You are not logged in. Please register or login.

PaSnow
 Rep: 205 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

PaSnow wrote:

GOP sources: Romney to suspend campaignNext Article in Politics »



From John King
CNN
     
(CNN) -- Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney will suspend his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, GOP sources tell CNN.

A candidate may "suspend" his or her campaign rather than dropping out, and technically remain a candidate. In this case, he or she is entitled to keep any statewide pledged delegates as well as their district-level delegates.

Candidates who officially drop out must forfeit statewide delegates.


http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/07/ … index.html



Can't say it's much of a shock. He didn't do very well for the amount of money he was spending.

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

James wrote:

Yeah, he needed to drop out. The loss in California officially killed his campaign.

bigbri
 Rep: 341 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

bigbri wrote:

See ya.

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

my business partner told me he had some big speech today about how he wanted to put an end to porn?

Von
 Rep: 77 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

Von wrote:
Jimmy Zig Zag Bobiadis wrote:

my business partner told me he had some big speech today about how he wanted to put an end to porn?

Good. We put an end to him first. See ya later, Rev. Moon.

Randall Flagg
 Rep: 139 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

This election is going to be heating up soon.  I've been checking polls in Va, Oh and Tx and Clinton leads in all of them.  This is truly going to be very interesting because Hillary is gonna be the spin masta trying to attack McCain on his support and strategy for the war.  Health care is not going to bring her any votes she wouldn't already get and I don't see how she has any economic leverage on McCain.  I believe that if the Democrats would have nominated Obama, they'd have almost sealed the deal, but I don't think that will happen.

Romney dropping out is going to allow McCain to start campaigning now rather than months out.  Hopefully Huckabee will bow out graciously and not force McCain to pander to debates.  The money will start to pour into the McCain campaign.

bigbri
 Rep: 341 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

bigbri wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:

This election is going to be heating up soon.  I've been checking polls in Va, Oh and Tx and Clinton leads in all of them.

The problem is, the 7 primaries/caucuses before that, Obama is leading or expected to win. It's basically a dead heat. Your claim that after Tuesday Obama would be nullified did not come to pass. Her staff is not taking paychecks, she's putting her own money into her campaign and Obama has rasied $9M since Tuesday. His momentum in these next few weeks before Va., Ohio and Texas will change minds. Once  he spends massive amounts of time and money in those states, he will close the gap. Look at Missouri, he came back and won that. That was perhaps the biggest of the night, moreso than Cali or NY, which was expected to go to Hilary. He won a state he wasn't expected to. She did not win anything that wasn't expected of her. It is clear she can't covert anyone. It's her core base supporting her. If she loses even a little bit of that to Obama, it's over. She has no margin for error.

Randall Flagg
 Rep: 139 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

I argue that Obama has been neutralized.  It was predicted he would have a sweeping wing and he didn't.  Clinton won with a decisive victory in California.  I won't reference NY because that is her state much like Illinois is Obama's.  But more importantly, she won MA which was predicted to goto Obama in the "surge" of momentum from Kennedy, Kerry and whomever their governor is.  She was able to hold her own there.  Virginia votes next week.  Obama picked up a bunch of small states that he has no chance of winning in the general election.  That is what you fail to realize.  Obama can win the Idaho's until the 2nd coming, but he will never win those states in the general election. 

Hillary will still maintain more delegates.  If Florida and Michigan's delegates get counted, which there is a move and possibilty they eventually will, you can chalk up more votes to her.  Furthermore, the party hard liners are going to side with Clinton in the end with their super delegates.  She's delivered the important states.  She has brought the party Florida and will probably bring them Ohio in the primaries.  If Obama can't do that in his own party, why would they want him to try against McCain who is almost guarunteed Florida and would probably have the edge in Ohio.  These are the things Democrats need to be considering in their candidate.

bigbri
 Rep: 341 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

bigbri wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:

I argue that Obama has been neutralized.  It was predicted he would have a sweeping wing and he didn't.  Clinton won with a decisive victory in California.  I won't reference NY because that is her state much like Illinois is Obama's.  But more importantly, she won MA which was predicted to goto Obama in the "surge" of momentum from Kennedy, Kerry and whomever their governor is.  She was able to hold her own there.  Virginia votes next week.  Obama picked up a bunch of small states that he has no chance of winning in the general election.  That is what you fail to realize.  Obama can win the Idaho's until the 2nd coming, but he will never win those states in the general election. 

Hillary will still maintain more delegates.  If Florida and Michigan's delegates get counted, which there is a move and possibilty they eventually will, you can chalk up more votes to her.  Furthermore, the party hard liners are going to side with Clinton in the end with their super delegates.  She's delivered the important states.  She has brought the party Florida and will probably bring them Ohio in the primaries.  If Obama can't do that in his own party, why would they want him to try against McCain who is almost guarunteed Florida and would probably have the edge in Ohio.  These are the things Democrats need to be considering in their candidate.

Why do you keep talking about the general election when I'm talking about the primaries? When it is Hilary or Obama against McCain, what happened in the primary won't matter. In fact, more people--far, far more people actually--are voting in the Democratic primaries than the Republican ones, which indicates those people will lean that way in the general election.

First of all, you realize he won more delegates on Super Tuesday, right? It was never predicted he would have a "sweeping wing," whatever that is. He was behind in several places where he closed the gap and even won, such as Missouri and N.M.

And Florida and Michigan won't be counted. It was determined beforehand that they wouldn't count and therefore no one campaigned there. Obama even withdrew from the Michigan race, so of course Hilary won.

Hilary winning Mass. wasn't huge as you say. Obama never led in the polls there.

Randall Flagg
 Rep: 139 

Re: Mitt's suspends campaign

Last I checked, the number of delegates won was still up in the air.  Both sides and many outlest have different numbers.  I meant to say "sweeping win", sorry for the typo.  You have to look at the states people win, not only delegates because that is what determines the ultimate winner.  Secondly, you can't assume that just because someone voted Democrat now means they will in November.  While that would most certainly hold true, there are other factors as to why Republicans aren't out in the numbers Dems have been.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB