Tag Archives: Mitt Romney

Chris Christie Extinguishes Chances to Become GOP Leader

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

It wasn’t but a year ago that Republicans across the nation were singing the praises of NJ Governor, Chris Christie. He had just fought entrenched NJ government employees in a liberal state to fix their pension system. He fought the NJ Teacher’s Union and others in the state to bring the state’s finances back within reason. He said:

“The Teacher’s Union is about the accumulation and exercise of raw power.”

His outspokenness against perceived wrongdoers in his state became nationally known and made him a beloved figure among the GOP–and even many moderates.

Unfortunately, that has unraveled. He was the keynote speaker at the GOP Convention that introduced Romney as the nominee. Personally, I thought his speech was very good, but many felt it was too self-centered and didn’t do enough to boost Romney.

Then came the “super storm,” Hurricane Sandy, in his home state. His state was decimated, and when Obama came for photo ops, Christie earned goodwill among the generally Obama-friendly populace of NJ by praising the President and taking loads of amicable photos with him. Many say Sandy stole Romney’s momentum and Christie’s appearances with Obama were a part of that.

Finally on Thursday (1/17/13), Gov. Christie slammed the NRA. They ran an ad calling Obama a hypocrite for rejecting the notion that schools should consider armed guards, while his children have armed guards at school. Christie called the ad “reprehensible,” and said the NRA has lost some credibility. It is below for your viewing.

Gov. Christie is clearly positioning himself to fend off a future Democratic challenger for the Governor’s seat–namely Cory Booker–at the expense of paving the way for a 2016 Presidential run, and that’s his prerogative. It seems that Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Bobby Jindal are all eyeing 2016, and they’re stronger candidates anyway. For Gov. Christie, it’ll take a while for Republicans to forget these missteps, just as it took the GOP faithful years to forget forgive Mitt Romney’s liberal moves and statements as the governor of a very blue state. At this point, I don’t even expect him to run in 2016. Ann Coulter will be distraught.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading!

If America Were A College Football Program

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

If America were a college football program, we wouldn’t be a Colorado or South Carolina. No, America would be a big program with a lot of prestige. We’d be a Notre Dame of sorts– former world beaters that everyone respects, though many hate (I’ve always thought it strange that Notre Dame, a religiously affiliated school that holds its athletes to such high academic standards would be so hated). America the football program would have a rich tradition, with all sorts of bowl records and National Championships, but we would be struggling.

Yes, America in recent years would be a program that has under-performed. The previous coach was solid, won his share of games, but finished his tenure with some historically bad seasons. Even after retirement, the rabid fan base hasn’t forgiven the previous coach and they brought it a fiery, young coach who can give an inspirational speech and ignite players and fans a like. Unfortunately, his first year at the helm has been even worse than the previous coach’s last year.

After winning just three games in year one of his new tenure, he brought in some of his recruits and while there was a lot of excitement, year two brought just four wins. Year three has just wrapped up, and while recruiting is still strong and the system is finally in place, still just five wins. What now?

In the last year of his contract, the coach insists that he has the program on the right track. His recruits are finally the core of the team, his system is in place, and while everything hasn’t gone as planned, he’s confident he can get the storied program back to the top.

The fan base is anxious, and unsure of what has happened to the program. Rivals they’re not used to losing to are beating them with regularity and while they are scared to fire the coach and restart with new schemes, they’re not sure if this new spread (the wealth) system will ever work. What are they to do? Do they fire the new coach and bring in an older, more traditional coach,  or continue the path with the current head ball coach?

That’s the question this great nation faces in November. Will they continue with their current leader, extending him another four years, and continue down a path the program has never tried. It’s a very different path from what previous coaches have done, but many feel it’s too early to give up. Many others just love the persona of the head coach. What will the program do? Only time will tell.

Would you fire the head coach? I’d rather just enjoy College Football until November.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading!

The Next New Tax May Just Be The ‘Spite Tax’

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Back in 2008, candidate Obama was debating Hillary Clinton on the subject of increasing the capital gains tax rate. Barack Obama was for increasing the tax rate. Hillary wasn’t so sure. The moderator succinctly explained that increases in the capital gains rate (due to its inverse relationship with economic activity) actually lead to decreases in government tax revenue. Despite this historical fact, then candidate, now President Obama said he would still work towards increasing the tax rate for “purposes of fairness.”

(Debate clip below)

After viewing that video, I ask you this: By “fairness,” does he really just mean spite? I ask that seriously, not in partisanship. Nobody benefits from such a tax increase. The taxpayers pay a higher tax rate and are scared away from investing, while the government has less money to spend on social programs. So why would anybody support such a policy? To be fair, he still hasn’t increased this particular tax rate. Since marquee tax hikes are generally unpopular, it could be move more appropriate in a second term though. Nonetheless, it’s more about the broad idea than the specific policy. You’ll see this theme or fairness at the DNC contrast sharply against the theme of self-made success that was oft-discussed at the RNC.

Does this underlying attitude or taxing for “fairness” represent your views?

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading!

Romney Campaign Makes A Splash With Paul Ryan VP Selection: What Do You Think?

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

In front of the USS Wisconsin, in Norfolk Virginia Mitt Romney introduced his Vice Presidential selection, Congressman Paul Ryan. It’s certainly a much bolder pick than many expected.

The Paul Ryan VP selection doesn’t play to a specific subset of people (e.g., Sarah Palin/Women or Marco Rubio/Hispanic-Americans) or a key swing state (Wisconsin will likely remain a blue state), but what it does is reframe the discussion. With all the negative campaigning that has been going on, there has not been enough direct contrasting of the two, very different, America’s that the candidates envision. Selecting Paul Ryan, the architect of the GOP budget proposal for the 2012 fiscal year, almost forces that discussion to begin again.

On that note, here are some of the quotes from Paul Ryan’s speech today that jumped out at me today:

We believe in equality of opportunity, not outcome…

The commitment we make to you is this: we won’t duck the tough issues, we will lead, we won’t blame others, we’ll take responsibility, and we won’t replace our founding principles, we will reapply them…

Our rights come from nature and God, not government!

Paul Ryan is only 42 years old, which in any other election may invite criticism of youth and lack of foreign policy experience. Given President Obama’s pre-election credentials I think that may come across as hypocritical and won’t be an attack that is leveled. Additionally, Fox News Senior Political Analyst, Brit Hume, said Ryan can speak intelligently about foreign policy and it shouldn’t present a major issue.

Paul Ryan is the intellectual leader of the Republican party yet he is young and energetic. As such, he’ll energize the Romney campaign without really bringing any controversy, with the exception of his budget proposal which does nothing more than focus the conversation on where it needs to be. I think it is a great selection because it shifts the debate squarely on the drastically different views of America.

As he said today,

“We can turn this thing around. We can!”

Conservative or far-left liberal, I am interested in hearing your thoughts on today’s selection. Please share in the comments below. Hearing your thoughts is why I wrote this short blog post this morning.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading!

‘The Dark Knight Rises’ Offers A Gripping Story, Gutsy Action, and Rich Social Commentary

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Before I begin, I would like to send my thoughts and prayers to victims of the tragic movie theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado.

This is by no means a movie blog, and thus this post is far from a movie review–not to say this blog is foreign to a good movie review or two. However, as The Dark Knight Rises has grown beyond the confines of another summer blockbuster, I couldn’t help but write something about my new all-time favorite movie (I’ll warn you before any spoilers) .

I watched The Dark Knight Rises on opening night, and after becoming so engrossed that I subconsciously starting clapping after the National Anthem concluded during the scene in Heinz Field, I left the movie utterly blown away. It had it all: great action, a gripping story, a fantastic musical score, and rich social commentary. The social commentary was unexpected, but I found that I enjoyed a great deal.

Walking out of the movie with an ol’ pal, it was brought to my attention that Rush Limbaugh had earlier implied that Hollywood liberals named the villain of the movie “Bane,” as a  jab at the venture capital firm, Bain Capital, that was led by Mitt Romney in the 90s. In reality, “Bane”–the villain–was first created in 1993, rendering Rush laughably incorrect. I typically cringe when Rush is unfairly bashed, but he deserves whatever he gets for this gaffe. What makes it even more misinformed is that he should be applauding the movie for its subtle, but real poke at the Occupy Wall Street/hate the wealthy/class-warfare theme that has become pervasive in politics today.

After (here comes a minor spoiler) Bane takes over Gotham, he “turns it over to the people.” The lower socio-economic classes, including freed criminals, take violent control and put the extremely wealthy on sham trials for their “crimes.” Leaders of major companies are sent to freeze to death in the frozen city. As Catwoman makes another’s house/apartment her own, she remarks to her friend that this is in fact somebody’s home, to which her friend responds by saying “it’s everyone’s home.” This theme remains on display from the “bad guys” (and Catwoman who is both good and bad) throughout the movie (spoilers over). One bitter, liberal movie goer bashed the film, saying:

“In a barely-veiled attack on Occupy Wall Street, Bane attempts to win over Gotham’s populace by demonizing Wall Street and the superrich and promising to return power to the people.”

(The liberal blogger continued with his long list of complaints by deriding the fact that the police were framed in a positive light and by exclaiming how wrong it was that the terrorists–hailing from Uzbekistan–were most definitely Muslim. It’s a unintentionally funny read if you care to indulge yourself.)

So while the names may be similar, the sentiments between “Bane” and “Bain” philosophically oppose one another.

To connect the dots I reference what President Obama said in a recent speech, that business owners didn’t “build that,” referring to their own businesses. To avoid taking the President out of context, here’s a whole big segment of his speech from which some feel President Obama displayed his lack of respect for business owners and the private sector:

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

So, while the villain, Bane, may share the name of Bain Capital, his political ideology couldn’t be more contrasted from that Bain Capital, Mitt Romney, and the American Right. Bane, his cronies, and Catwoman oppose the wealthy (spoiler coming). Bane and his army attack the stock market, kill business leaders, and plunder Wayne Enterprises, while Cat Woman overtly steals from the wealthy and details her frustrations with their fake concern at charity galas (spoiler over). The “bad guys” and Catwoman are the ones opposing the wealthy, while the billionaire is the hero and protagonist of the entire trilogy.

Who in the 2012 election opposes the wealthy and seeks to harm stock investors with higher capital gains rates? Conversely, who is the multimillionaire philanthropist who owned an empire that they didn’t manage for a few years (like Mitt Romney leaving management duties at Bain in ’99, Bruce Wayne maintained ownership, but didn’t manage Wayne Enterprises for the time span between the second and third movies)? Finally, whose ideology does this movie portray in a darker light? Now shouldn’t Rush be praising the movie, rather than calling it “The Dark Knight Lights Up” and attacking it for a coincidental name similarity?

I welcome you to share your thoughts on the social commentary from this phenomenal movie as well as President Obama quote with which I included in this blog post.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading!

Rick Santorum Concedes to Mitt Romney, Allows Party to Unite

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Rick Santorum, largely for family reasons, has suspended his campaign. It comes just at the moment when it became clear that continuing on would be fruitless. Romney has the money, organization, and delegates to make a Santorum comeback unrealistic.

Kudos to Santorum for fighting so valiantly for so long despite being outgunned by candidates with more money and better organizations. More than just that, Santorum also deserves a thumbs up for leaving the race at an appropriate time while another candidate who I will not mention by name still fights on for nothing but his own ego.

Had Santorum’s daughter not fallen more ill, maybe he would have continued to campaign, but I choose to believe he was ready to put his own personal goals aside and do what was best for his party and nation–which at this juncture is to allow Romney to focus on campaigning against President Obama.

Get ready for a nasty presidential campaign! We’ve already seen Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC concoct some absurdly offensive assertions against Mormonism. We’re going to see the wealthy vilified like we’ve never seen before. This won’t be pretty, and to overcome such obstacles, Romney will have to earn the support of those who were firmly behind Rick Santorum. There’s no doubt that this GOP nomination process has been a trying one and the party has grown somewhat divided. Some Santorum supporters have grown so attached to their candidate and so upset with Romney about his campaign’s attacks on the other GOP candidates that they refuse to support him. Some, like @CatholicLisa, have insisted they will not vote for Romney in any circumstance, saying he’s the same as Obama, but that doesn’t seem to be the overall sentiment.

Will they fail to support Romney when his name opposes “Obama”? If so, the party is in bigger trouble than anyone thinks. It’s more likely though that Obama will be enough to energize not only his own base, but the Republican base too and those who have been weary of Romney will get on board.

What could give Romney a huge edge is the timing of gas prices. Obama’s biggest weakness may be his failure to find and support economically feasible energy in America. His need to placate the environmentalist movement in his party has kept him away from nuclear power, clean coal, and new oil pipelines. If gas prices surpass and sit above $4.00 in November, it will be extremely challenging him to convince Americans that he isn’t at least partially at fault.

Regardless of what lies ahead, it is good to move forward from the primary season. We will now have a little slow spot when the inevitable will happen–Mitt Romney will collect the rest of the delegates he needs and the real campaign between two very different paths for our country will begin.

For an interesting take on the decision America now faces, check out this video that contrasts the fundamental philosophies of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street Movement. It’s worth your time. Please leave your thoughts in the comments below. Thank you for reading.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Santorum Stance Against Pornography Noble, But Indicative of ‘Big Government Conservatism’

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

The antithesis of libertarian conservatism, Rick Santorum has been often been accused of “big government conservatism.” The basis of these arguments typically revolves around his votes to raise the debt ceiling and his social views which make libertarians and liberals hot under the collar.

I’ve always founds these claims to be unfounded. His votes to raise the debt ceiling were unfortunate, but necessary to avert government shutdown. He has said that although he believes in traditional marriage, he thinks Texas’s sodomy laws are an overstep of government power. He has been consistent in his opposition to the individual mandate for health insurance, and voiced his opposition to both the Wall Street and Auto bailouts, explaining that “the government should not be involved in bailouts, period.”

His defense has some quagmires though. Mitt Romney points out on his website that Santorum actually voted for a steel industry bailout. Of course, this is the worst type of politics–the type that is willing to trade principles for popularity (the steel industry was especially important to his Pennsylvania constituents). In fact, it is what Santorum (rightly) rebuked Mitt Romney for when the former Governor said he supported Puerto Rico statehood despite earlier saying in a Florida debate that English should be the only official language for the United States (Puerto Rico has two official languages–Spanish and English).

The newest story in the campaign is Santorum’s proclamation that he will end America’s “pandemic of pornography.” While there’s little doubt that there’s too much pornography in America, fighting it sure feels a lot like a throwback to prohibition. More importantly though, it is another reach of government into the personal lives of its citizens. After all, we still have a “First Amendment right to free speech and to peaceably assemble,” and just as we recoil at the notion of hate groups, we tolerate their right to have marches down Main Street. In the same respect, we are obliged to tolerate the rights of those who produce and distribute pornography.

This is a classic big government misstep, and it leaves me wondering why Rick Santorum keeps walking back into debates over social policy rather than focusing on his robust plan to rebuild manufacturing. Does he want to win the nomination or just make a point?

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Super Tuesday Preview: Romney/Santorum To Win Lion’s Share of Super Tuesday States

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

With ten states up for grabs on March 6th, it has been dubbed “Super Tuesday.” As the name suggests, it’s a critically important day in the race for the GOP nomination. Georgia, my home state, is a part of the election’s big day. As such, it’s only appropriate that I share a little preview of what we may see on Super Tuesday.

Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia are up for grabs.

In Alaska Todd Palin has officially endorsed Newt Gingrich while Sarah Palin has all but endorsed the Georgian. In 2008 Mitt Romney won over 43% of the Alaskan vote, and while Gingrich and Romney have their advantages, Santorum’s principled conservatism should play well with the blue-collar Republicans in our most northern state. Alaska’s 27 delegates are determined by caucus, which generally seems to favor candidates with more passionate followings. If not for the format of the election, I’d probably favor Romney, but given its quirky nature everyone has a chance, including Ron Paul who is still searching for his first victory and spending time and resources in Alaska. Polls are unavailable, making a prediction just about impossible.

Georgia is much easier to predict. Newt Gingrich’s home state is expected to fall his way. Santorum can’t be counted completely out in Georgia as his social conservatism helps him in southern states, such as in Tennessee where he is expected to win.

It’s critically important that Newt fails to regain his momentum and doesn’t get another shot at the nomination. Of the four remaining GOP candidates, Gingrich has the highest negatives and the largest deficit against Obama in hypothetical general election polls. It is in the GOP’s best interest to nominate one of the other three candidates. A loss or (more likely) a slim win in Georgia would quell hopes of a Gingrich surge.

One would expect Ohio, not to far from western Pennsylvania where Santorum has always made his hay, to support former Senator Santorum, but with Romney’s effective campaign working hard in the Buckeye state, it’s a nearly toss up right now. Either way, Santorum is ineligible for many of Ohio’s delegates due to procedural error on his campaign’s part and will suffer as a result.

North Dakota, Idaho, and Oklahoma are tougher to predict. North Dakota is free game for Ron Paul, where his strong ground game and resources make him competitive, but Romney has to be the default favorite. Oklahoma and their Evangelical voters are expected to go to Santorum.

“Idaho may end up in his [Romney's] column because any state with a sizeable Mormon population is in play,” said Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. “They’re motivated and they turn out.”

Massachusetts, Vermont, and Virginia are just about locks for the front-runner Romney. Mitt Romney was fairly dominant in New Hampshire and I expect his moderate, “best to beat Obama” appeal to continue to play well in New England. In Virginia, Santorum and Gingrich did not make the ballot so it will be a two-man race between Romney and Ron Paul. Given the situation, I can’t fathom Romney not winning by a large margin. Even without the ballot fiasco I would have expected Virginians to support Romney.

Anything can happen on what will be an interesting day in American politics. Gingrich really must win Georgia and do it by 10+ points. He is expected to win Mississippi, Texas, North Carolina, and a few other post-Super Tuesday states, but he can’t lose all his budding momentum before then. Santorum has said he just needs to avoid “being voted off the island.” To do that he’ll need to win multiple states.

I think you’ll see Romney earn more Super Tuesday delegates than any of his competitors. It’s not at all unreasonable for him to win five of the ten states that will be voting or caucusing on the day, leaving just five states for the other three to squabble between. If Gingrich only wins Georgia, which seems to be the case, it’ll be hard to look at him as a viable candidate, but if Santorum has a poor showing he may retake the mantle as Romney’s chief rival. Regardless, we’ll have an exciting day that hopefully can go a long way towards wrapping up the nomination for someone, so the Republicans can stop arguing about minor differences in records and start going after Obama on blocking deep-sea drilling, stopping nuclear power growth, nixing the Keystone XL Pipeline, and blocking oil shale development as US gas prices shoot past an average price of $3.70/gallon.

Rough Predictions

Romney: Five States
Santorum: Three States
Gingrich: One State
Paul: One State

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Santorum Sweeps Three States, Reframes Race

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Last night (Tuesday, Feb 7th) was another game changer in a wild race for the GOP nomination. Newt Gingrich had his big night back in South Carolina, then lost momentum as Romney won Florida and Nevada back-to-back. Santorum though, never really had his time. His win in Iowa wasn’t known until after the votes were certified. By then, the opportunity for momentum and publicity was largely diminished.

Now, Rick Santorum will get his belated moment in the spotlight. Three wins in one night have given his campaign second life. Santorum exclaimed “Conservatism is alive and well…We doubled him up here, and in Minnesota.” He even managed to win Colorado, where Romney won handily in 2008.

Newt Gingrich has been attempting to cast the election as a two-man race between a moderate, Mitt Romney, and a true conservative–himself. Negative ads coupled with heaps of baggage and an “angry” approach to the campaign have led many to look away from Gingrich, making this anything but a two-man race. Those looking for a true conservative are finding that Rick Santorum holds genuine convictions where other candidates (save Ron Paul) seem more like wind socks.

Santorum showed principle and discipline when he avoided attacking Mitt Romney for his work at Bain Capital, this while Gingrich and Rick Perry were pounding away and it was the in vogue thing to do. I find it very hard to believe that Newt Gingrich really has a problem with a venture capital firm buying ownership of a company, streamlining the business, saving the company, and selling it for massive profits. Few, if any, real economic conservatives have a problem with this, but Newt has relentlessly bashed Romney for this while also claiming to be the true conservative in the election.

Rick Santorum is largely known for his social stances, especially his defense of the unborn. He contrasts boldly with Barack Obama (who is currently in a battle with the Catholic Church) when he talks about the Declaration of Independence and God-given rights. Santorum referenced this bold contrast as a key to beating President Obama in the general election.

I’m not sure how I feel about that. There’s no doubt in my mind that Rick Santorum is the most honest, consistent, and genuine conservative in the race, but will his “bold contrast” with President Obama help or hurt him in the general election?

If Santorum is the nominee President Obama will likely try to focus on social issues, which is not what the Republicans want. Obama is much better off if the election is about Santorum’s social views instead of his own record handling the economy. Any way the President can minimize talk of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a Canadian oil pipeline that would have crossed America’s breadbasket and provided much-needed jobs and energy, is a win for him. His decision to block construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline could be a political nightmare for him as gas prices inch up and the general election inches near. He’d also probably like to avoid talk of Solyndra, a solar energy company his administration sought to boost though government funding that ended up filing for bankruptcy. Will Santorum’s bold stances allow Obama to move the focus of the election to more favorable issues?

The problem with nominating a moderate is the lack of passion you get from your base. You need passion to get people to knock on doors, donate money, and otherwise contribute to your campaign. Gingrich warned that all the areas that Romney won in Florida had especially low turnout relative to the areas he lost. The positive to having a moderate as your party’s nominee is that they are more likely to do well with independent voters. That’s not to say that Rick Santorum can’t attract moderate voters though. His economic plans, which I believe he needs to extenuate more, and his personality seem to attract blue-collar “Reagan Democrats.”

Santorum has proposed cutting corporate taxes on manufacturing to 0%… again to 0%. This would bring a ridiculous amount of manufacturing jobs back to America and help a good many Americans. This coupled with Rick Santorum’s vote against right-to-work laws while in Senate and Obama’s blocking of the Keystone which was expected to create 20,000 new jobs, many of which would have been union jobs could make Rick Santorum a very strong candidate in the rust belt. Is it unrealistic to think he can win states like Ohio and Indiana? I’d venture to say no.

Do you think Rick Santorum could give Obama a solid battle in a general election, or do you (like current national polls) think he’d lose badly? You can watch his full victory speech on Youtube by clicking here.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Romney On The Verge After Winning Florida Primary

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Mitt Romney earned a much-needed bounce back win in the January 31st Florida primary. After getting pummeled in South Carolina, the Romney campaign regrouped and then retook the momentum by defeating Gingrich, and doing so by a wider margin than their margin of defeat in South Carolina. Now they look ahead to the Maine primary where they’ll be heavy favorites and the Nevada caucuses where a quarter of Republicans are Mormon. With a momentum, delegate, and money advantage Romney is in great shape.

One really interesting aspect we’ve seen is the impact that the national debates have had. Romney had the early lead in South Carolina, but after two great debate performances by Newt Gingrich, the momentum swung. The story was the exact opposite in Florida with Newt losing an early lead after two strong debate performances from Romney. 2/3 of Floridians said the debates were an important factor in their vote, and I think that’s great. I think it means Republican and conservative voters are engaged and learning about their candidates, rather than just listening to negative ad campaigns.

I think that level of engagement, combined with the now likely nomination of a fairly moderate and frankly pretty likable candidate in Romney has to worry the Obama campaign. Romney does well with independents and I believe most would say he’s closer to the center than Obama.

With oil executives saying gas prices are likely to rise to as high as $5.00, Obama could become extremely vulnerable. His policies have been extremely detrimental to domestic energy production by way of coal, nuclear, and oil, and the Republicans will be sure to drill him on those issues (pun unintended, but welcomed). While Republicans want the Keystone Pipeline because it’s great for America, if Obama really won’t pass it and gas prices sky-rocket… ouch!

The Obama campaign must be hoping Romney will stumble. Surely they would much rather face a candidate with less money, weaker infrastructure, excessive baggage, extreme libertarian views, or a focus on social views, but it appears Romney is on the verge.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading!