MITT-CHIGAN!

ON THE ROMNEY VICTORY IN MICHIGAN:

Your Mittiot had another press interview re: the Michigan Primary - not as the Mittiot - but as the PoliSci Instructor from the Battle Creek area. The Coldwater Record, (small town, less leading, a smidgen less liberal) wanted to know my thoughts. It was damn difficult as a staunch Romney supporter to put the pale "consensus" probables of the primary forth - but I did. Your Mittiot, a big droopy-eyed from hangin' at the victory party in Southfield, wanted to blurt - "MITT WON BECAUSE MICHIGAN LEARNED ITS LESSON!" - but I was a bit more composed. In a round about way, I let the reporter know that "organization" was the key - everyone knew it, everyone on the inside knows it - Mitt had us at "Hello." I, also, think I made the point (as I did with the BC Enquirer) that this is about GOP delegates - NOT STATES, and Mitt is the candidate best positioned to capture the majority of delegates. . . As such, we'll fight on regardless of S.C. or FL's outcome. . . and in the end we may look back and think, "Hmmmm, Wyoming. . . who knew?"

ON THE SOUTH CAROLINA PRIMARY:

Speaking of organization, Mitt does have a good organization in SC. I believe he can win South Carolina, as he'll get a bump from MI - and that'll pull him "close." What the Thompson supporters do to the Huckabee numbers still remains to be seen. Will there be a consensus of conformity around Huckabee by the Evangelical Conservatives? Will the "Thompson Strategy" pay off? If there is a indecision among the Evangelical GOP voters - Romney's in pretty good shape. Let's not forget, though the Media might want to spin differently, Romney is not unattractive to the pro-family voter. AND, he has done a fine job of picking up some of the Evangelical leaders in South Carolina already. So, Mittiot, what'll happen?

I believe, Romney is hedging his bets with the prediction that McCain wins (or will win) South Carolina. This is smart, as it gives a little cover and a lot of political pause for the GOP faithful. If Mitt moves up into second place behind McCain - which I predict he will - the Evangelicals with have to make a decision to what they want to do: Stick with Huckabee on principle and give McCain a win - or hedge their bets to a more palatable conservative. In any event - claiming McCain will be the winner in a close election in the Great Palmetto State - is as politically smart as pushing - DRUMMING - the rhetoric that "the race is so close in Michigan, independents and dem cross overs will decide the outcome" in hopes of enticing such an outcome. It didn't happen, BUT it was a fine strategy. There was just enough intrigue and apathy on the dem side to keep 'em battling within their own ballot - or at least keep them home all together. THANK GOD.

An open note to Saul Anuzis" COULD WE PLEASE GO BACK TO A CLOSED SYSTEM? [Which reminds me. . . an open note to Jack Lessenberry: Republican's are not "afraid of independent minded voters" (lumping "dem crossovers" as "independent thinkers" is a bit of a stretch) - we love 'em when they choose our Republican candidates come the GENERAL ELECTION - BUT for a PARTY nomination, wouldn't it make sense that the members of the PARTY choose the candidate who best represents the PARTY? ]

So, Mittiot, in SC, WHAT WILL HAPPEN? We'll McCain looks like he'll probably win South Carolina, of course - wink, wink, nod, nod.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.