I think it is looking more and more likely that Mitt Romney is going to win the Republican nomination (which was my original prediction, and has been my inclination all along).

Romney is now tied for the lead with Giuliani in national polls, and I will eat my trousers if Huckleberry, McCain or Thompson win the Republican primaries.  I think Huckabee will go down in flames like Howard Dean….within the next 6 weeks, I predict.

I really do think that it is now Mitt’s to lose.

Now the general election…that’s another thing entirely.  I’m still putting my money on Billary.


  1. DB December 19, 2007 at 8:29 pm - Reply

    He might be leading in the national polls, but just like normal elections, you need to win the individual states to win the election. Ross Perot got 20% of the votes, but didnt get a single electoral vote.

  2. Stephen Wellington December 19, 2007 at 8:41 pm - Reply

    Ron Paul or bust as far as I am concerned.

    Long live the Military Industrial Complex and the Federal Reserve if Giuliani or Romney win. Carry on with the dire foreign policy that is only exacerbating terrorism.

  3. Stephen Wellington December 19, 2007 at 9:08 pm - Reply

    The percentage error in some of the sub categories is HUGE. 17% for some cases…there is still hope. lol


    This site is fantastic to rigorously examine candidates funding and lobby group support. All of the “top tier” candidates have huge financial support from the banking establishment (especially Romney).

    I thought this was interesting Romney has accepted $32,000 from the tobacco industry and $14,000 from the Gambling industry. Not huge amounts but still caught my eye as his is LDS. Any thoughts?

  4. David Grua December 19, 2007 at 9:25 pm - Reply

    John: Will you do a podcast of you eating your trousers when/if Romney (Guiliani) doesn’t win?

  5. John Dehlin December 19, 2007 at 9:52 pm - Reply

    Anyone have chocolate trousers I can borrow, just in case? :)

  6. Carlos December 20, 2007 at 12:28 am - Reply


    I thought Huckabee had it in the bag but its looking like a Huckabust now.

    Strange thing, this GOP process.

  7. se7en December 20, 2007 at 1:14 am - Reply

    Of course Romney will win the nomination.

    And of course he will beat Hillary.

    I have greater confidence in Romney beating Hillary in the general than I do Romney winning the nomination. (Although he needs the the latter to get the former, obviously.)

    We need a leader with the Holy Ghost at this critical time in our nation’s history.

    I love the Book of Mormon: it reminds me that God is watching over this nation more that we realize.

  8. Chris Williams December 20, 2007 at 8:57 am - Reply

    Not a single caucus or primary vote has been cast. I don’t think Mitt’s that close to anything yet.

    The GOP race is wide open, with no clear front runner.

  9. Randy B. December 20, 2007 at 11:42 am - Reply

    Chris is right, of course, that it is still too early to tell. That said, I think Romney has the clearest path to the nomination. I have thought that for several months now. I think Romney’s greatest threat at this point is not Huck — I agree with John that he crashes and burns — but instead McCain. He has been down for some time now, but so was Kerry, and McCain is starting to gain some momentum as shown in the latest polls and endorsements. The only question is whether it is too little too late.

  10. Chris Williams December 20, 2007 at 2:40 pm - Reply

    If Huckabee wins Iowa and McCain comes from behind to win New Hampshire, Mitt is done.

    I think Randy B. makes a good comparison. McCain looks a lot like John Kerry in ’04.

  11. Carlos December 20, 2007 at 8:58 pm - Reply

    “We need a leader with the Holy Ghost at this critical time in our nation’s history”

    Columbus ‘had’ the holy ghost guiding him without ever have served as stake president or bishop.

    But Mitt is headed down from today. He actually never ‘saw’ his dad marching with Martin L King! He’s mislead people there and this will cause his campaign lots of trouble. Once voters leave aside the ‘Mormon’ issue and start looking at the candidate himself -well Mitt’s finished then. Without the mormon tag he would have being brushed off a long time ago.

    His latest problems come from The Phoenix papaers:


    catching him out in a very big lie.

  12. Carlos December 20, 2007 at 9:15 pm - Reply

    You know what the real problem is here with Mitt?

    Its that Mitt is the candidate of the Apostles and the ‘Salt Lake World Rulers’. He met with Pt Hinkley and then extensively with E.Holland to talk about the run, and off course they are neutral and all that…but support his efforts.

    THEY think he’s a good candidate because he was a stake president and bishop only and overlook every other BS he put out there. The pro-choice stake president? and the guy who ‘saw’ his dad march with King? really! His dad was probably pressured by the likes of Lee, Benson & Smith to not go near Martin Luther King! MLK was a communist infiltrator for these hardliners.

    Ahj, the hole thing is starting to make me sick. Salt Lake World Rulers, ie Apostles, think that only stake presidents are any good or capable when they stuff up almost every day, with paperwork that is doctered, they excommunicate those they dislike only (those that they don’t dislike are disfellowshiped only for the same sin), discriminating against people of other races and especially based on employment, and on and on…. I dread the day the church rules the world and brings back the rule of judeges. God help us all. If I have any chance I’ll work for and vote for these baptists or good honest Catholics or other Christians or good Hindus during the millenium, never the church’s candidate.

  13. the narrator December 21, 2007 at 2:02 am - Reply

    We need a leader with the Holy Ghost at this critical time in our nation’s history.

    Which is why I want Obama to win. If he gets the democratic nod, he’d beat anything the GOP has to throw at him.

  14. John Hamer December 21, 2007 at 12:39 pm - Reply

    Your homie just screwed the pooch, John. He’s been continually using the line, “I saw my father march with Martin Luther King,” to diffuse the historic Mormon racism question and it now turns out that Romney “saw” nothing of the kind, since it did not happen. But rather than admit error, Romneybot has compounded the problem by redefining the word “saw” to the extent that I could sign my name to the Testimony of the Three Witnesses:

    [quote]Mitt Romney acknowledged yesterday that he never saw his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. as he asserted in a nationally televised speech this month, and historical evidence shows that Michigan’s Governor George Romney and the civil rights leader never did march together.

    Romney said his father had told him he had marched with King and that he had been using the word “saw” in a “figurative sense.”

    “If you look at the literature, if you look at the dictionary, the term ‘saw’ includes being aware of in the sense I’ve described,” Romney told reporters in Iowa. “It’s a figure of speech and very familiar, and it’s very common. And I saw my dad march with Martin Luther King. I did not see it with my own eyes, but I saw him in the sense of being aware of his participation in that great effort.”[/quote]


    Considering he’s already known for his dishonesty, this repeated lie and the tortured explanation Romney has used to avoid admitting error, will certainly reinforce everyone’s impression of him. I’m certainly convinced: he’s dishonest to his core.

  15. Trevor December 30, 2007 at 10:03 am - Reply

    A bigger gaff was the use campaign’s of the witness es who erroneously claimed that they did actually see Romney and King march together. They knew these folks were wrong, but they chose to make use of the information for short-term advantage.

  16. se7en February 4, 2010 at 9:23 pm - Reply

    Wow, I was wrong about Mitt winning. :)

    I do like Ron Paul, though.

Leave A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.