Romney Ahead in Wyoming

Associated Press ^ | January 5, 2008 | Staff

[citizen]

CASPER, Wyo. — Mitt Romney grabbed the early lead in Wyoming’s Republican caucuses Saturday as the state had its brief moment in the political spotlight sandwiched between attention-getting contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The former Massachusetts governor gained the first four delegates while California Rep. Duncan Hunter won a fifth.

Romney easily led the overall vote with more than 50 percent. Hunter was second with 21 percent and Fred Thompson, who hadn’t won any delegates, was third with 17 percent. Results were expected throughout the day.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

It would be great if Duncan Hunter made a strong showing. As for Romney, he reminds me that the divide within the GOP has grown too great for any coming together at the end. I will NEVER vote for that man. The GOP is broken, or so it appears at the moment.

[La Enchiladita]

It takes one to know one, eh?
*Wink*

[La Enchiladita]

What is a jack Mormon?
Do you mean some of those Lutherans are really Mormons?
;^)

[22cal]

Since Romney changed on most of what you list since he began running for President, I DON'T BELIEVE IT.

Posting any of this 100 more times won't help either. To me he is a plastic ken-doll, finger-in-the-wind candidate.

[citizen]

Looks like Romney won 10 of the 12 so he’s leading at 19 delagetes. Not that you would know it on Fox News Channel. They only have eyes for McCain and the Huckster and Obama.

[Swordfished]

Romney Wins Wyoming Caucuses

[22cal]

Yes, not amazing actually. Romney can fool some conservatives some of the time.

[ComeUpHigher]

Sure you didn’t. Tell us what you meant to communicate when you said “[t]he presidency is gained by being ‘Mr Money Bags’?” LOL

[22cal]

See #167.

[Swordfished]

See #167.

I think Romney will make a MUCH better president than Bush. More conservative fiscally and socially, and more EFFECTIVE. He's much smarter and has a track record of success to show it.

[redgirlinabluestate]

Since Romney changed on most of what you list....

Wrong again. He's held a majority of the same positions since his first ventured into politics in 1994.

Literature from the Romney campaign in 1994 reveals the truth about Romney's conservative positions on the issues in the Senate race. One campaign flyer unearthed from the 1994 race lists a side-by-side comparison of positions held by Romney and Kennedy for 24 election issues.

In the 1994 Senate race, Mitt Romney held the solid conservative position for 23 of the 24 issues listed; the only exception being the pledge to maintain the status quo in Massachusetts regarding a woman's right to choose. A pro-choice position in Massachusetts in 1994 was a socially moderate stance accommodating the large majority opinion of voters in the state.

However, it's understandable how a first-time candidate in 1994, and former businessman, running a crusade for fiscal conservatism with solid conservative positions on crime, welfare, the economy, foreign policy, school choice, health care, and congressional reform might accept the status quo on a social issue respecting the liberal constituency he would represent.

[Bull Market]

I’m watching CNN from now on. It’s not perfect, but it’s far more balanced.

Fox’s post-Iowa coverage was infuriating.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

If he wins it won’t be with my help.

[ken21]

yes.

so much for the pubies not being for

identity politics.

[mylife]

The one with the most assets wins.
If you don’t have the money to campaign how can you go on?

Most candidates are depending on grass roots contributions.
Mitt cant even stay afloat with his corporate buddys money and is supplementing it with his own personal fortune to shut out the candidates with less funding.

It ain’t exactly buying the presidency but it stinks.
Abe Lincoln wouldn’t stand a chance against Mitt or Judy Annie or Hillary.

[22cal]

He’s anti-2nd amendment and still wants the assault weapons ban as he stated on one of his latest Sunday interviews. He is a Massachusetts flip-flopper ala Kerry. I will not vote for him period.

[Swordfished]

Is President Bush anti-2nd amendment, anti assault weapons? - did you vote for him?

[mylife]

Some of these guys don’t give a hoot about all that.
They are only concerned with their portfolios.

[alice_in_bubbaland]

Romney 8, Thompson 2, Hunter 1.

[ComeUpHigher]

Beyond his own $$$, Romney has been an effective fundraiser for his campaign. I don’t think it stinks to be a good at what you do. Every other candidate has the same opportunity to raise funds for his campaign as Romney does. Are we supposed to feel bad because some of them are terrible fundraisers? The reality is it takes $$$ to get your message disseminated. If a candidate can’t effectively raise $$$ to run a strong campaign, why should we vote for him?