Saturday, December 29, 2007



Here's the prediction - though your Mittiot has been wrong before (I mean who would have thought the Dems would be so stupid re: the Michigan Primary. . . but) - "ROMNEY WINS IOWA."

Not much of a prediction, as he's going to be 1 or 2 for sure - So, what's the kicker? Organization and Money. The Romney team has invested a lot into the organization of Iowa, AND, Romney has had a lot of money to invest into his well-oiled campaign machine in the land of the Hawkeyes. In other words the tipping of scales - especially when talking caucus - comes down to A.) identifying your supporters (done that) and, B.) getting them to the caucus (to be done with great precision).

I've seen - am a part of - Mitt's Michigan Machine and if Iowa's is anything like the Sparton State's - Mitt will win - hence the prediction.

Just a little anecdote to drive home the point. Mackinac Island, last September, BIG REPUBLICAN EVENT/STRAW POLL, Mitt crushes the competition, Huckabee hasn't even enough money to fly out to Michigan's most important GOP fall event. Will he, does he, for Iowa? Fellow Mittiots, this Mittiot is betting "close but no cigar."

At any rate, one thing seems to have become a far gone conclusion, Mitt will be solidly in the top-tier come New Hampshire (and he's lookin' good in MITT-CHIGAN, as well). The question then, is the impact after. . .

The National Review has a good "enter the spin" article here - check it out.

5 Days To VICTORY!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

Friday, December 28, 2007



In and out, in and out, I KNOW! Your Mittiot feels a bit like the Ross Perot of bloggers. But, I finally got some time. . .

Some of the lax bloggin' is that your Mittiot has found it hard not to lead with the negatives about the rest of field. . . Ronnie R. would be proud that I've taken his 11th commandment to heart. Much of the lax bloggin' comes from the pensiveness of a race too fricken close to call!

But, I'll buck up and tell it like it is. . . this race is Mitt's to lose AND EVERY DEMOCRAT, HUFFICRAT, HUFFICAN, LIBERAL NEWSPAPER, AND SOCIALIST BLOGGER KNOWS IT! And, they are piling on. I especially loved what Bryon York [which I read via Townhall] reported regarding the "anti-endorsement" of Mitt.

After the extraordinary beating it took from the Concord, N.H. Monitor – which a few days ago went out of its way to publish an anti-endorsement of Mitt Romney – the Romney campaign is sending around an email pointing out that the Monitor took some whacks at Ronald Reagan in 1980. From the paper on February 21, 1980:

"Ronald Reagan – The former California governor is simply too old (69), too doctrinaire, too inexperienced in the intricacies of the federal government. We gravely question his capability to withstand the daily physical and emotional battering that the nation's chief executive must endure."

If a rational individual pondered this fact, they might come to the conclusion that "If the Democrats hate him. . . he must be good for the GOP (and the nation for that matter)." The problem: Only 20 percent of voters are what we would call "rational voters." Lets hope in a field of 7 (or so, pending how you count Paul) 20% is enough.

And speaking of the field - why the light coverage over Tancredo's endorsement of Romney? At least Congressman Tancredo knows a winner when he sees one!

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

Now if you'll excuse me, your Mittiot has to go and replace another Romney 4x8 as someone spray-painted an anti-Mormon slur on it before tearing half of it down. . . real nice. . . I'd like to know who that individual is supporting so we could all know the caliber of voter supporting the candidate. . .