[no dems]

When did the Romney camp say that?
____________________________________________________________

Here’s the quote followed by the link to the article: “Romney could simply get to the 1,144 needed to clinch the nomination with greater ease, since Santorum would be far from guaranteed winning all of Gingrich’s support.
With a two-person race ‘we will get to to 1,144 …a lot faster,’ Romney political director Rich Beeson told POLITICO.”

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/03/mitt-romneys-delegate-math-begins-add

Why are you making me work so hard?

[JediJones]

The Santorum dude said the opposite...see below. The Romney guy is spinning. Just think, if you just said Romney was guaranteed to be the nominee, and the reporter asked what if one of the other guys drops out, are you going to say, "Oh, then we're in trouble." No, you're going to puff yourself up by saying you'll do even better then. It's nonsense.

The mistake some of the analysts make is not realizing that the WTA by district and "direct delegate elections" in PA, IL and WV (analysts are WAY behind on figuring those three out) behave almost just like full-on WTA states. Those states are not likely to produce much of a split decision since most of the districts will vote similarly. The full WTA states look good for Romney, but the district-level ones look much better for the conservative. Which means the conservatives splitting their vote, as they are DEFINITELY doing in Alabama right now, with a 31-30-29 split in tonight's PPP poll favoring Romney, simply hands Romney massive, undeserved wins.

“That’s certainly the hope,” said John Brabender, Santorum’s chief strategist, although he was emphatic that there is a chance to overtake Romney if circumstances begin to change. “We really think if we go one-on-one with Romney we could catch fire.