Posted on 02/11/2012 5:16:11 PM PST by BAW
PORTLAND, Maine — Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney narrowly edged Texas Congressman Ron Paul in Maine’s nonbinding GOP presidential preference poll on Saturday, ending a string of defeats for the Republican front-runner.
According to unofficial results announced Saturday evening by Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster, Romney took 39 percent of votes during statewide caucuses held during the last few weeks. Paul finished second at 36 percent.
“It’s good news. I’m hopeful this ends Romney’s little slide,” Maine House Speaker Robert Nutting said shortly after the announcement. “Romney is the best candidate to beat President Obama in the fall.”
Peter Cianchette, the Maine chairman for the Romney campaign and a former candidate for governor, said his candidate received broad support across the state despite a strong push by Paul.
“This was clearly a win and I think Maine showed him tremendous support,” Cianchette said.
ch took only 6 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at bangordailynews.com ...
Which of those states did the GOP carry in ‘08?
Even Reagan didn’t carry MN, so those 10 EVs don’t mean a thing. The GOP candidate could carry 100% n the primary but not carry the state in the Fall.
FL/MO/NV/CO are varying degrees of possible (i.e., slim to none) for the eventual GOP candidate.
Everything will depend on how the economy is being reported in the Fall. Not how it is, but how it’s being reported. They can correct to report the bad news after the votes are cast.
the north east, ARF, it’s like another country anyway.
To be honest if the north east left and joined Quebec I wouldn’t lose a wink of sleep.
At least try to check your facts before you post.
Rick has delegates in 14 of the 18 Congressional districts in Illinois.
So that story about Rick leading Newt in TN, was fiction?
Both Newt and Rick have won states while being outspent by Romney. Newt has been out there fundraising. Newt is only missing from the Virginia ballot. Rick is missing from that one, Indiana and 20% of Ohio. Unfavorables/polls, etc. are ever-changing and fluid as we’ve seen in this race. The link between “favorable” rating and votes is a very weak one. A lot of people have a favorable opinion of Mr. Rogers, but they wouldn’t elect him President. People didn’t have a very favorable opinion of Dick Cheney, but they knew he was capable and qualified to be President if he had to be.
You might want to read an article by someone that actually used a calculator.
http://www.capitalfreepress.com/4726-details-santorums-delegate-ballot-access-issues/
So much for the “conservative” approach...
http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/18641/gingrich-vs-kerry-great-debate/chris-horner
I remember that recent polling puffily claimed that Mr. Inevitable had 58% but he wound up with 39%. The forks are on the table and the toaster is all heated up and ready. Buh-bye, Mutt!
http://www.newt.org/answers#GlobalWarming
Global Warming/Cap and Trade
Newt does not believe there is a settled scientific conclusion about whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere.
Newt absolutely opposes “cap and trade” as well as any system of taxing carbon emissions. He testified before Congress against it in 2009 and led a grassroots effort while the Chairman of American Solutions to block its passage in the House and Senate.
Newt believes that cap and trade would kill hundreds of thousands of American jobs, cause electricity and fuel prices to skyrocket, and make America poorer. In contrast, Gingrich believes the best way to protect the environment is through markets, incentives, and entrepreneurs, who quite often are deploying innovative new technologies.
As for the question of whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere, Newt has noted there is no settled scientific conclusion. Many scientists believe it is the case. Others do not. But this unsettled scientific question has nothing to do with the best approach to protecting our environment, which is always markets, incentives, and entrepreneurs creating better and more efficient products and services.
Nice try, but it doesn’t fly...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/12/05/gingrich_was_for_cap-and-trade_268599.html
Gin-GRINCH was FOR a cap-n-trade plan before he was AGAINST it.
6% after zero campaigning, in a region with near-zero conservatives? I’d hardly call that a “total collapse,” but keep drinking your koolaid.
What a whining pessimist you are. Every one of these states is a swing state. What's more, they were carried by George W. Bush in two consecutive narrow elections.
a few observations: First, Mitt barely won in his home region and underperformed in Maine by 13 points relative to the 2008 results. Ron Paul doubled his votes in 2012. This reveals Mitts weakness, not his strength. Second, when Maine released the outcome, the announcer mentioned that caucus sites could choose to report results or not and the party would not go back later and include those votes. This suggests the Maine party could control the precincts reporting and thus the final outcome, in Mittens favor. Third, how can only one-third of CPAC “party activists” participate in their own straw poll? The CPAC results did not jive with the perceived audience responses to the candidate’s speeches? Something is wrong there! Fourth, I was sickened to watch Fox News report these events. FNC was a cheerleader and overtly in the tank for Mittens. I got a strange feeling that we were witnessing a highly coordinated party establishment-media effort on behalf of Mittens.
I'm guessing it's to add a bit of GOP-e propaganda to try to keep the RINO's floating with the other turds.
Political parties are (more or less) democratically operated organizations. They must meet to choose officers and rules. Outsiders just see straw votes. Those that are there see what like-minded neighbors are thinking about a variety of issues. Candidate preference straw votes inform leaders of members’ desires for the future and add some excitement.
who’s the liberal wreckless big spender now when the guy has to throw down money to win in this foreign country. :-)
“Hey, it’s Maine. Land of Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe.”
And corruption. Declaring a winner by disqualifying 10-20% of the caucus votes is slimy, even if the results are non-binding.
A liberal wins in the land of liberals. No shock there.
Santorum did not campaign there either, but got 10% more. Not sure what "koolaid" you think I am drinking. There is something called momentum. Newt had it after S.C., and then lost it with two disastrous debate performances. Can he get it back? Perhaps only if Santorum slips up, because Newt seems to have lost a coherent message, and is running out of cash fast.
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.