1. Craig says

    Perfect! He’ll have to fight for every vote, exhausting his resources. A complete nut is going to show the party for what it is. And then there’s the other complete nut. The blowhard Newt is dead. Perry has been exposed as a genuine idiot. Bachmann even more so. Outstanding!!

  2. cranky1 says

    Romney will go with a hard-right hater for his running mate. It could well be Santorum (shudder), Perry, but most likely Huckabee, who has been quietly waiting in the wings.

  3. Morning Tundra says

    Huckabee said of Romney in ’08 that he reminds voters of the guy who fired them, not the guy working at the next office or cube (like the earthy Huck, if he says so himself). Romney, and the DNC, never will forget that. So it won’t be Huck. But Stand by your Man is right in that Mittens must go right. Not just for a running mate, but in the way he governs for at least four years, if elected. Thune, Rice, Bush, Martinez, Alexander, Haley, and McDonnell are likelier picks, with Thune the standout.

  4. Things that make you go Hmm says

    I presume the Romney pic is his wife and sons…my gaydar is seriously going off…which one of his boys is one of our bois??

  5. gregory brown says

    It’s disheartening and an indication of a serious disconnect from reality that exit polls showed a large part of the Santorum faithful believe Abortion is the most pressing issue in American life and politics. Presumably all the Preborn survivors to be saved from the butchers would enjoy full employment, assurance of at minimal social safety nets and fulfilling lives in their futures. Of course, the overlap with the Tea Party enthusiasts works against most of that.
    Lordy, lordy….

  6. Graphicjack says

    Santorum? Really? Wow… Umericans are even dumber than I thought. By all means pick him as your candidate. The world wants to laugh even harder that you would vote for a man whose name means frothy mix… The only thing sillier would be voting for a dead person… But at least the sea person can’t wreak as much havoc as Santorum could… Scary.

  7. says

    romney is worth 200 million and opposes the “death tax” because it means that he’d only be able to leave his children 110 million dollars when he finally kicks the bucket.

    and of course 110 million dollars isn’t NEARLY ENOUGH when divided amongst all those kids, and even if he loses a few to suicide it’ll still not be enough. or something.

    right? because all good Christians know that the most important thing is dying with the most money.

    as for Romney’s kids – its like the first rule or Mormonism – you’re gonna have a few gay kids. you can’t have more than 5 children and not pop out at a ‘mo or three. ditto with Santorum.

  8. Mary says

    I must admit that it was surprising to see Santorum do so well in Iowa when he’s been polling in the single digits nationally for months. I’ll never undertand why Republican voters went through every other non-Romney candidate before Santorum – I mean seriously, the serial-adulterer Newt over Rick Santorum? I think its possible that the Senator now has a real chance to give Romney a run for his money and capture the nomination – but we’ll see.

    However, the fractured conservative field split between Santorum, Perry, Bachmann, and Gingrich should give pause to everyone who tries to paint social conservatives as monolithic, zombified, and narrow-minded. No one anywhere seems to have posed the obvious question: shouldn’t people so narrowly based have an easier time agreeing on a candidate? Socons have never been people who agree on everything. And note that the top two candidates (Romney and Santorum) are a Mormom and a Roman Catholic – proving wrong those who claim that evangelicals are bigoted against religions not their own.

  9. jack says

    Isn’t it interesting that neither Mitt nor his father nor any of his sons have ever served in the U.S. Miitary? I guess they realize that this duty is the responsibility of the lower classes.

  10. Mary says

    Jack, you raise a good point. There are many conservatives who are armchair warriors. The neocons in particular, among whom miliary service is rare, have a strange habit of referring to American troops as “we.” Liberals have every right to call them out on this.