you meant, right?

    It is interesting how memes develop in different groups. In leftist groups they actually think that Congress obstructionism will resonate. Somehow, even with an unstoppable majority for half of Obama’s presidency, he was obstructed.

    Hmmmmmm…..

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    “Somehow, even with an unstoppable majority for half of Obama’s presidency, he was obstructed.”

    I don’t know about that. For a while they got a lot done, imo – at least until they only had 59 in the Senate.

  • Dan says:

    Yes, it is interesting how memes develop and resonate within certain groups. For instance, while I almost fell off my chair upon hearing Sen. McConnell say that Obama got everything he wanted during the first years of his presidency, LA obviously (and inexplicably) believes that to be true. I guess you weren’t paying attention during all those months when even uncontroversial measures that were ultimately passed with large bipartisan majorities were slowed to a crawl by every means available to the minority in the Senate. Nothing was routine. Everything was made to take the greatest amount of time possible.

    It may come as a surprise to you, but reasonable and not highly partisan folks might call that obstructionism. And while that didn’t “resonate” with such folks for quite a while it seems from current polling data that obstructionists like McConnell may have overdone it to the point where such folks (let’s call them swing voters) seem to be getting it. I guess we’ll see in November.

  • Dan says:

    “I don’t know about that. For a while they got a lot done, imo – at least until they only had 59 in the Senate.”

    The election of Scott Brown (who will have his hands full getting re-elected) was in January 2010. As more than one wag has noted, that gave the Republicans a majority of 41 to the Democrats minority of 59.

    I have never favored the elimination of the filibuster. Even when it made passing laws like the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act extremely difficult. There are a number of good arguments to be made in favor of retaining it. But it has never been used in the manner that the Republicans have used it over these last couple of years.

    If the Democrats retain the Senate in November and it is proposed that the rules be changed to eliminate the filibuster when new rules are adopted in January I hope the change is made. It can be a useful tool when used appropriately, but McConnell has proven that in the hands of those who place party above country it can do a lot of damage.

    A hammer is a useful tool too. For driving nails. But if someone starts bashing skulls with that same hammer then it has to be taken away from the one wielding it.

    It’s time to take the hammer away.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “It is interesting how memes develop in different groups. In leftist groups they actually think that Congress obstructionism will resonate. Somehow, even with an unstoppable majority for half of Obama’s presidency, he was obstructed.

    Hmmmmmm…..”

    LA, you really are beginning to give anthropologists a bad name.

  • Cato the Elder says:

    “I guess we’ll see in November”

    Indeed. Like we saw in 2009, 2010, and 2011.

  • Dan says:

    Cato, yes, as we see with every election. Ain’t democracy grand?

    I like the way the landscape is shaping up for this one. And, as you know, Republican overconfidence and hubris are among my favorite things. I sense a lot of it these days.

    On a more comedic note, it is being reported that Donald Trump is going to endorse Gingrich. The show must go on!

    I think you guys are stuck with Thurston Howell, III. But I’m rooting for Newt to take it all the way to the convention. As long as he keeps paying young Vincent.

  • Dan says:

    The early reports were incorrect! Trump is not endorsing Gingrich. He is endorsing Romney.

    You couldn’t write a funnier script than this. The guy who is going to be the Republican nominee for president is going to take part in one of Donald Trump’s promotions of himself at the Trump hotel in Las Vegas. Romney is going to make a major deal out of receiving the endorsement of a rich kook who has spent most of the last year blathering on about every fringe conspiracy out there. What sort of morons are running the Romney campaign anyway?

    It’s a bit dated. About three months old. But A Fox News poll asking voters if they would be more or less likely to vote for a Trump endorsed candidate had some results that should be sobering to the Romney folks (yes, I know they are all Mormons and are sober all the time).

    6% said they’d be more likely to vote for a Trump backed candidate.

    31% said they’d be less likely to vote for such a candidate.

    The rest apparently couldn’t give a rat’s ass about Donald Trump.

    I wouldn’t put any significant weight on this, but why would you risk turning off a high percentage of voters by rubbing shoulders with a fruitcake like Trump?

    This show just keeps getting better and better.

Leave Comment