Skip to comments.
Romney Wins Overwhelming Victory In Nevada Caucuses ["Few Opportunities" For Rivals To Catch Up?]
Washington Post ^
| February 04, 2012
| Dan Balz
Posted on 02/04/2012 7:45:11 PM PST by Steelfish
Mitt Romney Wins Overwhelming Victory In Nevada Caucuses
Dan Balz February 4
LAS VEGAS Mitt Romney won an overwhelming victory in Saturdays Nevada caucuses, giving the former Massachusetts governor his second consecutive victory of the year as he tightened his claim to dominant front-runner status in what had been a turbulent Republican presidential race.
After his easy victory in Florida last Tuesday, Romneys big win in Nevada, where he also won four years ago, will provide additional momentum heading to Tuesdays caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota and set him up for more significant primaries in Michigan and Arizona at the end of the month. The outcome will increase pressure on his rivals to demonstrate how and where they plan to stop him, if they can.
Romney was far ahead of his closest rivals. Former House speaker Newt Gingrich and Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) were battling for second place. Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum was running fourth. Turnout was far below the primaries in Florida, South Carolina or New Hampshire and less than in Iowas caucuses.
As Romney celebrated his third victory in five contests, his rivals vowed to continue fighting. But the upcoming calendar provides those chasing Romney with significant few opportunities for victory in coming weeks. Gingrich and Santorum each would like to take on Romney without the other draining off conservative votes but neither has shown any interest in bowing to the other. Paul demonstrated again in Nevada that he can do well in caucus states with limited turnout but has yet to show real strength in a big state.
The first weeks of the Republican race have played out at the pace of a sprint. But the primary-caucus calendar slows to a walk in February, before resuming with a flurry of contests on March 6, this...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: 2012; gingrich; nv2012; rominee; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-113 next last
1
posted on
02/04/2012 7:45:21 PM PST
by
Steelfish
To: Steelfish
WaPoObama: “Willard Is inevitable!”
2
posted on
02/04/2012 7:48:16 PM PST
by
Old Sarge
(RIP FReeper Skyraider (1930-2011) - You Are Missed)
To: Steelfish; humblegunner; ansel12; svcw; greyfoxx39; FastCoyote; DaxtonBrown; Colofornian; ...
Considering the number of Mormons in Nevada and the number of moderates, is anyone really surprised by this?
3
posted on
02/04/2012 7:50:52 PM PST
by
reaganaut
(Ex-Mormon, Now Christian - "I wasn't brainwashed, just brain pre-soaked.")
To: Steelfish
Well, that means the
Establishment Republicans are going to lose to Obama.
Santorum Was Right About Romneycare
January 30, 2012
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Wall Street Journal, Grace-Marie Turner: "Rick Santorum went for the jugular in Thursday night's Republican presidential debate,
exposing Mitt Romney's weak and contradictory defense of his Massachusetts health-reform law.
Mr. Santorum attacked Mr. Romney's claim that the individual mandate affects only'the 8% of people who didn't have insurance.'
Mr. Romney insisted that'92% of the people in my state had insurance before our plan went in place. And nothing changes for them.'
Mr. Santorum blasted back that'what Governor Romney said is just factually incorrect,'
because the mandate affects 100% of the residents who are forced to buy health insurance'as a condition of breathing in Massachusetts.' "
And that was a salient point.
Romney tried to say it only affected 8%. No, it affects everybody in Massachusetts, everybody had to.
"In an earlier debate, Newt Gingrich underscored the point when he described a Massachusetts couple fined $3,000 by the state."
Now, listen to this. I remember this, but this is true.
This is factually correct."Newt Gingrich underscored the point when he described a Massachusetts couple fined $3,000 by the state.
They had health insurance, but it didn't meet the state's specifications.
Lauren and Nick Destito had owned a tree and landscaping business for 25 years before the economy collapsed in 2008.
They were forced to declare bankruptcy but still tried to abide by the state's health-insurance mandate, purchasing a policy that cost them $750 a month."
They still tried to abide by state law while filing for bankruptcy."No dice -- according to a government official, the amount of health insurance they can afford is determined'not, unfortunately, from your perspective but from the state agency's view.' "
You don't get to determine what policy you buy based on what you think you can afford.
You have to buy what we at the state tell you."After garnering national attention for their plight, the couple won on appeal.
Mr. Romney's attempt to contrast his plan with Obamacare wasn't convincing.'I don't like the Obama plan,'
he said in Thursday's debate.'His plan cuts Medicare by $500 billion. We didn't, of course, touch anything like that.
He raises taxes by $500 billion. We didn't do that.'
"These are bogus boasts:
States have no authority over cuts in the federal Medicare program,
so cutting Medicare never was an option with Romneycare.
Massachusetts didn't raise taxes to finance its plan becauseit relied on previously enacted health-insurance taxes
and an infusion of federal Medicaid money to finance its coverage expansion.
The state simply passed a big share of its costs to federal taxpayers."
Romney got to pass that along to taxpayers across the whole country."Mr. Santorum challenged Mr. Romney on his claim that Romneycare is'very different than Obamacare,'
citing a new study that lists key features the two plans have in common,
including the Medicaid expansion, an employer mandate and the individual mandate.
The study is from the liberal Families USA, which credits John McDonough and explains hein developing both Romneycare and Obamacare."
This is one of Romney's advisers that we have mentioned to you that went to the Oval Office to help Obama put together Obamacare after helping Romney write Romneycare.
John McDonough."Among the key checkpoints showing the similarities between the two plans --"
Are you sitting down for this, folks? Are you?
Look at me. I want you to listen to this."Among the key checkpoints showing the similarities between the two plans:'Romneycare authorizes "tiers" of insurance coverage, which are called Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Young Adult.' "
Romneycare authorizes tiers, t-i-e-r-s, levels of insurance coverage, and they've called them Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Young Adult."Obamacare sets the following tiers for policies:Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Young Adult."
They've even named the tiers in Obamacare after Romneycare, and they've added one called Platinum."Government will specify which benefits must be included in health plans under both reform laws.
Mr. McDonough earlier said the federal law is 'Massachusetts with three more zeros.' "
McDonough, again, deeply involved in developing both Romneycare and Obamacare."Mr. Romney repeatedly says he believes in state-level solutions.
But when he says he wants to give states more discretion in implementing Obamacare,
there is very little daylight between his position and President Obama's.
The president has said Congress should pass legislation to accelerate the provision in the law
that would allow states more flexibility in implementing the health law starting in 2014.
Mr. Santorum was passionate in insisting thatMr. Romney's defense will collapse in a debate with President Obama,
and the candidate would be wide open to attack.'Folks, we can't give this issue away in this election. It is about fundamental freedom,' he said."
Remember, I thought that was crucial.
I played that sound bite over and over again for you last week."Mr. Romney has indeed backed himself into a corner,"
says Grace-Marie Turner here,"by insisting on defending his health plan while attacking Obamacare.
In the Oct. 11 debate at Dartmouth College, Mr. Romney said:'[W]e all agree about repeal and replace.
And I'm proud of the fact that I put together a plan that says what I'm going to replace it with.' "
Did you hear that?
He's happy he put together a plan that says what he's gonna replace Obamacare with."Does he really mean...?" Asks Grace-Marie Turner,
"Does he really mean that he wants to use Massachusetts as a model for his 'replacement' plan?"
No wonder voters are worried."Unless Mr. Romney takes steps to conform his position with reality,
he will have trouble convincing voters he is serious about repeal
and will have an even harder time mapping a clear plan on health reform should he be elected president."
There you have it. She's right.
Basically what she's saying is Santorum was right in his attack, if you will, on Romneycare.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here's Linda in Ridgefield, Connecticut. I'm glad you waited, you're up next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
CALLER: Hey, Rush, how are you?
Thanks so much for taking my call. I love you.
RUSH: You bet.
CALLER: Hey, listen, I have listened to you for a long time,
and I've taken all your teachings and I've chosen my candidate based upon them,
and my candidate's Rick Santorum. I think that he articulates conservatism like no other.
I switched to him when I saw him speak in his Iowa caucus win,
and it was a beautiful conservative speech. I mean even Al Hunt's recent article refers to it.
And one of the things he talked about was how he stuck to his principles.
He went out to those voters in Pennsylvania, and he got them to come across to him.
They crossed the aisle to him. It was a 60% to 70% Democratic district.
And that's something you've always talked about, how Reagan did that.
I don't believe that Romney's done that at all in Massachusetts.
I think he has actually done the opposite.
He talked about conservatism beautifully.
I think it was one of the last questions in his Thursday debate when he talked about how the Constitution was the rule book
and how it's there to protect the Declaration of Independence, which talks about our rights are from God and not from government.
I think that was beautifully articulated.
Another thing he does that you're always talking about, you mentioned it earlier this week,
you talked about a family of four that makes $60,000 a year has no expendable income.
And Rick's been talking about this, about the family unit, and this is what's so beautiful about him.
You know, people may criticize Rick,
"Oh, he's the social conservative and, no, we don't want that,"
but he takes social conservative, that part of it and ties it into the fiscal conservative issues.
He blends them together and he can help and explain to peoplewhy the family is so important to the fabric of our society
and why we must get back to those issues revolving around families,
because it's those issues that are gonna make us strong again.
I really think this guy is great, and I'm very disappointed in some of the people out there
who haven't had the guts to come out and support him. I think he's wonderful.
You know, when we talk about Reagan, being a Reaganesque person, you know,
when Reagan went to the White House, he chose two things that he wanted to accomplish, just two.Getting the economy back, and defeating the Soviet Union.
He wasn't all over the place, and this idea and this, you know, going to the moon and these things.
He focused, and we need a candidate who's gonna focus like a laser beam on Obamacare.
And I think Santorum, you saw it in that debate, he was focused.
He has done excellent in all these debates --
RUSH: Okay. So tell me why he's there at 13%.
CALLER: I don't know. Help me out.
I don't know. I think if we had somebody that could come out and just,"Hey, this guy is great."
RUSH: Yes, I knew that's where this was headed."Rush, why don't you say you're for Santorum?
Why, you could push him over the top."
All the candidates have people asking me to do that.
I have the greatest admiration for Santorum.
He had a statement or debate, somebody, a think tank person, Brookings or whatever, something like three things --it might not have been Brookings, but some think tank
-- three things you could do that take care of income inequality, that take care of cultural rot,
and they were all family-oriented type issues, and one of them was don't have kids before you get married.
It's amazing when you look at the numbers of single-parent households, out of wedlock births.
If you look at that definition, if you accept it as a sign of the disintegration of culture, the family breakup, it is amazing.
Santorum is right.
You know, there's a story.I'm not gonna mention a name here because I don't want to...
There's a story of a football player who can't get a gig, and you read the story here and it's (summarized),"He's always been an island of sorts. Brash personality, self-absorption.
Made $80 million in his life and he's broke. He's broke.
He's got nothing. He's in bad shape!"
If you keep reading, then you find out he's got four kids with four women.
He owes child support. He doesn't have the money. All four are suing him.
It dovetails with what her point is and the point that Santorum talks about. (sigh)
Does the NFL give you counseling, like does the NFL tell you wear a condom?
I don't know.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I want to take you back to 2008. This is Austin, Texas. This is a Democrat presidential debate, February 21st, and this is Senator Barack Obama.
Senator Barack Obama in February of '08 during the Democrat campaign in the debate talking about health care reform.
OBAMA 2008: When Senator Clinton says "a mandate," it's not a mandate on government to provide health insurance;
it's a mandate to individuals to purchase it.
Massachusetts has a mandate right now.
They have exempted 20% of the uninsured because they've concluded that that 20% can't afford it.
In some cases, they're people who are paying fines and still can't afford it
so now they're worse off than they were.
They don't have health insurance and they're paying a fine.
In order for you to force people to get health insurance, you've got to have a very harsh, stiff penalty.
RUSH: Now, how do you read this? How do you hear that?
Think of the irony!
Back in 2008, during a Democrat primaries, Obama is railing against the individual mandate in Massachusetts
while Romney and Gingrich both supported it, as did Hillary.
He was taking on Hillary, remember, and Hillary was for an individual mandate.
Here's Obama."When Senator Clinton says 'a mandate,' it's not a mandate on government to provide health insurance; it's a mandate to individuals to purchase it,"
and he doesn't like it. He's telling us he opposes it.
Then he goes on to cite what's happening in Massachusetts. They got a mandate."They have exempted 20% of the uninsured because they've concluded that that 20% can't afford it.
"In some cases, they're people who are paying fines and still can't afford it
so now they're worse off than they were,"
and this is the guy that's going to be debating Romney. This...At the very least the irony here."Senator Clinton has said that we won't go after their wages.
Now, this is a substantive difference but understand both of us seek to get universal health care.
I have a substantive difference with Senator Clinton on how to get there."
He doesn't agree with the mandate, but he put one in.
You know, I don't think...Frankly, I've always thought that health care bill was written in somebody's drawer in Congress,
and Obama never really knew specifically what was in it and he didn't care because what he knewthat it led to was national health care in five or ten years.
It was gonna close the private insurance market, it was gonna force people to get their insurance from the government.
That's all they cared about.
The minutia, the details, whether they had a mandate or not, he couldn'ta cared less.
During the campaign, as he's trying to distinguish himself from Hillary, she's for it;therefore, he's gotta be against it.
He's gotta rip it. He cites Massachusetts, how it's unfair and not working four years ago.
At the same time, Gingrich was talking about the virtues of it,
and Romney was 'cause it was his idea in Massachusetts.
Santorum has never been for a mandate.
He never has. The story last week is incorrect.
We've got audio. He was opposed to it.
Santorum's never been for a mandate.
Everybody running in this campaign has, at one time or another, either instituted a mandate or has said they're for it.
Everybody, Democrat or Republican, except for Santorum.
Every one of them. What do you think of that?
Can I say "establishment" to you?
Don't give me this "outsider" garbage. Establishment.
Can I say that to you? Again:Every candidate running for office this year has either instituted a mandate or has been in favor of it. (interruption)
I didn't say they're all dirty.
If you want to conclude that, put it in your own words, H.R.
I'm just pointing it out.
Anthony Weiner, Tony Weiner, wrote a lot of the health care bill that was in the drawer
that they pulled out of there when Obama started going for it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: One year ago today, Judge Roger Vinson (who was the first to rule against Obamacare) wrote,"I note that in 2008 then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include a mandate
because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating:'If a mandate was the solution, then we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody buy a house.' "
That was one year ago today. Obama was cited as opposing a mandate that is in his health care bill.
END TRANSCRIPT
Related Links
4
posted on
02/04/2012 7:51:11 PM PST
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple, fight or die!)
To: Steelfish
Romney wins, and Obama gets closer to winning in November.
Why would people choose a Romney over Obama when the differences are very minor?
5
posted on
02/04/2012 7:51:11 PM PST
by
adorno
To: Steelfish
To: Steelfish
They’re really eager to pick our candidate for us, aren’t they? Romney winning a state he’s won before. Oh, wow?
7
posted on
02/04/2012 7:53:09 PM PST
by
ReneeLynn
(Socialism is SO yesterday. Fascism, it's the new black. Mmm mmm mmm...)
To: Steelfish
Did he win by a smaller margin than 08? Billion Buck Barak is very happy!
8
posted on
02/04/2012 7:53:44 PM PST
by
hope
To: adorno
Yep. That appears to be the plan.
9
posted on
02/04/2012 7:53:52 PM PST
by
LaybackLenny
(All hail Her Royal Highness Sarah, Queen of The Hobbits)
To: Steelfish
Did he win by a smaller margin than 08? Billion Buck Barak is very happy!
10
posted on
02/04/2012 7:54:02 PM PST
by
hope
To: Steelfish
To: ReneeLynn
IF Fla would abide by the RNC rules and split the delegates...Romney would lose a lot of steam. HE is buying the White House!
12
posted on
02/04/2012 7:58:16 PM PST
by
katiedidit1
("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
To: reaganaut
Correct. 26% of voters were LDS (Mormon). No wonder NV is in the dumps.
13
posted on
02/04/2012 7:59:02 PM PST
by
Steelfish
(ui)
To: Steelfish
He lost votes/gains in 2 districts vs last time.
He has problems. What you see on TV, is a manufactured hype.
To: aposiopetic
Thank you for the link. I am saving it. What happened to Little Ricky?
15
posted on
02/04/2012 8:00:39 PM PST
by
katiedidit1
("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
To: JerseyanExile
Romney at 37% right now. In 2008 he got 51%. It's not going to be romney.
16
posted on
02/04/2012 8:03:31 PM PST
by
Caipirabob
(I say we take off and Newt the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...)
To: Steelfish
Still a long road ahead to Super Tuesday and the primaries beyond. The delegate count is not even close to a ‘lock’ at this point. And, yet, the MSM and the GOP-e are still telling us who we will have as a candidate.
Time to send a few more buck to Newt...
If Myth Romney is the GOP nominee, it will be time for a new party.
17
posted on
02/04/2012 8:04:19 PM PST
by
PubliusMM
(RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2013: Change we can look forward to.)
To: Steelfish
If the current numbers hold, Newt/Santorum will have held Romney under 50%, which would be a victory in Nevada. All will get delegates, so the race will continue.
To: Steelfish
I would have been surprised if Mitt lost in Nevada.
Although I expect him to win in Maine as well..I don’t find any results. I’d like to know who came in second.
Didn’t they caucus today as well?
19
posted on
02/04/2012 8:06:23 PM PST
by
berdie
To: CharlesWayneCT
Isn’t Paul ahead of Santorum?
20
posted on
02/04/2012 8:09:45 PM PST
by
katiedidit1
("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-113 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson