Romney: “A Better America Begins Tonight!”

Last night, “inevitable” Republican Nominee Willard Mitt Romney won primaries in Delaware, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Minutes after he delivered the following speech, New York was added to his delegate count.

“After 43 primaries and caucuses, many long days and more than a few long nights, I can say with confidence – and gratitude – that you have given me a great honor and solemn responsibility,” Romney told supporter at the Radisson hotel in downtown Manchester.

“To all of the thousands of good and decent Americans I’ve met who want nothing more than a better chance, a fighting chance,” Romney added. “To all of you, I have a simple message: Hold on a little longer. A better America begins tonight.”

Peppering his speech with such terms as “destiny” and appealing to traditional American notions of hard work and sacrifice, Romney steered clear of any political issue except the stuttering economy and the enduring pain of strapped Americans.

At one point, he paid homage to the campaign slogans of both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton in their bids to defeat an incumbent president during economic turmoil.

“Is it easier to make ends meet? Is it easier to sell your home or buy a new one?” he said, as the crowd cheered “NO!”

“Have you saved what you needed for retirement? Are you making more AT your job? Do you have a better chance to get a better job? Are you paying less at the pump?”

“It’s still about the economy,” Romney added, bluntly. “And we’re not stupid.”

Romney also attempted to reintroduce himself to a national electorate that may not have been following the twists and turns of the Republican primary. He talked about his business successes, his wife, and his father – adding that he would bore the country with tales of his grandchildren.

“You might have heard that I was successful in business. And that rumor is true,” Romney said. “You might not have heard that our business helped start other businesses, like Staples and Sports Authority and a new steel mill and a learning center called Bright Horizons.”

In what is essentially the crux of his campaign going forward, he added, “After 25 years, I know how to lead us out of this stagnant Obama economy and into a job-creating recovery.”

“The Legacy” faces an uphill battle.

Per gallup.com:

Barack Obama’s job approval rating has increased in recent days and now stands at 50% in Gallup Daily tracking for April 21-23.

The 50% approval mark is notable because all incumbent presidents since Eisenhower who were at or above 50% approval at the time of the election were re-elected. Obama’s job approval rating has typically been in the mid-40% range for the last three months.

Obama reached 50% briefly earlier this month, but that soon dissipated, perhaps due to mixed news in the government’s April 6 unemployment report after largely positive reports in the prior two months. In recent days, Obama appears to be more solidly around 50%, averaging at least 49% approval in each of the last four individual nights of Gallup polling.

One possible reason for Obama’s recent rise is the decline in gas prices, which some analysts believe could indicate that prices have peaked. Rising gas prices have often been associated with a decline in presidential approval ratings.

Obama’s increased approval coincides with his taking a lead, 49% to 42%, over Mitt Romney in Gallup Daily tracking of registered voters’ 2012 presidential election preferences. That marks a shift from last week, when Romney held an edge in Gallup tracking.

The seven-percentage-point Obama advantage in April 19-23 Gallup Daily tracking, based on interviews with more than 2,100 registered voters, also represents the largest lead Obama has held over Romney in Gallup polling on 2012 election preferences, dating back to last August.

Obama’s lead is owing in large part to his improved standing among independent voters. In April 11-15 Gallup tracking, Romney was up, 45% to 39%, among independent voters. Now, Obama holds a 45% to 43% edge among this group.

Democrats and Republicans still overwhelmingly back their own party’s candidate, although Obama may have improved slightly, and Romney declined slightly, among their respective parties’ loyalists over the past week.

The biggest challenge Romney faces…is himself.

His political history turns off voters.

In Ohio, 63 percent of Romney voters say that they are voting against Obama, with just 29 percent voting for Romney. And in Florida, a majority of Romney voters (52 percent) are voting against Obama as well.

So, you’re saying to yourself, “what difference does that make, KJ?”  At least we will be rid of Obama!

That’s true.  And, at this point, one would think that a finger-painting chimp could beat Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

The problem is, what happens if Mitt does pull it off, and becomes our 45th president?

If Obama is Jimmy Carter on steroids, will Romney be the second coming of Reagan or Bush on steroids? (Not W…H.W.)

Why is it so hard to elect a Conservative?

Last night Mitt declared:

A better America begins tonight!

Wonderful, Mitt.  What’s your platform?  What’s your plan?

Americans want to know.

Mitt and the GOP Don’t Need Conservatives, Evidently

Yesterday afternoon, I was listening to Ben Ferguson, our local afternoon Conservative Talk-show host.  You may have seen Ben on the cable news networks, where he appears as a Conservative Pundit or listened to his nationally syndicated radio program on Sunday nights.

Ben was discussing Rick Santorum’s dropping out of the Republican Primary.  Ben, who has leaned toward supporting Romney during the primary, told how Mitt had visited Memphis twice so far during his campaign, both times, meeting with the local movers and shaker, while ignoring the GOP rank and file.

Will he pay attention to the Conservative Base now that Santorum is out of the picture?  Or will he continue to ignore them, with the presumption of both the Romney Campaign and the GOP Elite being that they will have to vote for him in November?

A casual glance at gallup.com, shows Romney at 42% ballot support among Republican voters.

Ummm…shouldn’t that be higher?  That means that 58 % of Republicans don’t support him.

Outside of the party, now that it’s basically Romney vs. Obama, realclearpolitics.com shows Romney losing to Obama 48.5% to 43.2%, a difference of 5.3%.

Those of you who are inclined to reach for your pocketbooks to send Romney a little sumpin’ sumpin’, hold on.

Foster Friess, the retired investor who spent nearly $1.7 million boosting Rick Santorum’s presidential run, is ready to help Mitt Romney.

“I’m obviously going to be of help in whatever way I can,” Friess told POLITICO Tuesday afternoon, hours after Santorum suspended his campaign for the GOP presidential nomination, cementing Romney’s status as the party’s presumptive nominee.

Friess, who was in Washington to accept an award from the Horatio Alger Association, said he had yet to discuss his planned shift in allegiance with Romney’s campaign campaign or the Washington-based super PAC supporting it.

“I’ve got some plans as to how I might be able to be of help,” said Friess. “The bottom line is, I’m going to be very supportive and I’ll probably have plans to share with you a little later on.”

So, fellow Conservatives, just sit back and watch as the rest of the GOP movers and shakers line up to grease Mitt’s already money-lined palm.

As Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday,

There are no more excuses now. Well, there are. That’s why I guess I want to know what the excuses are gonna be if this doesn’t go the way they have it planned. If this doesn’t pan out to big-time electoral victory the way the establishment has it figured, then what will their excuse be? And I think I know. I think that if this campaign goes on and if it results in Obama winning, I think what the establishment is going to do is blame us. They’re gonna blame us conservatives for once again being too rigid and too demanding and too narrow and unrealistic and all this, and telling us that we’re the reason that Obama won.

“If we’d-a just got behind it,” and so forth… Which, of course, will be bogus.

…I will just say this: If the Republican establishment is not careful, they are going to destroy themselves in the process of this campaign. If they screw this up… We’ve never had a better chance to win than this. If they screw this up, folks…

The problem, Rush, is…they will.  The tone-deaf squishes of the GOP Establishment always do.

The last time they got it right was during a campaign that really came about through circumstances which they had nothing to do with:  The Reagan Revolution.

Per learnourhistory.com:

Through the 1970s, the United States struggled through a terrible recession and government became much more involved in Americans’ lives. Additionally, America showed significant weakness globally, as the Soviet Union flexed its muscles and smaller nations began to lose both fear and respect for the United States. It was clear the country needed a change.

Ronald Reagan was the right man for the job and was elected in a landslide. He swiftly changed the course of the nation, lowering taxes and reducing regulations to stimulate the economy and standing up for America’s principles and beliefs around the world. In addition to his changes to foreign and domestic policy, Reagan was an “American Exceptionalist”, meaning that he understood that there was something special and different about America that set it apart from all other nations. During his time in office, Reagan reduced the intrusive role of the government and helped the nation re-discover its greatness, power and economic growth.

So, why are we facing a Republican Campaign featuring a flip-floppin’ Moderate who has spent the last 6 years bragging about his own state-run healthcare system?

Why isn’t the Republican Party presenting a Reagan Conservative  to run against the socialist in the White House?

Because Sarah Palin refused to run, that’s why.  And who can blame her.

The GOP Power Brokers have been on a mission for years to rid the party of Reagan Conservatism. There is no way in Blazes they would have supported her of their own volition. They would have had to have been forced to do so by a populist groundswell, much like the original Reagan Revolution. That is why they have done their best to neuter the Tea Party Movement.

Like many Conservatives, it now looks like I will be forced to hold my nose and vote for Romney in November, because electing a flip-floppin’ Northeastern Moderate snob to the presidency is preferable to the Alinskyite Anti-American socialist we have as one now.

However, we Conservative Americans never should have allowed ourselves to be ignored by the Party we led to victory in the Midterms.

A Split Decision on Super Tuesday. A Conservative Light on the Horizon?

As I sit down to write this blog, Super Tuesday has turned out to be the split decision everyone thought it would be.  Romney won his “home state” (another one?) of Massachusetts, along with Vermont, Virginia, and, barely, Ohio. Santorum took North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee.   And, Newt Gingrich won his only home state of Georgia, decisively

Per the Associated Press:

Romney won at least 212 Super Tuesday delegates and Santorum won at least 84. Gingrich won at least 72 delegates and Texas Rep. Ron Paul got at least 22.

So far, Romney is winning 54 percent of the Super Tuesday delegates; Santorum is winning 22 percent.

A total of 419 delegates were up for grabs in 10 states Tuesday. A handful were left be allocated.

In the overall race for convention delegates, Romney leads with 415, including endorsements from members of the Republican National Committee who automatically attend the convention and can support any candidate they choose. Santorum has 176 delegates, Gingrich has 105 and Paul has 47.

It will take 1,144 delegates at the party’s national convention this summer to win the Republican nomination for president.

Does any one else see a regional pattern developing here?  Romney is hardly beloved in the Heartland, is he?

While Mitt Romney may very well be “inevitable”, due to his unrelenting support for the GOP Establishment and his never-ending supply of Campaign Funds, he is hardly a “Consensus” Candidate.

Gosh, I wish that there was a candidate out there, who was a Reagan Conservative, who could relate to average Americans, and was so down to earth that they would even stop their campaign bus at a Walmart to pick up diapers for their baby.

Oh, wait…

Stand by for this “live” (last night) interview from CNN:

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Our Paul Vercammen is up there in Wasilla, Alaska. Remember, Wasilla, we heard a lot about Wasilla only a few years ago. Paul Vercammen is standing by with a very special guest – I’ll give you a hint, the former governor of that state. Paul, talk to her.

PAUL VERCAMMEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I will, Wolf. By the way, Sarah Palin says hello. She just voted here in Wasilla. They expect 1,000 people to come through here.

And I think, Sarah, a lot of people are asking, who did you vote for tonight? Who would you like to see emerge as the GOP frontrunner?

FORMER GOV. SARAH PALIN, R-ALASKA: I would not tell you who I voted for in this presidential preference poll. I want to say hi to Wolf, though, and thank you guys for being up here in Wasilla and covering this, because every vote counts, and every district, every state matters. And that’s why I wanted to see this process continue because I want more people to have a say in who the nominee should be.

VERCAMMEN: But while you won’t say who you’re leaning for, are there any trends or is there something that you think is extremely important to the GOP platform this year that you want to see come to fruition?

PALIN: Yes. I want to see the process continue, more debate about who it is who can bust through the Orwellian Obama rhetoric and pandering that we see in the incumbent, who can bust through that with facts, with history, with logic, with common sense, in order for American voters to understand we do have a choice. There is a contrast between the incumbent, Barack Obama, and any of the four on the GOP ticket. Who best can bust through that rhetoric and express their ideas and their solutions to get our economy back on the right track, that’s the nominee I want to see forwarded (ph).

VERCAMMEN: Is there any fear that if this drags on for a long time, you are going to sap war chests and you’re going to cause a situation where the party becomes too divided?

PALIN: I am not a believer in that, not at this point. I do believe that competition makes all of our candidates better. Remember, there are five men running for president, and I think Barack Obama is the worst choice, is the last choice. So the four in front of him, as they duke it out in the arena of ideas and solutions to propose, the more of that, the better.

VERCAMMEN: Sarah Palin for president 2016, is it possible?

PALIN: Anything in this life, in this world is possible. Anything is possible for an American. And I don’t discount any idea or plan that at this point isn’t in my control. Anything’s possible.

VERCAMMEN: But would you seriously consider a run?

PALIN: I would seriously consider whatever I can do to help our country to put things back on the right track. Our economy, the foreign policy, proposals that we have to see put forward in order to secure our homeland, and the Americans, especially our brave fighting men and women who are overseas right now in places that perhaps we shouldn’t be right now. Anything that I can do to help, I will be willing to help.

VERCAMMEN: OK, one more question, from Wolf, if I can hear him. Let me try to relay it to you.

BLITZER: All right, Paul, I know there’s a delay between me and you, but thank the former governor, the Republican nominee for all of us. A quick question for her. I’m just curious how she’s been reacting to this whole Rush Limbaugh controversy with this Georgetown University law student, because there were some vile words that were uttered by some liberal Democrats as far as Sarah Palin was concerned, and I wonder if she wants to weigh in on this controversy.

VERCAMMEN: Wolf wants to know if you want to weigh in on this controversy. He says some vile words were thrown around, some of them directed towards you actually, the controversy involving Rush Limbaugh, contraception and the Georgetown student? Your reaction to some of those words that were used?

PALIN: I think the definition of hypocrisy is for Rush Limbaugh to have been called out, forced to apologize and retract what it is that he said in exercising his First Amendment rights, and never is that – the same applied to the leftist radicals who say such horrible things about the handicapped, about women, about the defenseless. So I think that’s the definition of hypocrisy. And that’s my two cents worth.

I wish we had some straight talk from all of the current Republican Candidates like that.  

It would certainly be refreshing.  And Conservative.

Santorum/Romney: The Country Mouse and the City Mouse

I’m sick and tired of reading posters on Conservative websites and hearing from contributors on the Cable News Channels, including Fox News, pushing the idea that the Republican Primary is done, Mitt Romney is the winner, and there is no need for any more states to participate in the Republican Primary.

Rush Limbaugh (per usual) had a spot-on take on this on his Wednesday program:

…Oh, no, no, no. It’s not time to put a stop to it, anoint anybody and say that we’re done. Newt’s not getting out. He’s gonna stay in through Super Tuesday. That’s where he’s got all of his money banked. This thing could go on as far as May. Santorum’s not going anywhere. Santorum doesn’t have a lot of money even now. Romney outspent Santorum six to one in Michigan. I mean just some facts about Michigan. Romney won by nine points in 2008. He won by three points last night but got more votes last night than he did in 2008. But the percentage of his victory in 2008 was nine. It was three points last night. Santorum — and this is preliminary, I’ve gotta double-check this all, but this is what I have now — Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties.

As of now, Santorum, who lost the popular vote, won because of the way delegates are apportioned. Seven of the 14 congressional districts, Romney has won six. So that’s seven and six, a total 13 out of 14. One is still too close to call. Now, according to what I’m told, the 28 delegates, of those 28 delegates in Michigan, Santorum will either win 14 or 15, something like that, the way things get apportioned because of the number of delegates and counties, districts, so forth and he won in Michigan. So it’s not winner-take-all. So when you ask me if I should pronounce it over, it’s not my job to do that anyway.

I think the weakness that Romney has is not the conservatives won’t show up in November. They will. They want Obama out, and that will override everything. The problem is with the Reagan Democrats, the white working class that Obama lost in 2008 by I think about eight or ten points. You’ve gotta win that by 20 points, and you can do that. Some of the Republican candidates in theory could do that. Romney is weak with that segment. He knows it. That’s why he tries to do the everything and he keeps tripping over himself. If he wins that constituency, he wins the presidency, but that’s where he’s gotta work.He is just not all that good a candidate. So here are the numbers: Romney won by nine in 2008; he won 41-38 or three points last night.

Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. That’s an incredible percentage, and it reminds me of the map of the United States, red and blue by county, when you look at that after a presidential race. The whole country is red (signifying Republican) except LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Miami, Washington, New York, Boston, Chicago and Detroit. The Republicans win 80% of America’s counties and lose the White House. Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. And, as of now, Santorum, while losing the popular vote, has won seven of the 14 congressional districts; Romney won six; there’s still one at least right now (earlier this morning it was one) still too close to call. This means that, of those 28 delegates, Santorum will either win 14 (if the last district goes to Romney) and 16 if Santorum wins the last district.

So the delegate count from those 28 will be either a 14-14 tie or 16-12 Santorum.

The way that the state of Michigan was divided between the two candidates is a metaphor for the political blood bath currently going on between Conservatives and “Mitt Romney supporters” (which seems to encompass everyone from “Fiscal Conservatives” to Ron Paul tin foil hat wearing nutjobs) .

This whole primary battle reminds me of Aesop’s Fable  “The Country Mouse and the City Mouse”:

There once was a mouse who liked his country house until his cousin came for a visit.

“In the city where I live,” his cousin said, “we dine on cheese and fish and bread. Each night my dinner is brought to me. I eat whatever I choose. While you, country cousin, work your paws to the bone for humble crumbs in this humble home. I’m used to finery. To each his own, I see!”

Upon hearing this, the country mouse looked again at his plain brown house. Suddenly he wasn’t satisfied anymore. “Why should I hunt and scrape for food to store?” he said. “Cousin, I’m coming to the city with you!”

Off they went into the fine town house of the plump and prosperous city mouse.

“Shhh! The people are in the parlor,” the city mouse said. “Let’s sneak into the kitchen for some cheese and bread.”

The city mouse gave his wide-eyed country cousin a grand tour of the leftover food on the table. “It’s the easy life,” the city mouse said, and he smiled as he bit into a piece of bread.

Just as they were both about to bite into a chunk of cheddar cheese, In came the CAT!

“Run! Run!” said the city mouse. “The cat’s in the house!”

Just as the country mouse scampered for his life out of the window, he said, “Cousin, I’m going back to the country! You never told me that a CAT lives here! Thank you, but I’ll take my humble crumbs in comfort over all of your finery with fear!”

Conservatives, like myself, can identify with the Country Mouse.

We would rather hold on to our ethics and values, than compromise and elect a Left-leaning Moderate who will “reach across the aisle” to shake hands with Liberals.  

We feel that, if we elect a Conservative candidate, we won’t have to spend time worrying about the knifes that the Liberals are holding behind their backs with the other hand.

Dear Ms. Coulter: Regarding Mitt Romney…

Yesterday, Famous Authoress and Conservative Beltway Darling, Ann Coulter, published a column with the title, “What’s Their Problem With Romney”?

While I am not anywhere near as talented a writer as Ms. Coulter, nor am I rich like she is, I am one of “Them”, which I presume to mean the Republican Party’s Conservative Base.

So, please bear with me as I attempt to answer some of Ms. Coulter’s pronouncements concerning the perfect candidate, Former Governor Willard Mitt Romney.

COULTER:  As governor of one of the most liberal states in the union, Mitt Romney did something even Ronald Reagan didn’t do as governor of California: He balanced the budget without raising taxes.

Per Boston.com:

The Republican managed to slash spending to eliminate a deficit pegged at $3 billion, but he also proposed or presided over a far-ranging series of fee hikes — a strategy that allowed him to maintain the no-new-taxes stance he now boasts about as he runs for president.

In all, then-Gov. Romney proposed creating 33 new fees and increasing 57 others — enough, he said, to pull in an extra $59 million for the cash-strapped state.

Horseback riding instructors, prisoners, those seeking training to combat domestic violence and used car shoppers were asked to dig a little deeper.

Romney and Democratic lawmakers ended up approving hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines, making it more expensive to use an ice skating rink, register a boat, take the bar exam, get a duplicate driver’s license, file a court case, install underground storage tanks, sell cigarettes or alcohol, comply with air quality rules and transport hazardous waste.

A survey of states by the National Conference of State Legislatures found Massachusetts led the nation during Romney’s first year, raising fees and fines by $501 million. New York was second with $367 million. Nine other states raised fees and fines by more than $100 million.

COULTER:  Romney became deeply pro-life as governor of the aforementioned liberal state and vetoed an embryonic stem cell bill. (Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich lobbied President George W. Bush to allow embryonic stem cell research.)

Again, per Boston.com:

In December 2005, Romney required all Massachusetts hospitals, including Catholic ones, to provide emergency contraception to rape victims, even though some Catholics view the morning-after pill as a form of abortion.

COULTER:  Romney’s approach to illegal immigration in Massachusetts resembled what Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona is doing today, making her a right-wing heroine.

From Boston.com, December 6, 2007:

The Globe reported yesterday that Romney had continued to employ Community Lawn Service with a Heart to mow his lawn and rake his leaves, one year after the newspaper reported that the company was using illegal immigrants for work on his grounds. Romney fired the company Tuesday night, hours after the Globe inquired about the work at his Belmont home.

COULTER:  Romney pushed the conservative alternative to national health care that, had it been adopted in the 49 other states, would have killed Obamacare in the crib by solving the health insurance problem at the state level.

From my post “Romney:  Romneycare Good.  Obamacare Bad.”:

…although Mr. Romney promised that his plan would lower costs, the liberal Commonwealth Fund reports that Massachusetts insurance costs have climbed anywhere from 21% to 46% faster than the U.S. average since 2005. Employer-sponsored premiums are now the highest in the nation.

COULTER:  Unlike actual Establishment candidates, Romney has never worked in Washington, much less spent his entire life as a professional politician. He’s had a Midas touch with every enterprise he has ever run, including Bain Capital, the Olympics and Massachusetts.

A Washington Outsider? Hardly. MSNBC.com reports:

Romney’s fourteen lobbyist bundlers – including representatives from powerhouse D.C. lobbying firms Dutko Worldwide and Ogilvy Government Relations – raised $1.1 million for his campaign in the second half of 2011, according to recent Federal Election Commission filings. Ogilvy chief Wayne Berman, one of Romney’s top bundlers, is also a co-chair of his national finance committee.

But Romney’s connection to elite D.C. operatives don’t end with fundraising.

Ron Kaufman, a former Bush Sr. advisers and now one of Romney’s top advisers was a top lobbyist for Dutko for years, telling the Boston Globe he decertified as a lobbyist just last year.

Team Romney also includes other top-tier Washington power brokers like Charlie Black, a former top adviser to John McCain began advising Romney earlier this year, and Romney’s chief counsel Ben Gingsberg, who held the same role in both Bush-Cheney campaigns, and has represented numerous house and senate campaigns and PACs.

COULTER:  The chestnut about Mitt Romney being pushed on unsuspecting conservatives by “the Establishment” is the exact opposite of the truth. The Establishment, by any sensible definition, is virulently opposed to Romney — and for completely contradictory reasons.

The entire NFM (non-Fox media) hate Romney because he is the only candidate who stands a chance of beating Obama.

Meanwhile, many of the pillars of the conservative establishment also implacably oppose Romney. Fox News is neutral, but its second-highest-rated host, Sean Hannity, is anti-Romney – though endorsing no one — as is prominent Fox News contributor Sarah Palin — who has also offered herself up as a possible presidential nominee at a contested convention. (Wouldn’t a former candidate for vice president on a major party’s ticket be part of the Establishment?)

The No. 1 conservative talk-radio host in America, Rush Limbaugh, is critical of Romney, and another top conservative talk-radio host, Mark Levin, is adamantly against Romney — though both Limbaugh and Levin supported Romney as the conservative alternative to John McCain in 2008, and Romney has only gotten better since then.

That’s your opinion, Ms. Coulter.

Here’s mine, which I originally expressed on January 23rd, in a post titled, “Southern Man Don’t Need Ann Coulter Around, Anyhow”:

You see, we average  Americans, here in Dixie, and folks in the rest of the Heartland, are fed up with you Vichy Republicans treating us like the hired help.  We stood by and watched you nominate the likes of Bob Dole and John McCain, the squishiest of squishes, then held our noses and dutifully voted for them.

Then, we watched you and your buddies, the Democrats, and their lackeys, the Main Stream Media, trash a good Christian American like Sarah Palin, to the point where she and her family said, “Enough of this mess”, which led to her dropping out of the Primary race.

Miz Ann, you need to go on Wheel of Fortune, buy a vowel and get a clue.  The South and rest of the Heartland will vote for whomever we want to, so go get your skinny self a sammich and stuff it.

Besides, why should we trust the judgment of someone who used to date Bill Maher, anyway?

I rest my case.

What Happened to “Mr. Inevitable”?

It’s seems like, just the other day, that Mitt Romney supporters, known on Conservative websites as “Mittbots” were insisting that the Nomination of Mitt “The Legacy” Romney as the Republican Presidential Candidate was a fait d’accompli.

Things have changed.

Reuters.com has the story.

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s struggles in Michigan are fueling speculation that Republicans might have to resort to a doomsday scenario and launch a frantic search for a 2012 savior at their nominating convention in late August.

Rare in the modern age of U.S. politics, a “brokered convention” could result in Republicans ditching their current crop of candidates and turning to someone else who they feel would have a better chance of defeating Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.

How did Republicans get to this point? Romney’s failure to get conservatives fully behind him and put down yet another challenger in the party – this time it’s Rick Santorum – is causing angst in the party.

Many senior Republicans do not think Santorum, a social conservative caught up in the U.S. culture wars over issues like abortion and contraception, has a chance to beat Obama if he wins the party’s presidential nomination.

When he ran for re-election as a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania in 2006, Santorum lost by 18 percentage points. But, nevertheless, he is exposing Romney’s weaknesses in Michigan, where Santorum leads polls ahead of the big Midwestern state’s February 28 primary.

A Romney loss to Santorum in Michigan, the state where he was born and where his father was governor, would only intensify the talk about a weak Republican field and feed demands for someone else as the party’s candidate to challenge Obama.

“It’s hard for me to see how Romney rights the ship if he loses Michigan,” said Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak. “There is no level of spin that can overcome that disaster.”

Michigan will set the table for “Super Tuesday,” the March 6 jackpot when 10 states hold Republican nominating contests. A loss for Romney in Michigan would raise serious doubts over whether he can rally enough support to have a big day on Super Tuesday and make a big move toward clinching the nomination.

The candidates are engaging in a state-by-state battle to become the Republican nominee. The party will officially pick a nominee at its August convention in Tampa, Florida.

Why is Romney losing in what was once his “home state”, a state where his own father, George Romney, was once Governor?

L.Z. Granderson, in an article published on CNN.com, has a possible explanation:

One very clear reason why Mitt Romney is far from a lock to win the Michigan primary, despite his ties to the state, is that he’s not really tied to the state.

He was born here, he lived here. But he’s not family. Not anymore.

That’s why the characterization of Rick Santorum polling well in Romney’s backyard is a bit misguided. The truth is, many of us disowned that two-faced liar years ago. We remember how, back in 2008, Romney came home promising to do all he could to save the auto industry. And we believed him and voted for him and he won the primary here. Then, after he dropped out of the race, he wrote a New York Times op-ed that carried the headline “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”

The opening sentence: “If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.”

What the he@@?

I thought he said he was one of us.

Later in the piece, Romney talks about why we should let the auto industry go bankrupt. Although he lays out some very sound reasons for this — including an anecdotal story of when his father, George, took over American Motors — at the end of the day he fails to mention the most important thing. Us.

He forgot about the people back home who depended on the auto industry to put food on the table, pay mortgages, send the kids to college. He greeted us like family when he needed our votes, but when he left town he treated us like strangers.

If Romney didn’t think a bailout was the best way to help the state, he should have said that when he came here looking for delegates and let the people at his rallies decide if they agreed with him. Instead he pandered, then kicked dirt in our faces on his way out the door — an all too familiar pattern with Romney.

The reason Santorum is gaining votes in Michigan isn’t because he’s so liked here, though his social conservative rhetoric plays well in the western side of the state. But it’s because we’ve been burned by Romney before. He tells the people in front of him what they want to hear. But when he sets his sights on a new shiny object, he changes the script to fit his new needs.

Unfortunately, for The Legacy, other Americans besides Granderson and the Michiganders have figured out his Karma Chameleon nature, also.

According  to pollster Scott Rasmussen:

…Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum has now bounced to a 12-point lead over Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters finds Santorum with 39% support to the former Massachusetts governor’s 27%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich follows from a distance with 15% of the vote, and Texas Congressman Ron Paul runs last with 10%. Three percent (3%) like some other candidate in the race, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Now, I’m just an average American, sitting here outside Memphis, Tennessee (Detroit South) in the Northwest Corner of Mississippi, but it seems to me, as I’ve said before, that average Americans, especially Conservatives here in the Heartland, are a stiff-necked people.

We tend to stand up on our hind legs when someone tries to force something (or in this case, someone) upon us that we really don’t trust, or care for.

For an example, please watch a certain Supreme Court Case coming in a few months, concerning the Constitutionality of forcing everyone in America to buy Health Insurance in order to participate in a Federal Government-run bureaucratic nightmare of a Healthcare System, that the overwhelming majority of Americans remain opposed to, but was shoved down our throats, anyway.

By the way, where did Obama and his Administration ever find a state-run Healthcare System to model Obamacare after?

Oh, yeah.  Romneycare.

You know, that might have something to do with Romney’s campaign tanking, as well.

What do YOU think?