Romney appears to have won the Michigan primary. So it's entirely conceivable that we could have five different caucus/primary winners before this is all over:
Huckabee: IA
Romney: WY & MI
McCain: NH
Thompson: SC (this Saturday, and I still think it's a longshot)
Giuliani: FL (1/29, if he doesn't win here he's toast)
What's this "brokered convention" phrase I hear being tossed around?
Huckabee: IA
Romney: WY & MI
McCain: NH
Thompson: SC (this Saturday, and I still think it's a longshot)
Giuliani: FL (1/29, if he doesn't win here he's toast)
What's this "brokered convention" phrase I hear being tossed around?
posted by Matt | 9:49 PM
3 Comments:
I'm not concerned. McCain will NOT stand up in the south. Rudy needs to pull a rabbit out of his butt; I just don't get his strategy. I mean--I get it. But I don't get it. Fred will rise in the south.
Still don't know how the true conservatives will do with the mormon.
Let's not forget guys--all these primaries have (thus far) been in predominately liberal or "independent" (i.e., closet liberal) states.
At this point, I'll be happy with a Thompson/Romney, or maybe even a Romney/Thompson. Don't feel comfortable with Rudy, due to his social liberalism.
Hey Matt--being that the mormon was your state governor--I wish you'd weigh in the guy. How the heck did he get elected up there anyway? Is he wicked liberal about stuff that I haven't found out about yet?
No Greg, he's a "wicked closeted independent" - mostly about stuff you haven't heard about.
I don't know how he got elected. I was in CT when it happened. (I know to the rest of the country that sounds like a stone's throw, but it's enough to be oblivious.)
I know he was once officially pro-choice, but claims to have had a change of heart since then. A lot of conservatives aren't buying it, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. There may be other such occasions prompting his being labeled a "flip-flopper".
Post a Comment
<< Home