Wednesday, January 9, 2008





Your Mittiot shouldn't have to remind individuals that these contests send delegates to the National Convention - this isn't the Electoral College. The delegates sent will chose the nominee.

Now, I'd be a liar if I didn't spill that I was disappointed in the N.H. results - not because we lost, per se, but because we had a chance to conclude the inevitable Romney nomination in the Granite State. . . now we have to wait another week.

There's no doubt the Michigan election will be tight - and with the Media's lips puckered tight to McCain's 71 year old tushy - anything other than a 10 point win will be considered a "loss" for the Romney campaign. So, we're in a tough spot. . . but ROMNEY WILL WIN MICHIGAN.

Why and how? Yes, McCain won Michigan in 2000 - but it was NOT a primary where independents (or democrats for that matter) had to choose one or the other ballots. In fact, the dems chose their candidates by closed caucus, while the GOP held an open primary. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID! Dems voted for their candidates and ours! And, wouldn't you know it - McCain the "Maverick" won. That shouldn't happen this time around.

Why not? A couple of things - the dems (though feebly) are choosing their candidates via the same primary as the GOP - and you can only vote on one ballot. So, again I ask, "For whom will the Indys vote?" Well, here's the 10 cent analysis:

In NH Indys were supposed to break for Obama - they didn't. Why? The Media had Obama up by 10 and "unbeatable" - and the Media had the McCain Romney race "tight." Well, if I could vote in either race as an Indy - I'd vote in the race that would have an impact, too. And that's what we got. Not that your Mittiot was certain we were going to win (you see, while we were actually campaigning in Iowa, McCain was cherry-picking his "most likely". . . don't forget, Romney beat McCain in Iowa 2 to 1) but I did believe we'd be within 2% - turns out it was 5. And wouldn't that 3% have made all the difference to the Obama team? Frickin' Media. . . but I digress.

Secondly, had Hillary lost by 10, she' d be done. BUT, she won, and now Michigan DOES matter for the momentum. It is very likely that Clinton - though the only candidate on the Michigan Ballot - could LOSE the Spartan State. Why? Because dems can vote "Uncommitted" and if they want to stop Clinton's MO, they better... and I believe they will. So, dems vote for dems. . . and so do the Indys.

Third, if it were an Obama/Clinton race, Michigan would be a lock (voting "Uncommitted" is a little tough to get excited about, AND in a tight race Hillary's being the only name on the ballot - doesn't leave much chance for Obama). BUT, Edwards is not going to get out - even though he took third in Iowa. Why? He has enough money to last until Michigan, he understands that he and Obama will both draw voters to vote "uncommitted", he can "share" a victory in Michigan (giving him a second, third and "first" place finish), but mostly, his national chairman is David Bonier - the former Michigan Congressman. There's no way Edwards will drop out before Michigan. So no dems for McCain, either.

Lastly, the MIGOP have been tweaked about the 2000 shenanigans for the past 8 years. Many believe, including your Mittiot, that because of McCain's underhanded win in Michigan, we've been ignored by Bush for the better part of his administration (Hey, I love the guy - and appreciate the tough love of DC - it'd be a lot easier to handle, though, if we weren't in a "one state recession.") and the MIGOP won't - MUST NOT - be fooled again.

And lastly, lastly, Mitt is a Michiganian. . . and a car guy. . . and has been plowing the primary field here for a longggggg time now.

We will take Michigan - Huckabee will get NO BOUNCE from NH - and McCain will run into "real republicans" in Michigan. . . which by the way, Iowa and NH, you have proven to be "unrepresentative" in the primary process - you taint the wishes of the party - and you should not be "first in the nation." In short, you blew it.

~ so sayeth the Mittiot.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home