Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Mitt Romney and Illinois

As is common with this blog, this blog has already discussed the RESULTS in Illinois BEFORE THEY HAPPENED. Without either polls or exit polls, this blog alreadly told you (as the results in Mississippi were just being established) that Romney would have a SUBSTANTIAL victgory in Ilinois (even though Santorum desperately needed some sortof miracle to get votgers he did not figure to get).

Then, BEFORE tonight's results in Illinois, this blog CALLED the nomination for Romney, because the arithmetic cannot be denied on the delegates. Winning "victories' is no longer enough for Santroum. Absent some major scandal, Romney can no lonter be denied the nominatin. This blog has told you that we were headed from this point WEEKS ago. And this blog has told you the truth, WITHOUT benefit of polls or exit poll (albeit Santroum LEAVING Illinois--perhaps based on his own polls--was a factor in this blog officially CALLING the nomination for Romney. It was obvious no miracle was going to happen for Santroum in Illinois. I agree with the Romney people that it is "part of the game" tgaht Romney can be said to have BOUGHT the nomination, in a sense, by OUTSPENDING the opposition. However, he did NOT do that with his OWN money, and you can hardly knock him for it. What you can knock him for, and whcih I do knock him for, is the KIND of negative campaign Romney has run. Romeny has used his money mainly to tear down his opponents, and pretty much misrepresent himself. That has led to my conclusoin that Romney CANNOT WIN the general electin agaisnt Obama, but taht Obama can (and really is likely to) LOSE the election to Romney. People are not generally voting "for" Romney. He is merely the "safe" choice--playing for your opponent to defeat himself on the economy (where Romney realy does "comfort" peole, even as he showns NO ability for BOLD actions).

Thus, Romney has won the nomination, as of this blog's "call" a day or two ag (using the rather disgraceful network practice of "declaring" a result wlkhen there is really only a network ESTIMATE--which woulld be in ]the dustbin of history if people jsut were rational and REFUSED TO COOPEATE with polls in any form). You want candidates to actually CAMPAIGN in states like Illinois, Texas or California in the general election? Then SABOTAGE POLLS. Eventually, candidates will HAVE to "worry" about being totally in the dark about what is happening in states like California. It will take a truly brave canddiate (thre is no such thing in modern times) to take a state like California for granted WITH NO INFORMATION. One or two unforeseen "upsets" willl revoutionize the whole proces.s. The DISCREDIting OF THE POLLS IN THIS ELECTION (much as the media seems to be in denial) has already made it obvious thatit is DANGEROUS to pay any attention to polls (especailly a week or more out).

This blog will now continue to refer to Romney as the nominee, which he is (as certainly as the "projections" tonight that he won Illinois). It is distressing to me, personally, because it means that the GOPestalbishment will have successfully shafted conservatives yet again. As this blog has told you, Hell will freeze over and the sun die a final death before I will ever vote for a GOP establishment candidate again. But reality is reality, and the reality is that Romney is the GOP nominee. Santroum could win Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and West Virginia--among even a few ohers. It does not matter. It will not affect the final result. Texas is not enough. The arithmentic is jsut oo overwhelming. I majored in physics in undergraduate school, with a minor in mathematics. Even with my absence from those filds in my later life, I can still handle ARITHMETIC.

You saw it all on this blog first, and with the correct reasons and possible uncertainties. That will continue to be true from now on, but with Rmeny now considered to be the GOP nominee.

P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).

No comments: