Saturday, February 12, 2011

Why Mitt will win in 2012 Nomination/ With June Update 6/16

I have had numerous discussions on this topic for the past several months with my TEA Party and Facebook friends and many others.  Nearly every time I get this groan...Not Mitt!  One word " over".  I disagree!

I have felt Mitt is the best choice since well back in 2006 when names were just getting tossed around, and I still think he will win in 2012 at least the nomination.
I'm gonna get a little wonky here..but stay with me.  CPAC just finished it's Straw poll (record attendance and record number of voters), and for the second year in a row Ron Paul came out on top this year with 30% of the support. (Romney placed second this year and last and first the 3 years prior to that).   First off CPAC is very core conservatives/ TEA Party and in the past 2 years infiltrated by lot's of the Ron Paul-ittes.  3700 voters in this years Straw Poll.  Ron Paul gets 30%, Romney 23%, Gary Johnson (another Libertarian) ties with Christie, (who is NOT running) get 6% each.  Newt garners only 5%, and Sarah Palin comes in at 3%.  Huckabee doesn't even place with 1%  T. Paw and Daniels 4% each, Herman Cain, (the TEA Party darling)  only 2%.
Now we must accept the Ron Paul infiltrators are trying to stack the deck here, but it's artificial.  Paul only rec'd about 3-5% of the actual vote in primary's in 2008.  So of the attendees Paul got about 1110 votes.  Gary Johnson the other Paul-itte got 6% (222 votes).

This leaves about 2400 voters who represent a more traditional Republican/ Conservative voter:

Mitt with 23% of the total (962 votes), actually represents 40% of the adjusted vote, Christie at 6% (222 votes), equals just under 10% of the vote.  Newt @ 5% (185) equals 8%, Palin at 3% (111 votes) equals 5%  of the adjusted voters.  Herman Cain with 74 votes is about 3%.

Now lets look at who is actually likely to run.  Romney, Cain, and T. Paw * are in for sure.  Ron Paul MAYBE, (but I doubt it)..and I suspect he'll do better than 2008 but 10% at best.  Christie is NOT running; Palin is smart enough to not run this time; and Newt will probably waffle until he sells a few more books and then drop out or not ever get in like the past 2 times.

The race becomes Mitt, Cain, T. Paw * and maybe Hayley Barbour who both got 3% of the votes.  T. Paw is boring even compared to Mitt, and Barbour has a few things that are lingering out there, and he was a big time Lobbyist for a few years as well.    What about Huckabee??  Great question!   The Huckster has a pretty good ride going on Fox right now,  he didn't even show up at CPAC this year..and didn't receive enough votes to garner even 1%.  I think most people see his "aw shucks" thing and realize the folks in IOWA got bamboozled in 2008, where Mitt took second place..and could never recover, despite doing well in each race he was in.  It's almost too late for anyone else to jump in and compete..  JEB Bush wont do it.  Rick Perry from Texas maybe *.  Any US Senator that could go at it, right now I can't think of one; (John Thune indicated he is NOT going to run).  The rest of the Repub Govs are still too new to jump into a race this soon.  But there are some GREAT Govs out there  Christie, Walker, Scott, Kasich just to name a few.  I suppose I should add Mitch Daniels from Indiana as a possible, he did make some dramatic changes to IND.  But I think he'll come across a little too wimpy/ wonky  for the voters to grasp.  But he could be the possible upset. (He scored 4% in the CPAC poll).

  My handicap: Romney wins with 54%; Cain places with 20%; T. Paw* (Perry jumped in the same day T.Paw dropped out), and/or Daniels drops out early with 3-4% ; Barbour 12%; and Ron Paul with 10%  if he even gets in the race this time.

I welcome your comments and hopefully a dialogue.  I fully expect the Mormon topic to come up as well.  (* Comments were added regarding Perry/ T. Paw after the Iowa Straw Poll).

APRIL UPDATE:  See Charles Krauthammers commentary:

 MAY UPDATE:  Huckabee is out;  Still looks like Palin is not running;  Gingrich is in..but no one seems to take him seriously. Trump was a one week wonder.  Daniels is seriously considering it...but there is a bunch of stuff with him that will be challenge.  I'll talk about more later:

JUNE UPDATE:   Palin still being discussed, But I don't expect her to get in;  Huntsman to jump in this week. and Rick Perry is getting more serious talk, (I still think 50/50% at best).  Fox Debate was "won" by Herman Cain..and his poll numbers ticked up.  The New Hampshire debate added Romney and Michelle Bachmann and they both won the debate with Romney on top. The polls this week came out and have Romney breaking 30% and as high as 33%.  The NH Poll came out with GOP/ IND. Voters who are "Likely" and over 50% had watched the NH Debate.  Romney was 42% and led by over 32% over the nearest competitors: Ron Paul and Bachmann were tied with 10%.    National polling gives Ron Paul has been stuck around 7-8% for years. Cain and Bachmann are both polling around 10-12%.  Palin and Giulianni have been grabbing 14-16% but neither are likely to run. T. Paw can't get over 5%; Gingrich is still 8-9% despite his campaign staff all resigning last week.  Finally Johnson and Huntsman are both stuck around 1-2%.  


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. This is enterteaing. I am starting to spell like you. Had to erase my first comment because I spelled entertaining correctly!

  3. Numbers won't matter. What will matter is the public perspective. I think anyone that ran for president last time will not stand a chance in 2012. The reason I believe that is the same reason so many newbies won in November. People are fed up and want to start over. There's a lot of concern about trust and deception. Frustration at that good ol' boys club and those that seem to be "career politicans"' who play the political game, year after year. There'll be a lot of new faces running in 2012.

  4. PJ thanks for chiming in. Mitt is not a career politician, While he has run before and served one term as Governor of Massachusetts, which he could have run for a second term. If your looking for a name who is not a Pol. your gonna get a Donald Trump..or someone whose gonna have a bunch of "surprises". Mitt is surprises. It's also a lot easier to pick off races in a non-Prez election cycles when the electorate is more conservative, and more motivated. The TEA party movements best chance of survival and progress is to get a very strong leader to carry the mantle forward.

  5. Ken, I'm not sure if RP runs in 2012. Gary J. gets my support, in that case. Closest to my liberty-minded views on the main issues. Mitt is just too much for me to handle right now. If he had a smaller govt. mindset and record even close to the new breed of GOP gov's, he'd be a shoo-in. Cain, TPaw, or Daniels would be OK at least on fiscal/economics, at least better that Mitt. Romney Care is not a problem for you, Ken? Unless he does a MAJOR mea culpa on this, and shows how he's gonna do better as POTUS than as GOM, then I don't see him winning either the GOP nomination or POTUS. People are fed up with the typical political games these prima donnas play, and Mitt will look like a GOP RINO version of Dukakis, trying to make himself look more conservative, but can the zebra change his stripes? We had enough of that crap in the past. If you want me to vote GOP for POTUS in Nov 2012, you guys better get a ticket that I can be CONFIDENT will stand for less govt., and more freedom.... or else I pull the LP lever again, vote my conscience, and be one of 500k protest votes. Tired of the R's picking the "heir apparent". Happened a lot when I was in the party, and one of the main reasons I'm not an R.

  6. Thanks for the reply Anon. I had the chance to see and meet Herman Cain last night and I was very impressed! I decided I'd go back and review my see how much the landscape has changed since I originally wrote this Blog..and I have to say I think I'm gonna stick with my original prediction. I think you should seriously look deeper into Romney. If he has a Conservative House and the R's are able to conquer the Senate as it looks likely at the moment..he will be able to govern to the Right of Ronald Reagan. I am hopefully Herman will do well enough to be the second to the last man standing..and force Mitt to keep paying attention to the TEA Party forces. I will post a new blog about Herman Cain in the next few days.

  7. Who is more likely to hand it to Obama in the debates, Romney or Cain? No contest, Cain all the way!

  8. Anon April 13th. Cain has handled himself pretty well in the debates. But he's only won one of them and that was the first debate that did not include Romney or Bachmann. It seems Romney has won every debate he's been in thus far. It is true that Perry's entry, and instant front-runner status took the focus off of Romney and onto Perry. Romney has been un-ruffled, Presidential and very eloquent. Cain is barely polling at 7% pretty much unchanged from early spring, and well below my prediction of 20%..but it is still early, and no caucus, nor primary has begun yet. I think Cain might regain some of Bachmann's TEA Party supporters as we roll forward.