Romney Wins Arizona, Michigan; Paul 4th, 3rd
Mitt Romney took both Republican primaries held yesterday, winning easily in Arizona with 47 percent and less so in his boyhood home state of Michigan, where he garnered 41 percent of ballots.
Your presumptive GOP nominee, ladies and gents:
"We didn't win by a lot, but we won by enough. And that's all that counts," Romney told supporters Tuesday night in the Detroit suburb of Novi.
And there's this:
"It's very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments," Romney told reporters. "We've seen throughout the campaign that if you're willing to say really outrageous things that are accusatory and attacking President Obama, that you're going to jump up in the polls. You know, I'm not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support."
Ron Paul placed fourth in Arizona totals and third in Michigan. [Note: corrected placement.]
Now it's on to Super Tuesday next week.
For Wash Post coverage, go here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fiscal conservatism, social moderation, strong on defense is where the American public is at, and where Mitt Romney is at.
Ron Paul's got the first two, and fails on the third.
Mainstream libertarians can support Mitt.
Classic northeastern Rockefeller liberal.,
you cannot govern Massachusetts like Mississippi or Montana. Haley Barbour would have fared no better in MA than Romney would in MS, and I remain convinced a lot of Mitt's troubles with the fire breathers on the right is his being a Mormon.
After decades of politicians at the helm, why not try a business guy. It's not like four more years of Obama is going to turn out well.
Meh Romney isn't a politician? Sure, he was a business guy, but so was Dubya (supposedly), and we saw how that turned out.
Then again, no one could argue that Romney wasn't a successful businessman. But his lackluster career as governor is more relevant to the job he's campaigning for.
Dude, come on.
You haven't been gone long enough yet.
Give it eight more years or so.
Or post anonymously.
You'd get a more receptive hearing here posting as "Child Molesting Priest" than as "Eric Dondero".
I don't remember an "Eric Dondero", and yet with this one post/link I think I know all there is to know about him...
Eric Dondero spent the 2008 cycle telling us all that Rudy Giuliani was the true libertarian candidate in the race.
This time around, he peddled a story to the press explaining how the fact that Ron Paul spent a week hanging out with and campaigning with a gay San Francisco couple back in the 1988 campaign proved that Paul was a homophobe.
That sort of thing.
No "peddaling" about it. It happened. It just doesn't fit your template, so you pretend like it didn't happen.
Confirmation contact Jim Peron in San Francisco. Oh, and I do have at least one photo from the trip, un-related to the incident itself, but a photo of the SF campaign swing.
You're the one with the audio of Steven Hawking going down on Ron Paul at the Cali swinger's club.
If I grant you that "it" happened will you explain why it proves Paul is a homophobe? Or do you reject that portion of Fluffy's comment?
I have said on record on CNN, and numerous other media, I don't believe my former boss is a "homophobe." Some liberals might see him as that. But I just see him as an old guy, who's not so hip on what's PC and what's not in the 2010s.
Can I ask you all something? Why do you post under bogus names and under Anonymous.
It's rather annoying. What's wrong with using your real name?
Your real name is Eric Rittberg, so don't go throwing stones, Awik.
Damn near nobody here uses their real name. Get used to it.
And by 'here', I mean the internet.
Who cares? You're the asshole who sold him out. You're a tool for the Left to bash Ron Paul. Some "libertarian" you are, you fucker.
DONDEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Dondero is a disgruntled former staffer of Ron Paul who ditched him when he refused to support the Iraq War. This is almost certainly a spoof, though.
Ah, so Dondero is a mainstream Republican. Got it.
As far as I know he's good on prostitution and drug issues though. His positions typically line up with the Randians (though I have no idea what he thinks of Rand).
His positions typically line up with the Randians (though I have no idea what he thinks of Rand).
I doubt Objectionablists would see Romney as socially moderate with ObamaCare: The Prequel in his film credits.
Thank you Tulpa. Yes, my positions line up with Rand, but also Dennis Miller, Neal Boortz, Dana Rohrabacher, Pamela Geller and other pro-defense libertarians.
You may have heard of us. We're called the Libertarian Defense Caucus. We've been a small, but occasionally active group within the Libertarian Party since the mid-1970s.
And ironically, Robert Poole, Founding editor of Reason Magazine, was also a Founding Member of the LDC.
Yes, a mainstream Republican that supports abolishing the IRS, legalizing drugs, repealing seat belt laws, lowering the drinking age, eliminating the EPA and privatizing social security.
You know us "mainstreamers" and all. Always taking easy positions on the issues.
No "spoof." If you'd like to confirm my comments here call me on my cell 979-848-4575. I'm in the central time zone.
I'm in the central time zone.
Good. The less neocon bedwetters in my timezone the better.
NeoCons are like the Ron Paulists; both appease Islamo-Fascism. The NeoCons want to throw money at them and make them our friends. The Paulists want to pretend like they don't even exist.
We libertarians are the true foes of Islamo-Fascism.
Question for Tulpa. Why do you post under a bogus name? What's wrong with your real name???
I won't speak for Tulpa, but I don't like being stalked, harassed, or receive unsolicited emails.
Why is it any of your business? Ideas rise or fall on their own; the source is irrelevant.
Then what's the point in posting at all? It's Troll-ish. Your comment cannot be given any credibility if they go un-signed.
I post under a fake name because I am in the real world of business. The last thing I need is a customer or potential boss finding my political views distastful. Politics and business should not mix.
Which makes you what we call a "coward."
you've descended to phishing phone numbers from Hit and Run commenters?
Oi!
I'm a Santorum man, everyone knows that!
Pick a different handle, please.
Pick a different handle
Oi!
Donderoooooooooo!
It's true that Ron Paul fails to meet the American public's definition of being "strong on defense". But the American people like to vicariously bully and kill foreigners, so that's just one more reason to like Dr. Paul.
Mainstream libertarians can support whoever they want, but if they choose to support Mill then they are lying about being libertarians.
Dr. Paul is strong on defense, but he's weak on understanding the country's enemies.
Kindly enlighten me.
Right. He fails to see that the way to defeat our enemies is to invade countries seemingly at random and turn the previously friendly, or at least indifferent, population against us during occupations lasting decades or more, and bleeding our treasury dry while giving our enemies some free practice against our military equipment and techniques. How the fuck many more Predator drones are we planning on hand-delivering to Iran and hostiles in Pakistan?
You guys are with war like Krugman is with stimulus. Never enough!
Sound strategy Tulpa! Well done!
Guess it's better to fight them on our own soil instead of over there, right?
I'm sure the good citizens of McAllen, Texas, Laredo, El Paso, Tucson, AZ and San Diego, CA will be real happy about that strategy.
Explain how having forces in Iraq or Afghanistan prevents Muslim terrorists from crossing the US border.
forget it, jake, it's donderlolz.
I'll give him this (and only this). I do wish Ron Paul coupled his non-interventionist policy with a more full-throated endorsement of maintaining US hegemony and role in the world.
While I don't think we should go around bombing brown people and occupying foreign lands, I think the role our military plays in securing global shipping lanes, assisting third world countries with food and medical supplies in disaster relief, and promoting the concept of liberty through diplomacy and example are noble, inexpensive, and just.
He should also note that just because he doesn't believe in intervening in various and sundry conflicts and world affairs which don't concern us doesn't mean he'd consider North Korea and Iran as diplomatically equal with Great Britain or Germany.
Yet you post under "anonymous"?
How libertarian is that?
It's the internet. Everyone is anonymous. It's a joke. Get it?
No, I don't get it. Everyone is not anonymous on the internet.
I am Eric Dondero Rittberg. My phone number is 979-848-4575. My website is LibertarianRepublican.net. I live near Houston, Texas
Anonymous on the internet means coward in my book.
Fine. We're cowards. Congrats - you win ,uh...something.
I'm not anonymous on the Internet, but DONDEROOOOOO!!! is an idiot nonetheless.
Jake Boone is to be congratulated. He is the only one here that I see who actually posts under his real name. His views count. I may not agree with them, but I respect him for having the courage of his convictions.
Anonymous on the internet means coward in my book.
Wow, I didn't realize that 99% of the internet-using public were cowards.
We are the 99%!
Posting one's phone number on a public website means risky in my book.
Strong on defense = Zionism
Right?
Several things come to mind when I think about Romneycare, but fiscal conservatism is not one of them.
DONDERRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
I lost your cell #, can you repost?
Is what he's peddling so far off from those here who suffer from the delusion that Ronald Reagan was some kind of champion for freedom?
I never said that. Though I did like some elements of RR's foreign policy.
RR was a disaster on immigration and the drug war, as well as deficit enlargement.
One point that I do not see made often enough is that Reagan spent so much time in the public sector or trying to gain admission to the public sector.
If one wants to get governmet off of our backs, one should not spend a quarter of a century in the public sector. He started running for gov. of California in 1965. He left Sacremento in January of 1975 running for the GOP presidential nomination.
He left Washington in January of 1989.
What a hypocrite.
Tulpa, my post was not directed at you or Rev.
TO be sure, the liberal narrative on Reagan is full of flaws, no doubt about that.
Yes, its frustrating trying to have a discussion with Donderoo aka Gregory Smith.
Some guys like guys, some guys like girls, some girls like girls, some girls like guys, some like both, let it be.looking for the bilover?"datebi*co'm" is a site for bisexual and bicurious singles and friends.Here you can find hundreds of thousands of open-minded singles & couples looking to explore their bisexuality.sign up for free.
"It's very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments."
Cop walks into a kennel...
DONDERRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOO
How is Weigel doing?
Fiscal conservatism, social moderation, strong on defense is where the American public is at, and where Mitt Romney is at.
Mitt Romney is in no way a fiscally responsible candidate. No True Libertarian /Scots accent off/ can support Romney in good conscience.
And what makes you a "true libertarian?"
I've never heard of you before. How long you been involved in the movement? What's your libertarian background? How many Libertarian Party petition drives have you been involved with?
I've never heard of you before.
Your loss, then.
How long you been involved in the movement?
Involvement, or not, in a "movement" is irrelevant to the validity of a person's opinions.
What's your libertarian background?
I've been a pretty consistent libertarian since about, say, 1993ish. I have some sympathies to deep libertarian thinking, am a "night watchman" minarchist, and like pina coladas and long walks in the rain. You?
He who works hardest for the libertarian movement is the most libertarian.
We oldtimer libertarians judge people by the commitment of their activism, not by bullshit they post on some internet site, and their "beliefs".
Again, what's your background with the Libertarian Party, Republican Liberty Caucus? How much have you donated to Cato, Reason, other libertarian causes over the years? How many libertarian campaigns for office have you worked on? Have you run for office yourself as a libertarian?
If not, then you ain't no libertarian. Sorry. Fuck you and have a nice day.
*yawn* you're boring, Rittberg. Maybe you can go peddle another "insider" story to HuffingtonPost so people will actually give a shit about you for more than five minutes.
You haven't changed a bit. Still pushing your old "I stood barefoot in the snow for months in 1908 handing out campaign literature to rabid pit bulls, therefore when I say that libertarianism requires us to bomb foreign countries who look at us cross-eyed, that proves it's the "real" libertarian position!"
Jake, I respect your views. Thank you for posting under your real name. The other fuckers here, except for RC Dean, are a bunch of cowardly trolls.
But you and RC are to be congratulated and thanked. I don't agree with you but I respect you for having the courage of your convictions.
He who works hardest for the libertarian movement is the most libertarian.
Da, comrade. Throw in something about the vanguard of the proletariat, and you'll have something.
One fallacy to point out:
"Working hard" for anything means nothing. Results count, not effort. Based on your results to date, I would say you and I are on about equal footing, there. And that's being charitable, given your attempts to damage Ron Paul.
Although I can certainly understand why you don't want to be judged by what you post on the internet.
That was teh epic, RC.
I don't agree with you about everything but I respect you (most of the time), and then there are the iron laws.
This donderoooooooooooo is a spoof! The real Dondero has been retired 15 years and living like a king in Patagonia.'
^^ That was funny.
He who works hardest for the libertarian movement is the most libertarian.
Isn't that what Karl Marx called "the labor theory of value"?
You know, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt but your "true libertarian schtick" just proved what everyone says about you.
>Mainstream libertarians can support Mitt.
we can??
Because, you know, Romneycare was all about fiscal conservatism.
DONDEROOOOOOOOOO!!!
DONDEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
And if you're going to go around telling people they aren't REAL libertarians by supporting anyone, shouldn't it be whoever the Libertarian candidate is?
Cause it sure as shit ain't going to be Mitt Romney.
Here we go!!
Not even close. With comment threading, your second comment is actually the 24th, and falling!
I didn't want to directly feed the insane person (more likely spoofer).
Oh well.
I think you've got Paul's rankings reversed.
Didn't he come in 3rd in MI and 4th in AZ?
Yes he did.
Yes.
Look how presidential that thumb looks.
Yes, but where's it been?
Mitt's "strong" military spending will enrich the war profiteers and bankrupt America.
The same could be said of Gingrich or Santorum or Obama.
But that's what wins elections. You have to promise to bully and kill foreigners if you want to be president.
You have to promise to bully and kill foreigners if you want to be president.
Let me be clear.
Except Kenyans and Indonesians.
Strong defense is a universe away from crony capitalist-sponsored military adventurism and the intent of our founders. Paul is absolutely right on this.
Donderoooooooooo!
Dondereeeeeeeeee!
Donderiiiiiiiiii!
Donder-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah!
He's got Santorum on his thumb.
"I'm not willing to light my hair on fire"
RAAACIST!!
Mitt would not like THE HAIR on fire to save the lives of his family, I'm sure.
Not the holy hair.
I'm sure that he goes home at night and lovingly brushes it, whispering over and over about his "Preccccious".
Would you agree that he cares more for THE HAIR than he does space in the family car?
If he's willing to tie the dog to the roof of the family station wagon in order to maximize cargo space, whom or what would he throw under the bus in order to make sure that he did not have a bad hair day?
the dog was in a kennel. Good grief. My dog hung his head out the window for entire trips; being on the roof and having an endless aromatic buffet would not have troubled him.
"We didn't win by a lot, but we won by enough."
"We didn't lose by much, so it's close enough."
That would perhaps be either a world ending conflagration due to the amount of product used or a completely impossible task given the space polymers that are in use.
Willard's hair would melt before it burned.
"We've seen throughout the campaign that if you're willing to say really outrageous things that are accusatory and attacking President Obama, that you're going to jump up in the polls. You know, I'm not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support."
I hope he doesn't really feel this way because the Obama machine is already in attack mode, and they will be merciless as soon as he wins the nomination.
** gleefully anticipating **
Will *they* light their hair on fire?
I may be in the minority on this, but BO's official campaign is as incompetent as everything else he runs. It was fairly stupid in 2008 too but he had a weak opponent, a hated president from the other party to run against, and a blissful ignorance among the electorate about his true nature.
The advantages he has this time around are a compliant press that will act as a free "idiot filter" of his campaign's deeds and formidable war chest. So they'll probably appear to put forth a good showing just by blundering around enough and having the press clean up their messes.
Don't forget that Obama has the economy on his side.
I mean, imagine how much worse it would be if he hadn't created and saved all those jobs!
We'd be at 50% unemployment!
Krugnuts said so!
One of these times, the press is going to be right about the upturn that's right around the corner.
One of the worst examples is david gregory of Meet the Depressed.
"Won't it be difficult for the republican nominee to argue that the economic recovery is not good enough?"
He has asked that question at least twice in the last 6 weeks.
Why would any person not dependent upon the state even assert or report that unemployment is what the Labor dept. releases on the first friday of the month?
We know that the "official" ue rate is bogus. We know that U-6 does not even tell the whole story.
UE is not 8.4%. Its closer to 20% according to shadowgovernmentstats.com.
"Won't it be difficult for the republican nominee to argue that the economic recovery is not good enough?"
Quite easy, actually.
Something like 4MM jobs were lost after Obama took office until the recession "ended." Since then, around 2MM jobs have been added. There are fewer people working in the US today than when he took office.
And the working-age population is larger, too.
and a blissful ignorance among the electorate about his true nature.
-----------------
it's not like the voting public's intelligence has gotten much better since then. And Obama will again have the compliant press, the section of the electorate that buys into the stereotype of "tax cuts for the rich", and lest we forget, the number of takers has increased during Barry's watch.
Ron Paul is not anti-National Defense. Like waste in every other part of the federal government the military is no exception. Just throwing money at the Pentagon and the Military Industrial Complex doesn't make this country safer. It's spending money where makes sense that does that. If Ron Paul is so 'anti-defense', why is he getting so much support from both current and former military personnel? I don't think it's just because he's the only one running for President who actually served in the military.
But, but, but if we don't fight them there we'll have to fight them here!
All those poor Afghans living in mud huts, shooting AKs and planting bombs, would be in New York City if our troops weren't over there.
Thousands of them! All throughout the city!
Chaos!
Bombs blowing up taxis!
Automatic weapon fire in the streets!
Is that what you want?
Wasn't that a Chuck Norris movie?
Bruce Willis.
Shouldn't you be posting links to pictures of attractive women? Don't you have a job to do?
I do that on the links....
New York City, maybe not? But Dearborn, Michigan. El Paso, Texas (across from Juarez), San Diego, Tucson, McCallen, Texas.
OTM illegal aliens are a reality. Radical Muslims have been caught on numerous occasions trying to cross the borders from Mexico and Canada.
You don't remember the Millenial Bomber in Bellingham, WA? Or that Al Qaeda guy that was caught in the trunk of a BMW last year near San Diego?
You must be mistaken.
I was told that we're fighting them there so that we won't have to fight them here.
That means that the terrorists who would have come here to attack defenseless civilians would choose instead to attack the best trained and equipped killing force the world has ever seen.
It makes perfect sense.
Well then, thank goodness we have our troops in Afghanistan preventing terrorists from crossing the Mexican border.
Exactly. Silly Ron Paul might use the troops to guard the border.
How do you stop terrorists that way?
Sheesh!
You forgot human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
Ron Paul is classic anti-National Defense. He doesn't even acknowledge Islamism exists. He appeases Radical Islam at every turn.
Tell me, what's "libertarian" about forccing our wives/girlfriends to wear ugly black burkas from head to toe, jailing our marijuana smoking buddies for life, outlawing booze and gambling, caning adulturers, hanging homosexuals and stoning prostitutes to death?
Ron Paul is a 50%-er libertarian.
He's 100% pro-liberty on economics.
100% anti-freedom on foreign policy.
What's "libertarian" about blowing people up because they disagree with you on policy issues?
Are you some sort of One World Government type person?
How can forcing American individuals to defend the rights of every individual on Earth be a libertarian position?
Nothing. But where, exactly, is the evidence that Ron Paul will impose these things on America?
The direction the evidence actually points is toward the position that you're a total nutjob.
Notice he didn't answer either of us? That's because he has no answer. He was just bravely talking out of his ass.
anonymous, why do you post under anonymous and not your name?
Did your father and mother not give you a name when you were born? Did the birth certificate somehow get lost by the frontdesk nurse?
If you have a name, USE THE DAMNED THING!
donderoooooooo?
Fourth? Crap.
in Arizona. 3rd in MI
Arizona is a winner take all state. Paul hasn't made any effort at all on those states. MI is a proportional state, and Paul does very well in caucus states. He's not going to win the nomination outright. If this thing goes the distance and turns in to a brokered convention, that's when it gets interesting.
over 115,00 voters for Paul in michigan. took some 15 or 16% in wayne county (detroit).
NOW LET'S GET OUT THERE AND THROW THIS ELECTION!
Now it's on to Super Tuesday next week.
Tsk, tsk, Nick, falling into the media's trap. You neglected to mention the March 3 Washington Caucuses, where Paul is polling pretty well and working hard to rally his troops.
I really like the idea behind that.
http://www.Gone-Anon.tk
7% in Arizona. That can't be very good news for you America-hating/anti-National Security Paul-bots.
I'd mark that down as an extreme rejection of y'all's leftist brand of libertarianism, in a Right-libertarian State like Arizona.
They love Goldwater in AZ; not Osama bin Laden.
The home of noted libertarians Joe Arpaio and Jan Brewer.
They love Goldwater in AZ
Hence Arpaio, Brewer, and McCain.
Donderoooooooooooooooooooooooooo
America-hating
The troll reveals itself.
He's always been like this. I prefer Donderrrooooo over our resident griefer, so I won't call him a troll.
Hmmn? I'm a "troll"? I post under my name, not under "anonymous."
What is your name? Why do you have to hide yourself? Coward.
I won't call him a troll.
Somehow gets this response:
I'm a "troll"?
You'd think a hardened movement apparatchik wouldn't have such a thin skin.
"Coward"
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Also, you'll never get a rise out of me. Ever.
I'm not looking to "get a rise out of you," I'm merely looking for you to have the courage of your convictions and post under your name.
What's all this "anonymous" bullshit about? What's the point of posting a comment on a blog, if you don't post it under your own name? It has zero credibility. Just takes up space.
Eric is right. Until we occupy every nation on earth, we will never be safe from all those foreigners who hate the United States.
Occupy Smock-u-py. We don't occupy jackshit. We wage war in these countries, take no war booty, take no territory, and then high tail it out of there.
Well, except for that acre plot of land where we buried our dead from WWII on the beaches of Normandy in France. That's the grand total of our territorial expansion in the last 80 years.
And by "high tail" we mean have bases there for 70 years (see: Germany) and spend trillions of dollars.
And Japan.
And Kuwait.
And Korea.
And...
I'm sorry, did I miss the news report of us high tailing it out of Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq? No? Then shut the fuck up.
Whatever
Eric, what is your exit strategy for Afghanistan, being a former military member and all?
Good one, RA, and Donderoooo's lack of response is telling.
BTW, Does Donderoooo rhyme with "kangaroo" or is it like Khaaannnnn?
It originally came from the Bonanza theme song. "Dun da-da dun da-da dun da-da dun don-der-ooooo!" It's a long "o" at the end, like Cheerio, but stretched out as per Shatner.
Occupy Smock-u-py. We don't occupy jackshit. We wage war in these countries, take no war booty, take no territory, and then high tail it out of there
I think the nice folks in Okinawa & Guam might hive a little different take on that, sweetie.
That guy spent the whole morning arguing himself into various corners from which he could not escape. The forum is littered with his logical corpses. Is this what happens every time he visits?
It seems like it.
He used to have more stamina. He'd continue blathering for hours, shifting from one spurious argument to the next while we skewered each one with Musketeerian glee.
Now he's just old and tired, I guess.
No, now I spend all my time at my own website - LibertarianRepublican.net, where we tear you left-libertatrians apart on a daily basis and expose your utter hypocrisy.
Oh, and btw, we don't allow any "anonymous" posters there.
Jake Boone, RC Dean, Pham Nuwen and others who post under their real name are welcome any time.
I spend all my time at my own website - LibertarianRepublican.net, where we tear you left-libertatrians apart on a daily basis and expose your utter hypocrisy.
Beware, Donderooooooooo! He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.
I've only had two run ins with him on HnR. Both times he went FULL RETARD. Never doubt Donderoooooooo's keyboard warrior skills.
anonymous can you explain why it is you post under a bogus name, and don't use your real name on line?
Are you a yellow bellie?