Updates on the Arizona and Michigan primaries
WASHINGTON (AP)—Mitt Romney coasted to victory in the Arizona primary Tuesday night and vied with rival Rick Santorum for supremacy in Michigan.
Two other candidates, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul, made little effort in either state, pointing instead to next week’s 10-state collection of Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses.
Romney’s Arizona triumph came in a race that was scarcely contested, and he pocketed all of the 29 Republican National Convention delegates at stake.
Michigan was as different as could be—a hard-fought and expensive race in Romney’s home state that he could ill afford to lose and Santorum made every effort to win.
Returns from 13 percent of Michigan’s precincts showed Romney at 41 percent and Santorum at 38 percent. Paul was winning 11 percent of the vote to 7 percent for Gingrich.
UPDATE (10:19 p.m.)
WASHINGTON (AP)—Mitt Romney has narrowly won the Michigan Republican presidential primary. The former Massachusetts governor defeated Rick Santorum, who had waged a hard-fought battle for the state. Michigan is critical for Romney because it is the first of the nation’s industrial battleground states to vote in the GOP nominating race—and it is also his home state.
© 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top24 Comments to “Updates on the Arizona and Michigan primaries”
I’ve been reading “One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church” by Richard Abanes
The Mormon faith is wacky.
Report comment to moderator
Been wanting to read that ever since I hear Hangraaf interview Abanes about it many years ago.
… but off topic! (First post, too!)
Report comment to moderator
NOPM: And dead people getting up out of the ground, giants, burning bushes, 500 year old people, witches, devils, parting seas, walking on water and talking serpents are not?
The only things that really makes Mormonism seem more wacky are that their prophet lived in a more or less modern era which makes his story seem somehow more incredible than an “ancient” one, and he was a spectacularly lousy writer. Otherwise I can’t see much difference at all
Report comment to moderator
As for the election, a couple of exit poll results caught my eye. Saantorum did win the much touted white evangelical vote, but only by 51-35. And Romney won the Catholics fairly decisively. Self-identifying TP’ers split around 40-40.
I suspect the Santorum wave has crested. And if Newt really is motivated and can wrangle his billionaire he may beat EXPECTATIONS in the entire South. I think both Romney and Santorum are a bit too smarmy for the good ole boy crowd.
But I’m Rooting for Rick…
Report comment to moderator
But if Rick keeps this up, he may vanish completely:
“We need to look at the situation with gas prices today,” Santorum said, according to CNN. “We went into a recession in 2008 because of gasoline prices. The bubble burst in housing because people couldn’t pay their mortgages because they were looking at $4 gasoline.”
He’s starting to sound like Newt, if you know what I mean.
Report comment to moderator
I told you all Santorum was a non-start candidate. And I think it will reflect well on our Democracy if there are no more “anti-Romney” support waves. Santorum is a nut, but he was getting some traction as the guy who’d really debate and who would explain policy positions not regurgitate talking points.
Still I think he un-did all of that work with his comments about Obama wanting people to go to college so they would be less religious and more liberal. And while I was willing to give him credit for his defense of his Spector endorsement, there is working across the isle and then there is participating in a attempt by Daily Kos to swing him the progressive vote in the Republican primary. Santorum really didn’t do himself any favors there.
Michigan will likely not be a competitive race in the general election, but at least by getting a step closer to closing this race out with Romney on top the GOP has done a lot to keep Arizona in the competitive column–not to mention all other states where Santorum would be out of the running immediately. Republicans came together for some rational action tonight.
Report comment to moderator
4,5 & 6. Are why I’m uncomfortable with Romney. Why do liberals want him as the nominee so bad. They must think he would be the easiest to beat.
Report comment to moderator
KBells
Daily Kos was urging dems in Michigan to vote Santorum — that’s because the liberals believe Santorum would be easily defeated. You have it backwards. Regardless it isn’t just liberals who believe Santorum would be weak in the general election. Ann Coulter thinks so too as do numerous Republican governors who support Romney.
Personally, I’d like to see Santorum win the nomination so that the hard right can get its candidate and lose. Then maybe the Republicans can do a real reassessment, realignment and become once again a party that doesn’t drive centrists out and can provide workable solutions for the country’s problems.
Report comment to moderator
8. Would you vote for Romney over Obama.
Report comment to moderator
Romney comes across too much like the R party’s Al Gore. Or maybe he is Thomas E. Dewey 2.0
I’m generally unsupportive of BHO for the reasons I oppose liberalism in general irrespective of who its current leader/spokesman is.
But I think this man is a razzle dazzle Entertainment Tonight superstar candidate. And that pulls a lot of folks to his side. In the south the HBCs [historically black churches] will set aside their MAJOR differences with BHO [abortion targetting poor blacks, homosexual marriage agenda] and invite him to attend a service. It will be more of a political rally than an actual Christian worship service, but you knew that already.
I hope whoever the R nominee winds up being that he “thinks out of the box”. A veep candidate like Puerto Rico’s Gov Fortuno or SC congressman Tim Scott would be a colossal win.
Report comment to moderator
And make no mistake about it, President OBama may vacation in Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard but he knows to win he needs the money from the liberal MV crowd along with the votes/endorsemt of the HBC folks.
I think a lot of Tea Partiers will sulk and sit out this election. They will be just like all the “Neat & Clean for Gene” kids in ‘68 who chose to sit that one out and in so doing they helped a man they despised claim the WH.
Report comment to moderator
They will be just like all the “Neat & Clean for Gene” kids in ‘68 who chose to sit that one out and in so doing they helped a man they despised claim the WH.
Republicans are on the verge of nominating Mitt Romney, Mitt Freakin’ Romney, but you’re saying you still wanna keep trying the ol’, failed strategy of “at least he’s not a Dem”? We’ll never learn.
Report comment to moderator
Coyoteblue. . .
because when they nominated John McCain that worked out really well for them!
Report comment to moderator
#12
Just as I predicted!
It’s sad. I used to follow that strategy. Eventually I came to see that it was getting us nowhere.
Report comment to moderator
14. And reelecting Obama will get somewhere, in the wrong direction.
Report comment to moderator
KBells: The point is, we’ve been going left for decades, even when we “win.” Something ain’t working right with our strategy.
Report comment to moderator
If you can’t stop slowing down is better than speeding up.
Report comment to moderator
17: In some cases, yeah. The more fitting analogy is the boiling frog. We (conservatives) have conceded so much to these “moderates” that last year’s left looks like this year’s center, *but we don’t realize it.* We don’t realize it because nobody’s standing up for true conservatism (’cept for you-know-who). So the slide left continues unabated and we’re only left to judge these things relatively. Sometimes the minority is right.
Report comment to moderator
Kyle A: Not to disparage your powers of prescience, because you certainly did predict this, and you’ve been spot on on what you’ve said on the subject, but we professing conservatives are pretty predicatable, wouldn’t you say? Remember how James Dobson said he would never again vote for anyone who was pro-choice at all, then ~5 seconds later recanted? Speaking of which, how many folks here do you suppose vote for a candidate because he’s somewhat less pro-choice than the other guy? (We’re talking baby killing here, so “somewhat less pro-choice” is basically a euphemism).
Report comment to moderator
kBells 02.29.12 AT 6:36 AM
4,5 & 6. Are why I’m uncomfortable with Romney. Why do liberals want him as the nominee so bad. They must think he would be the easiest to beat.
–
That is why they want him and why the elite Republicans are pushing him. He is just another Bob Dole and John McCain.
Report comment to moderator
Kbells
No, his record is a bit too slippery to me. But I would have had a positive reaction to Huntsman. I think Gov. Sandoval (Nev) is another candidate who would appeal to centrists and moderates. But those guys don’t have a chance in the primaries.
Kyle
McCain hurt himself with his reaction to the financial crisis — that was the beginning of his slide. He hurt himself further with the selection of Palin.
Report comment to moderator
Kbells, I don’t think any of the GOP candidates have a realistic shot at becoming President, but I’d rather see Romney make a run for it than Santorum because I don’t think nominating Santorum would say great things about our Democracy. You’d really want a presidential candidate who tells people supporting college educations is a liberal conspiracy? The world watches this contest, and Republicans should be concerned with putting their best feet forward. Santorum’s only point backward.
No, I wouldn’t vote for Romney (he’s a gutless flake who takes two positions in the same hour and I think foreign adversaries would walk all over him). But I’d rather see a President Romney than a nominee Santorum. And seriously, I’ve asked before an no one can tell me what Mitt Romney would actually do about the economy that President Obama wouldn’t (besides balloon the deficit with Bush tax cuts 2.0)?!
The more he’s pressed about the auto-bailout the more he concedes to Obama’s position. He opposed government loans and thought they should have gone into bankruptcy to find private financiers…but oh…then people point out that all the banks were dying and he insists that he’d be there with the government loans anyway! He’s literally shameless.
Let’s press him about rebuilding that bridge in Kentucky! I’m sure he’ll say we should sell of the to a private firm and let them operate it. I’d like to hear Romney tell someone, “If you like that I have a CONDEMNED bridge to sell you!” I guarantee you when there are no takers he’s going to sign some public money over to fixing that bridge!
Perhaps the Democrats want to run against Romney because at every battle over the economy the illustrious, venture capitalist business man is forced to concede he would have done things the same. I can see where that might make it really difficult on Republican’s “dissent into socialism” meme.
Report comment to moderator
Redwal, CB, which is why I don’t take your comments seriously, it would be like taking batting signals from the opposing coach.
Report comment to moderator
Kbells
LOL. By all means nominate the most extreme candidate possible. Might be the only way you guys can learn.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!