GOP Primary Stuff

You should know by now that McCain won Florida yesterday. He won by 5 points, I think he was up over Romney by something like 100,000 votes. That's a pretty good margin, and I don't think it bodes well for Romney one bit. They say that this is the year of the non-bounce from primary wins, but it certainly shouldn't be hurting McCain's momentum going forward.

This upcoming Tuesday is Super Tuesday where 22 states will be holding primaries for the allotment of their delegates. Although Hugh is still unswervingly optimistic about the race, there is just very little opportunity for Romney to bounce back. The problem I have with Hugh's commentary is that it flies so much in the face of what is actually going on. I've been reading his stuff for months now, and every time it looks like Romney will have a breakthrough, he just falls flat. I will vote for him next Tuesday, but frankly, he's running out of "next time(s)." Given Hugh's argument that McCain manages to obtain about 745 delegates after Super Tuesday, that's still more than double the 327 delegates that he's projecting for our guy, Romney. In order to secure the nomination the candidate needs to have 1,191 delegates, and while there is more than 900 delegates after Super Tuesday, that means Romney will still have to capture at least 90% of the remaining delegates to win the nomination outright. If you haven't noticed, he hasn't even cleared 40% yet (maybe he did in Nevada, but I digress). Or, at the very least, if he can force a brokered convention, then he needs to prevent McCain getting the remaining 446 he needs. That's under 50%, so at that point, Romney will then have to do what none of the GOP nominees have been able to do up to this point - win a majority of the vote, majority meaning more than 51%, not just the most. There's just no way.

I hate saying it and I'm as big a Romney supporter as anyone, but it's like we're banking on coming back from more than 5 runs down after the 7th inning against a pretty formidable opponent. It's just very unlikely. The never say die attitude is great and while comebacks do happen, it's more likely that they don't. In which case, we need to start bracing ourselves for the very real possibility of a McCain campaign. And as it's looking right now, Huckabee seems to be running for Vice President already on McCain's ticket. With that in mind, is that what you're really comfortable with? Or, with the prospect of the Democratic nominee, will you throw your weight behind the opponent, whomever that might be? I will vote for the most conservative choice, but I think this election cycle bodes ill for the GOP.

Here is some commentary from Powerline. And then this comes from several contributors over at NRO. And I'll include this quote from another post at Powerline:

Paul wrote a long time ago about the "stature gap" between the Republican presidential candidates and the Democrats. I think we're seeing that, in the eyes of most Americans, the real stature gap is between McCain and the rest of the field. Americans generally choose the person, not his policies. That's frustrating to many of us, but history suggests that it's usually wise.

The bold is mine, but I think that particular point is becoming increasingly clear. This post is more specific to my point. One more excerpt:

So, are primary voters preferring McCain (or Romney) because they think he'll do a better job on the economy? Or do they think McCain (or Romney) will do a better job on the economy because they prefer him?

My strong sense is that it's the latter -- preference drives perception of economic soundness. Voters as a group probably have little idea about the comparative economic acumen, or the substantive economic views, of McCain and Romney. But they do know which of the two they like more and which of the two they trust more, in general. That candidate is likely to become the one they think will do the best job with the economy.

In exit polls for Florida people were saying that the economy is the most important issue, but that the candidate they thought best suited to handle that problem is McCain. Obviously that can't be true given Romney's breadth of experience and very tangible results, not to mention McCain's own admission of his inexperience in dealing with economic issues. I wish I could find the reference for that quote. If you got it, leave it in comments. Who am I even talking to? Nobody who reads this blog has that...anyway...Isn't it unbelievable to think that we are on the verge of entrusting someone with our national budget and economy who has never had to balance a budget bigger than his own personal checkbook? Senators don't have to deal with that. Governors do. And Romney has dealt with several multinational corporations and large scale events. Whatever, I'm feeling depressed again, I'm gonna go eat a motherload cake from Claim Jumper.