E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
ATLANTA —Predicting an extended nominating fight, Mitt Romney said Wednesday he didn't expect the GOP primary season to result in a "coronation," all while downplaying a sweep of three nominating contests last night by Rick Santorum.
Romney said he still expected to become the Republican Party's nominee against President Obama this fall, but seemed to brace for a longer-than-expected path to the nomination.
“We think we can beat Sen. Santorum where we compete head-to-head in an aggressive way, and we obviously didn’t do that in Colorado or Minnesota to the extent that the other campaign did," Romney said on an airport Tarmac here in Georgia. "There will certainly be places where he wins, and there will be places where I win. There’s no such thing as coronations in presidential politics. It’s meant to be a long process. It’s not easy to get the nomination, it’s not easy to be elected president and this is a testing ... a testing approach. And so far we’re doing pretty well.”
Last night's contests — in which no delegates were awarded, Romney's campaign was quick to point out — did not, however, go so well for Romney. He suffered double digit defeats in Minnesota, where he won four years ago, and in Missouri, where Newt Gingrich did not appear on the ballot. In Colorado, a state where Romney competed actively and where the campaign seemed confident of a win, he lost by five points to Santorum.
Asked today about lessons learned in the defeat, Romney came out swinging, lumping Santorum together with Gingrich as a creature of Washington, and blaming both men for fostering a spending and earmark culture that ultimately hurt the Republican party, and spawned the Tea Party movement. The former Massachusetts governor said he did not respond to attacks while campaigning in Nevada, but that going forward he would make differences between himself and his opponents "very clear."
"Under Newt Gingrich earmarks doubled. Rick Santorum was a major earmarker and continues to defend earmarks. Under Rick Santorum he voted to raise the debt ceiling I believe five different times to a tune of about an addition $3.5 trillion," Romney said. "I believe that while Sen. Santorum was serving in congress and the Senate, government spending increased by some 80%. Republicans spent too much money, borrowed too much money, earmarked too much, and Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have to be held accountable."
Romney followed up with a spending-based attack on Santorum at a rally later on: "During Sen. Santorum's time in Washington, government grew 80 percent. And he voted to raise the debt ceiling five times."
Perhaps looking to reclaim his economy-oriented message, Romney turned his attack on Santorum and Gingrich into an attack on borrowing and spending more broadly, and hammered his point home.
"When Republicans act like Democrats, they lose. And in Newt Gingrich’s case he had to resign. In Rick Santorum’s case, he lost by the biggest margin of any Senate incumbent since 1980. Again, borrowing, spending, and earmarking is not a good combination if you’re a Republican and not a good combination, in my view, for America," Romney said.
Leave a Comment:
Gingrich, ron paul, & santorum has been saying they & their super pacs will be there until the convention regardless of how many electoral votes they have accumulated. In the end, it might be a matter of whether mr grover, gop, & the rusbo can get romney enough votes.
Santorum has never run anything. He is Obama conservative. It would be nice to elect someone that has run something.
we will see if miit can withstand this run. it is amazing that all these guys are getting their chance. it is strue what they are saying, it is like the republicans really dont want to put mitt as their candidate. surely this will be a two man race or mitt will pull ahead for the last time.
When Romney gets through with Rick ,he will be in the same Boat with Newt....
You mean with enough power to affect decisions on the platform.
Yep, change is coming. Obama in 2012 and dang it my house is paid for. I could skate on my mortgage and have the second term obama pass something to cover it for me. I'm going to get everything I can and use every angle necessary to get more goodies from the government. Hopefully the dems will take back the house, keep the senate and my retirement years should really be sweet. After all, it's the repubs trying to kill us old guys.
Well I plan on using the NDAA as my new retirement plan. I figure I can't keep my mouth shut another four years. And they keep adding things to the list of things christians can't say in public. So my Blessed in 2012 sticker on my motorcycle should end me in jail for an indefinite time.
Make sure your tinfoil hat is properly attached and look in the closet and under the bed befor you go to sleep.
In the end, Romney will prevail. Because, for no other reason, he's smarter, richer, and better looking. Not to mention, he's produces offspring that are not genetically-challenged like Santorum. The corporations spoke long ago, and Romney is there choice....Deal with it!
Yuck. You're bringing someone's handicapped child into this?
I have almost nothing in common with Santorum, and dislike pretty much all he has to say, but I wouldn't go there.
Truman,
I'm not a fan of Santorum's. In fact, I loathe his politics. I'm a progressive who believes Republicans are changing America into a Third World country with no middle class. However, I would NEVER use his handicapped children as the basis for a talking point.
Borrowing a famous question from an earlier era of Republican oppression, "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
We didn't want Santorum in Pennsylvania. He couldn't win here, so now he's trying to get elected anywhere he can. Lucky for him the primary is so late in PA. Will be hard for his "spin" people to explain why he is regarded as a jerk in his home state!
Old "Roman" military tactic----Promote fighting among your opponents,Weakening them so WHOEVER is the last one standing can be taken out easily.
But santorum said he beat romney & that's why romney has been out of govt. It could be that santorum has romney's number & romney will not be able to lay a glove on the guy like before. Romney is at his best when attacking obama. Like watching somebody shadow boxing.
Put America first and vote Ron Paul.
RON PAUL 2012
Give up on Ron Paul he will never get the nod, nor should he. Focus on the big picture. I once thought the same thing with Ross Perot. I voted for Ross which was just like throwing a vote away. The only thing I have from placing that vote is "Nothing".
I was brought up to believe that voting is both a right and a responsibility, that you are supposed to vote for the person you think will best lead the country. I do not vote for the person that I think will win. I vote for the person I believe in, even if I have to write his name on the ballot (that is a legitimate right of ours). I do not fall for the line that "voting for a candidate from another party is throwing your vote away" and I do not believe I "have to vote for the lesser of two evils". I believe that if my vote counts for no one else it counts for me and my conscience. I was also taught that if you do not vote, you should not complain. I have too many complaints not to vote.
RON PAUL 2012
Besides, you seriously underestimate most Ron Paul supporters. His voters are privy to the corruption in Washington and will not stand for any more of it. You will not see them jump behind just any Republican or Democrat. Ron Paul has built a history of ethics behind his voting record. If anything, they will stay home if not voting for some Independent. It's not the man. It's the ideals Ron Paul represents that puts America and her people, her economy, and her freedoms first!
There is no way Ron Paul supporters are going to jump ship last minute to support more of the same BS that has taking this country to the abyss. You can take that to the bank!
RON PAUL 2012
Ron Paul is not going to be nominated or elected to anything. He's a hick who has shown he's a racist, a dull-witted anti-abortionist, a global warming flip-flopper and denier, and a rabid Christian who is completely ignorant of the Constitution, corrupting it to advance his personal beliefs. At the very least, Ron Paul allowed his name to be used by racists in his employ to publish racist rants like "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
Paul has no problem banning abortions, even though such bans were outlawed by Rowe v. Wade, but just thinks it's a state's job to do so because of his warped view of the 10th Amendment. Paul has stated that because he delivered 4000 babies, he knows that life begins at conception (this is as stupid a statement as he's ever uttered--when life begins has been, is, and will always be a question for philosophers or politicians, and certainly not some quirky physician who delivered babies when he was in the Army).
Ron Paul is also a global warming flip-flopper and now a global warming denier. In 2008, he had this to say about global warming: "It is clear that the earth experiences natural cycles in temperature. However, science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.” By 2009, Paul was singing a different tune: "The greatest hoax I think that has been around for many, many years if not hundreds of years, has been this hoax on [...] global warming." Even if Ron isn't being paid off by Big Oil, he's still doing their bidding. The concept that humans cause global warming is shared by the vast majority of legitimate climatologists in the world; only scientists hired by Big Oil promulgate the myth that global warming is a hoax or is not caused by human activities. Moreover, his claim that global warming has been a hoax for hundreds of years is so obviously wrong: concerns about global warming have not existed for "hundreds of years." I was around for the first "Earth Day" in 1970, and global warming or climate change wasn't an issue then. I'd say it became a topic of discussion about 15 years ago. Paul's statement about there being a global warming hoax for hundreds of years is patently ridiculous.
However, the most frightening aspect of this dogmatic old fart's belief system is his conviction that we are a Christian nation. According to Ron, "The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance." This is demonstrably wrong, according to no less an authority than the United States Supreme Court, which has consistently recognized that the purpose of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment was to build or erect a wall separating Church and State, according to Thomas Jefferson, whose group crafted the clause:
"[A]t the first session of the first Congress the amendment now under consideration was proposed with others by Mr. Madison. It met the views of the advocates of religious freedom, and was adopted. Mr. Jefferson afterwards, in reply to an address to him by a committee of the Danbury Baptist Association (8 id. 113), took occasion to say: 'Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions,-I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.' Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured." Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 164 (1878).
"Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'" Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, 16, citing Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.
"This Court first reviewed a challenge to state law under the Establishment Clause in Everson v. Board of Ed. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 67 S.Ct. 504, 91 L. Ed. 711 (1947).1 Relying on the history of the Clause, and the Court's prior analysis, Justice Black outlined the considerations that have become the touchstone of Establishment Clause jurisprudence: Neither a State nor the Federal Government can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither a State nor the Federal Government, openly or secretly, can participate in the affairs of any religious organization and vice versa.2 "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State.' "Everson, 330 U.S., at 16, 67 S. Ct., at 511 (quoting Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 164, 25 L. Ed. 244 (1878)). The dissenters agreed: "The Amendment's purpose ... was to create a complete and permanent separation of the spheres of religious activity and civil authority by comprehensively forbidding every form of public aid or support for religion." 330 U.S., at 31–32, 67 S. Ct., at 519–520 (Rutledge, J., dissenting, joined by Frankfurter, Jackson, and Burton, JJ.); accord, Lee v. Weisman, 505 US 577, 599-600 (1992).
So what does Paul say about these court decisions: "Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity." So this arrogant twit, who is not educated in law, purports to be a higher legal authority on what the Founding Fathers intended by the religious clauses in the First Amendment than the Supreme Court, the final authority on what the Constitution means, has consistently ruled since 1878.
Just because Paul wants to dismantle the federal government and eliminate federal income taxes, as you may want, and will allow you to smoke pot (unless the states continue to outlaw it) doesn't make him a fit candidate for President of the United States. His brand of government may have worked in the 19th Century, but certainly not in the 21st. He keeps being rejected by the electorate because too many of his ideas are just plain kooky.
Michael L. Marowitz
J.D., J.S.M. (Master's Degree in Law with emphasis on constitutional law, Stanford Law School, 1981)
You are so far off base, Michael; it's hard to take you seriously. You obviously don't know Ron Paul.
Nice misinformation piece.
RON PAUL 2012
Wow Michael, good read :)
Yea Scott, when you can't address the arguments and your ego is too bloated and there are no facts on your side, you just shrug it off as nonsense.
Romney isn't exactly wrong on some points he makes against Santorum, but Santorum is a very likable guy. The only issue I have is his stance against gay marriage. Today's quote of him saying Cali is calling people against it bigots. It's the awful truth. Remember the civil rights movement, this is the same thing. Homosexuals help society a lot. BECAUSE THEY ARE PEOPLE TOO.
The "Shinny Turd" Romney might have to spend some of his offshore wealth just too loose in the end..
Rick is oozing with confidence.
no, he's oozing with the frothy mix coming out of his anus!
Mitt doesn't have enough money to buy the Evangelicals...
Key states that candidates for both parties must carry to either hold the presidency or take the presidency. Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. The way I see it whoever the GOP nominee is,will try to persuade Rubio to be their running mate to help secure Florida for the GOP. I think Pennsylvania and Virginia will go to the GOP as both seem to be leaning that way. So if the GOP finds a way to take Ohio with the other three must win states the Gop will take the White House, no matter who the candidate is.
Listen to all the GOP & Teabaggers R the party of No: No & Newt: that wants to go to the moon. & Mitt: sending his money off shore, so he doesn't have to pay Taxes.T Its all about the Wealthy getting richer and the middle class getting poorer.....They don't want to help out the poor, I do mean the poor not the lazy good for nothings...Who are the one's that leach off the taxpayer. They: are the Wealthy that get welfare both for themselves or for the Corps.TRUE So really All party are at fault...But it seems that the Wealthy get away with it like the .(.Democrat )... They steal billions and the few poor steals a few thousands. So what does the GOP want to do is Screw the MIddle Class to get even with the few. As I say its the me me me and F everyone else.... The failures of the Republicans party trying to take away SS and Medicare so they can give their wealthy Blackmailers more money... To hell with the Poor and Needy. Let them freeze in the winter and stave the Old and Babies,let them die from bad water, do away with the EPA and thats what you'll have, just like all you Teabaggers want...You make me sick with your Me Me Me altitude. It just a matter of time before the masses raise up against you . Greedy and you all call yourself Christains. What a laugh: Your no better than all the Muslims you all hate. Wake up America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WAKE UP.
Amazeing-
you are one very confused and ill-informed person
Well at least he's not a fraud like you huh Larry? :) haha
If you say so but I am not a fool like you an believe everything the Republicanpukes tell you....Everything I said is TRUE......
Hey Larry you seemed to miss this question from Jim you moron. Here you go:
OK Larry,,,, Show me you were a submariner, prove it or remain a total dishonest unpatriotic fraud
You are alone on the pier & nobody is on the submarine, get the boat underway
It's a standard question I asked of all non-quals
And I was attached to SUBRON 8 in the late 70's,, My last boat was the USS Plunger SSN 595, we won the only battleship award in submarine history,, 3 West Packs, 10 FBM Deterrent Patrols on boats from Charleston to Hawaii
lol, Larry, better get your googling out :) lol
Ron Paul does NOT want to get rid of Medicare and SS. He wants to end the phony wars for profit, bring our troops home and put the trillions saved into a stronger national defense and start funding Medicare and SS.
The media, who is pro Obama, wants us to believe he will get rid of them. That would be political suicide.
RON PAUL 2012
Asimplicity- as you said, anyone can google. Instead here is the Sea Robin link and you can find my name on the roster
Larry Robinson TM3 SS ( I got busted in a drinking party at Anapolis and the Old man had me reduced back down to TM3)
http://ss-407.net/list_N-R.html
I disagree with most of the posts here with their name calling and destructive comments. Every political person has some kind of baggage (same as us common folk). I also believe that most politicians want the best for our country but just disagree on how to go about it.
I think that views on social issues such as abortion, homosexuality, religious convictions should matter the least when choosing a leader, and beware of the person who keeps tooting his religious views. This should be the least qualification.
We need someone to pull us out of the doldrums financially and job-wise.
That's why we need Romney as president. His financial expertise is unprecedented and he will do the most for us to get back on safe financial ground.
Romney for 2012
If Mitt really cared, he would have donned a Uniform during Vietnam instead of dodging the Draft in France and securing his financial future.
It's called "Real Skin in the Game"
None of his children will come home in Body Bags, because none of his five sons served in Uniform either.
Skin in The Game Matters...
Really.
And what pray tell will willard do to get us "back on safe financial ground"?
Specifically..
He might bring his money back from the Cayman islands and Switzerland.
I meant to say Romney/Rubio for 2012
I think you got the ticket right.
If Mitt really cared, he would have donned a Uniform during Vietnam instead of dodging the Draft in France and securing his financial future.
It's called "Real Skin in the Game"
None of his children will come home in Body Bags, because none of his five sons served in Uniform either.
Skin in The Game Matters especially when he is so quick to send other Families Children to War...
A lying Mormon and a guy who invented his parents story about fleeing Cuba.
Now there's a match made in Looserville.
No wonder the average republican voter dislikes Willard so much. Here he goes again with the same old worn alibi/excuse when he loses. It's always the other guy's fault. Perhaps if Willard devoted more energy to exactly what his agenda is for this nation instead of browbeating all others, he might come across as electable. That tale he recited about his father and the nails in his mouth is about as exciting as watching grass grow. Willard if this is an example of how you performed in the private sector you need to return to whatever you professed doing there: politics is not your cup of tea. Willard and the NE Patriots have a lot in common: 0 for 3 against credible competition. Next Willard will attempt to sing, "If I had a hammer".
Ron Paul is the only candidate who is serious about America's debt problem, which will lead to the enslavement of America's 99% via hyper inflation. He's the only candidate serious about building a STRONG middle class by keeping jobs here. He is the only candidate willing to keep America out of another phony war and concurrently build a STRONGER national defense.
Put America first!
RON PAUL 2012
Ummm, what state did Ron Paul win? Reminds me of all those Kucinich supporters...
He does not have to win a single state. As long as he has enough delegates and is on the ballot in every state, that is what matters. Santorum and Gingrich are not on the ballot in every state. Besides, the Electoral College decides the president of the United States.
When it comes to the popular vote, it's all about the delegates.
RON PAUL 2012
Sandy boy needs to go come and help his wife with all those children he burdened her with. It doesn't matter how much help she has, he helped make that child and he should stop running butt up and down the road running for president that he'll never win and pick up the slack as the father of that child. His ideas are outdated and he want to turn other women into is wife. Those days are gone.
Romney is the candidate of the liberal drones just like McCain was before. Every sane person knows that Romney's baggage is by far the worst with his Romneycare, state cap and trade and his taking a page out of Obama's play book lie enough about your opponent and something will stick because the drones believe blindly. Over his 16 years in government Santorum has the highest conservative grades of any conservative and rino's like Romney know they can't compete with that. For drones like amazeing here is a fact you can chew on the democrats have made SS untendable by their out of control spending and those same liberals get more money from the rich than anybody. For example Buffet contributes heavily to Pelosi, Reid and Obama so his $1billion tax debt is forgiven.
Creo,
And you know that Buffet got a "$1billion tax debt. . .forgiven?" Where did you learn that?
Mike,he just made it up.
Morons for the Mormon, or Loones for Insanatorum. Who will win?
The American people with the re-election of President Obama.
Ok, now you Repuglickin's can spew your crap.
Obama has an excellent chance of winning! He deserves it too.
With Santorum actually winning some states, the US voting process has officially reached the status of a joke,
Santorbum is an idiot. We fired him as senator from PA because he's an incompetant loser. His bible thumping doesn't belong in the white house. He's a poster child for why abortion should be legal. They should've thrown him out with the garbage.
PR: you forgot to say he's a crook....sent his kids to a different school dist. while living in another....
Last I checked, abortion is legal. It has been since 1972. Look up Roe vs. Wade.
It's just not state funded, which is a good thing. That is what the GOP is fighting and I support that. I do not want to fund abortion with my tax dollars...and most Americans don't.
I don't want to fund abortion with my taxes or my charitable donations so all of you who believe in it can pay for it. Nothing is stopping any woman from having one, nothing is stopping any woman from getting birth control. All of you anti-catholics can quit worrying there aren't enough of us to endanger your world.
lonereb thanks to the rethuglicon loons, no one is funding abortion with tax dollars, due to Hyde Amendment. It is illegal in the US anyways. What people want is the religious Catholic fools like you getting out of their health decisions and business.