Romney Can’t Believe He’s Losing to These Guys

This is the most bizarre sentence written to date by a political chatterer.

" He doesn’t seem to like his audience much, and they don’t like him."

What is your agenda? This has no basis in fact, just speculation. I guess that is why you work at the American Speculator.

Ok, I can't stand it any more! Do you people that write these articles ever do ANY research before you write? At all?

The last two polls in NH have shown Romney back to a 6 - 8 point lead, yet you continue to report on polls A MONTH OLD showing his lead narrowing to a single point.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_...

Marist and Insider Advantage both had him at 27-28%, within the margin or error of his highest polling numbers he EVER had in the state, yet, "his lead is vanishing"?

LIAR! That's right, I said it. LIAR! If you are going to write a story, research the facts. Don't create an entire article based upon a post hoc argument that can be easily disproven with any research at all.

EVANGELICALS GETTING BEHIND ROMNEY:
Have you noticed, since apparently you do NO RESEARCH, that Romney has received ENDORSEMENTS from 4 of the LEADING EVANGELICAL LEADERS IN AMERICA in the last week, including the Dean of Bob Jones University?

Last point. In a Primary season, NATIONAL POLLS ARE MEAN-ING-LESS. This thing will be all over except the shouting after the first two weeks of voting. Right now, national polls are just a "oh yeah, I've heard of him" poll.

Can I prove my point? How would Fred Thompson be polling nationally now if he was just an obscure Senator from TN who never accomplished anything of note in his political career that even comes close to qualifying him for the White House?

Right, Fred who?

Worst article ever. Do some research next time.

I echo Bill Mitchell's comments above. Furthermore, national poll numbers mostly reflect name recognition at this point. Romney leads in states where people have really gotten to know him, where it matters.

Jennifer, this has got to be one of the weakest political commentaries I've ever read. There is no depth to any of your arguments. Could it be that you're simply opposed to a true conservative platform? Or maybe there is some anti-mormon bias lurking? Not sure what your motivation is, but you don't hide it well and it doesn't justify your extremely weak arguments. Back to journalism school for you, I'm afraid.

Why do you have a problem with Mitt talking to his lawyers? Should we not feel better that this candidate is willing to seek the advice and consequences from advisors? Do we really want another gun slinger in office? Do we want to have someone who acts on impulsion?

Romney's #1 problem in coming from business is that he doesn't really know how to 'spin' every word that comes from his mouth - he just says what he believes to be true.

Although saying he would "consult the lawyers" before attacking Iran doesn't sound good politically, it is, in fact, what a President MUST do.

Saying we 'the surge appears to be working' before Patraeus had actually testified, didn't sound very macho politically, and yet, he was 100% correct.

Do we want a President like Hillary where every single syllable is poll-based spin, or do we want someone who speaks the truth?

P.S., Talk about "flip-flopping", Hillary was for torture before she was against it, she was for $5000 for every new child born before she was against it.

Hillary can't go a week without contradicting herself. At least Romney had his mea cupla over a period of years.

Many columns I have read this morning have informed us that we are not permitted to have Mitt Romney as President. Note: Dick Morris as one. It may not happen this election but it is slowly happening, the power of the press is slipping as being able to give us our "marching orders" as to who we can have for President. Maybe we should just do away with elections and let the media declare who you want - thats what you are doing. It will be Guillani and Hillary - both will support your agenda and retain your influence. WE the People need a free press and media, not what you have become telling us what we think and why we should think it. Why we should listen to people that are obsessed with silly opinions is beyond me and getting to be beyond everyone. Don't like Mitt, fine, don't vote for him but please quit giving me your ridiculous reasons why I shouldn't vote for him. Read your own column - "empty suit", "Mormon", "people really don't like him", "polls", - not a lot of thought here. Want to cover the real empty suits, listen to Congress on C-span.

This article is unbelievable. Romney is gaining in all the polls I have seen. Fred Thompson has slipped 8% and Giuliani lead is getting smaller. Romney has a 10% lead in Iowa and a 6 to 8% lead in New Hampshire. This inspite of the fact the Eastern Press continues to belittle his campaign and refrains from making positive statements about him. This article is perfect example of the negative press. Just go to the followin unbiased web site and check the polls state by state for yourself: http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/candidates/Mitt-Romney.html

I love how the New Yorkers are all trying to bad-mouth Romney in a desperate attempt to help Rudy G. The reason why Romney is behind in the polls NATIONALLY is b/c Rudy, McCain, and Thompson have much higher name recognition and are known quantities. Romney started the campaign with about 2% of the vote in polls nationally, and now has about 12%, which any pollster will tell you is significant movement. The four states where voters are actually paying attention, ie, Iowa, NH, Michigan, and Nevada, all show Romney in 1st place in polls.

Only New Yorkers think that Rudy connects with the people. He, unfortunately, comes across gruff, abrasive and confrontational. Perhaps that's why he's lagging in Iowa, where most people drive their entire lives without honking their horns once.

Jennifer Rubin should be embarrassed to have written this article. She seems really out of touch with her subject matter. In fact, Mitt Romney's momentum seems to be gaining ground right now, especially with the Evangelicals. Why don't I want Rudy as president? Rudy is a warmonger. He has more arrogance than G.W. Bush and absolutely no diplomacy skills. He is sure to get us into more "Iraq" type situations.

only in the media did romney ever stand a chance. no one ever cared about him, he was never a serious contender. sorry. his resume never resonated for a second with the average gop voter. the media had a different view and tried to push him as top tier which wasted a lot of his time and everyone else's time.

Dick Morris is generally wrong in his predictions, and he says Romney has no chance. Perhaps he identifies better with Giuliani. He likes a guy that has had 3 wives and a bunch of girlfriends in between a lot better than an honest family man like Romney. If people like Dick Morris are dead against Romney, he must be doing something right.

Jennifer you wrote, "Mitt Romney is the least adept politician in the field...". As a professional journalist you should have at hand certain tools that can provide you with the definition of "adept". Perhaps you should try using them sometime before you publish. Mr. Romney is probably the MOST adept one in the field.

It's understandable that you live and work in NY City, and surely you want to see "Hometown boy does good" in your rag's headlines. Bashing his opponents with lame, unsubstantiated attacks will do little more than inflame and unite their followers.

Finally, you have the brazen boldness to bestow Mr. Romney with three pieces of sage advice on how to save his campaign. And you are not running for office because... ? It literally took me quite a while to stop laughing at just how seriously you took yourself here.

While we're giving advice, let's try to be a tad more "adept" at writing as a profession please.

LOL! This article is hysterical. Did the author actually watch the Dearborn debate?? Mitt was definitely not 'puzzled'. He's too quick and bright. I'd label Thompson as the more puzzled one. And the statement about the diner scene with the waitress is ridiculous. Did he actually watch it?? Romney gave the woman much more time and attention that I would've. She wouldn't shut up and let him answer her questions. It was obvious by his response that he cared about her predicament and used the already short time he had to give her a very unrobotic answer.

Jennifer,

Looks like you struck a nerve with the Romney folks.

They are so unnerved they are even spamming the comments section.

Romney spammers look at this link for the latest CNN poll and tell us how well you are doing?

Link: http://flapsblog.com/?p=5744

The Guiliani people don't seem to understand that "national polls" are meaningless in a presidential primary. Perhaps President Howard Dean can explain to them how meaningless they are. Most potential voters are just now starting to pay attention to the candidates. In the states where the candidates have been campaigning, eg, Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan and Nevada, voters have been paying closer attention b/c there is an abundance of news coverage. These states provide a much more accurate picture of the political landscape, and Romney is running strong in all 4 states.
(By contrast, when pollsters doing "national polls" call republican voters in Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Alabama, etc, many probably haven't even heard of Mitt Romney).

Finally, Mitt Romney did not say he would consult lawyers before deciding whether to defend America. He was asked a legal/constitutional question about whether the president should get congressional approval before striking Iran. Obviously, if the President has the time to deliberate, he would most certainly consult constitutional law attorneys to discuss whether he may or may not attack a country w/o a war declaration under the War Powers Act. His answer was correct to the question that was asked. You simply do not attack a country w/o a war declaration unless you are on firm legal and constitutional footing.