Mitt Romney tries to break Southern losing streak

[Torie]

I am putting up this story as yet another exhibit to my brief as to just how the delegate allocation rules are going to nominate Romney in the end long before the convention. No, Mittens is not going to come in first in Mississippi or Alabama. I doubt that he wants to really, since keeping Newt alive has some residual benefits. What Mittens is doing is picking off delegates, in proportional allocation states. And he can afford it. Mittens outflow of cash is matched by his inflow, so he cruises along with about a steady 7 million in the bank as working capital.

It is sort of like Grant and Lee in the last year of the Civil War - a battle of attrition - with Mittens playing the role of Grant. So Mittens is now decamping his troops from their current base in Hamilton County, Ohio, and marching down to the western reaches of the Redneck Riviera to secure his urban pockets of friendly "Unionists" down there and along the way in De Soto, Rankin, Jackson, Jefferson, Baldwin, Mobile and Madison Counties. He should hit the beach in a few days.

[Bull Moose Base]

You doubt Mitt wants to come in first in Mississippi and Alabama?  Come on.  Not saying he won't go down there and give that speech invoking imagery of himself as a Union general destroying the South, but that doesn't mean he's not ineptly trying to win.  Why Florida is allowed to award delegates WTA, BTW?

[J. J.]

I love the analogy.

Yes, because of proportional representation, Romney will win some delegates, but right now, someone else wins a plurality on Tuesday.  I wouldn't be to surprised to see Santorum get that plurality, when factoring in the two islands.

[Wisconsin+17]

Grant may have fought a war of attrition, but then General Grant also didn't get blown out in Minnesota and North Dakota.

[Torie]

Grant may have fought a war of attrition, but then General Grant also didn't get blown out in Minnesota and North Dakota.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the Battle of Cold Harbor.  It made zero difference to the inevitable outcome. Grant just put some ice on it, and kept going, and going, and going.

[Eraserhead]

Of course he wants to win them. He'd end the race then and there.

[Torie]

Of course he wants to win them. He'd end the race then and there.

Mittens winning Alabama and Mississippi = Rick dropping out, who will win Kansas at the same time (Kansas is Rick central - its demographics are horrible for Mittens outside of Johnson County - it's packed with evangelicals these days)?  Really?

[Eraserhead]

Of course he wants to win them. He'd end the race then and there.

Mittens winning Alabama and Mississippi = Rick dropping out, who will win Kansas at the same time (Kansas is Rick central - its demographics are horrible for Mittens outside of Johnson County - it's packed with evangelicals these days)?  Really?

Kansas is before AL and MS.

[Torie]

Of course he wants to win them. He'd end the race then and there.

Mittens winning Alabama and Mississippi = Rick dropping out, who will win Kansas at the same time (Kansas is Rick central - its demographics are horrible for Mittens outside of Johnson County - it's packed with evangelicals these days)?  Really?

Kansas is before AL and MS.

A mere lacunae. You know I'm right.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That was in Virginia, on Confederate territory. Very different from losing big in Minnesota and North Dakota.

So far Mitt has gone 0/4 in the South, and he's running out of states.

[BigSkyBob]

Grant may have fought a war of attrition, but then General Grant also didn't get blown out in Minnesota and North Dakota.

Perhaps you are not familiar with the Battle of Cold Harbor.  It made zero difference to the inevitable outcome. Grant just put some ice on it, and kept going, and going, and going.

Perhaps, I should remind you of the Hutu Tutsi conflict in Rwanda. The 95% Hutu majority decided to exterminate the 5% Tutsi minority. After initially being slaughtered in  large number, the Tutsi organized a defense, and, soon, gained the upper hand. Now, the 95% Hutu majority was on the chopping block, figuratively and literally. Fortunately for the Hutu, the US founded the prospects of a 5% minority exterminated the 95% majority to be unacceptable, and intervened.

The Hutu had a nearly twenty to one advantage in manpower, while the North held a four to one advantage over the Southern White population. In the second case, the manpower advantage was decisive, and, in the first it was not. Your only using the second example because it supports your preferred conclusion.

[Torie]

Well that analogy may work if you assume that Rick has Mitten's money, and Mittens has Rick's money,  and the rules are written for Rick rather than Mitt, with the establishment all on Rick's side, including the bulk of the super delegates. The Tutsi had the fire power, provided by outside sources, with the bulk of their army in the sanctuary of The Congo (or Zaire, or whatever it was called then or now).  After securing the resources, they crossed back across the border.

[Wisconsin+17]

Torie:

You're right about the money and manpower advantages- but Santorum raised 9 million in February to Romney's 12.

If Romney has to spend 6:1 to pull out a draw - the unbelievable is going to happen - RMoney is going to run out of money.

If I were the head of the Romney campaign, I wouldn't spend a dime in the south. I'd be wallpapering Illinois and California.

[Torie]

Torie:

You're right about the money and manpower advantages- but Santorum raised 9 million in February to Romney's 12.

If Romney has to spend 6:1 to pull out a draw - the unbelievable is going to happen - RMoney is going to run out of money.

If I were the head of the Romney campaign, I wouldn't spend a dime in the south. I'd be wallpapering Illinois and California.

Mittens will never run out of money. Why on earth do you think that?  As I said, what goes out, is replaced by what goes in, something like 12 million in February. The more salient issue is how much money Rick has, and how effectively he can use it, and just how many more voters are available to him if he does manage to advertise heavily on the tube.

Mittens is just trying to pick off delegates in the cotton belt is all, as I have noted. He has his little systems engineering blueprint to get to the magic number that shuts it all down after the final round of primaries assuming his opposition stays active until then, and this foray down into hostile territory is just a part of carrying out the blueprint.

I might note that I am still available to open my checkbook for Mittens. I am still a financial virgin in that department.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Burn rate in January. He spent around 19 million in January, and he won't be able to spend that much anymore.

February proved this to be the case with only 7.7 million cash on hand at the beginning of the month and 7.5 million cash at the end of the month. He raised 11.5 and spent about 11.7 million.

Santorum had 1.5 million going into February. If he raised 9 and spent 4 of it, he's got 5.5 million cash on hand going into March.

That puts Santorum about 73 percent of Romney funding for the rest of the campaign. That's a 3:2 advantage.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The bolded part is probably the weakest link in your rather nicely done logical chain. Really? 

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here's the problem with that strategy.

KOing Gingrich spells doom for the Romney campaign. The only place Romney should be putting money is in KS. You never spend if not spending can net you better results than spending.

Romney doesn't need to KO Gingrich in order to win. Romney is much better off downballot with Newt in and shoring up IL and CA. His campaign has shifted from needing to attack to playing defense.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is there any reason to suggest, since Santorum has won 7 states ,that his funding is going to drop significantly below Romney?

I'd like to hear it. 9 million in a month is very good news for Santorum, especially given that he's now close to parity with Romney.

[Torie]

The blueprint has some delegates penciled in down there for Mittens. He needs to nail them down. He will probably be visiting Johnson County too, in KS, just to make sure that he gets the 3 delegates assigned to KS-03, along with hitting the 20% threshold for KS as a whole so that he gets his share of the at large delegates. Mittens doesn't like being zeroed out in delegates anywhere. That is not a part of the blueprint.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is there any reason to suggest, since Santorum has won 7 states ,that his funding is going to drop significantly below Romney?

I'd like to hear it. 9 million in a month is very good news for Santorum, especially given that he's now close to parity with Romney.

I guess we will find out.  Pity the Mittens voters are the ones with the money. What little money evangelicals have in general they give to their church. And even if Rick does match the Mittens money machine going forward, we will then find out how much difference it makes. I suspect the difference will be marginal, but we will find out. Sure it would help Rick some if Newt dropped out at the margins (not nearly as much as folks assume around here, but some), but Newt isn't going to drop out.  He wants to go to the convention as a candidate. That is how you get more media attention. Newt's blueprint is about media attention, not delegates. When you have different blueprints, you have different goals. Who knew?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, we've seen Mitten's 2.0 doesn't run so well when it's not spending 18 million a month.

He's constrained by fundraising at this point.

[BigSkyBob]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The bolded part is probably the weakest link in your rather nicely done logical chain. Really? 

11.5 x 4 + 7.5 = 53.5
9 x 4 + 5.5 = 41.5

41.5/53.5= 77.6%

If you use three more months,

11.5 x 3 + 7.5 = 42
9 x 3 + 5.5 = 32.5

32.5/42 = 77.4%

The numbers work out. Whether Santorum's fundraising continues to accelerate, or drops off is the question. Romney isn't going to be able to buy it from here.

[Torie]

Just as an aside, just how many Pub primary voters are unfamiliar at this point about the ins and outs of Romneycare?  How much difference at the margins will it make at his point if Rick saturates the airwaves chattering about Romneycare?  

By the way, for the record, I favor Romneycare, particularly the version Mittens wanted, and didn't get, which would have limited the mandatory insurance to just getting catastrophic policies with large deductibles, for the big medical bills. That is where the real moral hazard and money drain was, not for going to the emergency room to get a birth control prescription. So ads reminding me about Romneycare, just reminds me of one of the reasons as to why I am a Mittbot.

[Likely Voter]

It's true that Romney needs more money than the others because his he needs to buy votes outside his natural base, which isn't enough to win. But there is no reason to think that he and his friends will come up with the money. Even if (and i doubt it would ever happen) Santorum could match Romney's fundraising, Romney's SuperPAC will always be able to outspend Santorum and his superpac combined by far. Plus if it came to it, Mitt can dip into his vast fortune.

[J. J.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That was in Virginia, on Confederate territory. Very different from losing big in Minnesota and North Dakota.

So far Mitt has gone 0/4 in the South, and he's running out of states.

Florida and Virginia (though by default).