Sam, we’ll get back to you on that

Yesterday, when asked if Mitt Romney supports equal pay for men and women doing the same job, his campaign team didn’t have an answer. They had to check to see if he actually support women’s rights or not. The shocking thing about this is not that they weren’t sure. It’s probably hard to know when you’re a Republican these days and you’ve spent such enormous energy going after the rights of women in so many different areas. No, what’s actually shocking is that the event was a conference call during a week when Mitt Romney is trotting out his female supporters and his utter lies all over the country to prove he’s pro-women.

Don’t you think his campaign would have had the answer to that particular question already sorted out? It is, after all, the first bill President Obama signed into law and a signature accomplishment of his first term.

But, no, when asked the question by Sam Stein of the Huffington Post, Romney’s spokesperson paused an agonizing six seconds then responded, “Sam, we’ll get back to you on that”.

Here’s the exchange followed by Lilly Ledbetter herself talking about the law named after her.

This is not Republican and it’s not Democrat. It’s civil rights. It’s a human right. It’s a right that each of us should have. Not based on our party affiliation but based on who we are and what we do and is it right?

Ms. Ledbetter responded to the Romney campaign’s response, as well:

“I was shocked and disappointed to hear that Mitt Romney is not willing to stand up for women and their families. If he is truly concerned about women in this economy, he wouldn’t have to take time to ‘think’ about whether he supports the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. This Act not only ensures women have the tools to get equal pay for equal work, but it means their families will be better served also. Women earn just 77 cents to every dollar that men earn for the same job, which is why President Obama took decisive action and made this the first bill that he signed when he took office. Women should have the ability to take their bosses to court to get the same pay as their male coworkers. Anyone who wants to be President of the United States shouldn’t have to think about whether they support pursuing every possible avenue to ensuring women get the same pay for the same work as men. Our economic security depends on it.”

Here’s how absolutely tone-deaf Mitt Romney is on women’s rights: last November, he gave a list of Supreme Court justices that he would use as models when appointing justices of his own. He named Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. Every single one of these men voted against Lilly Ledbetter in the case that forced Congress to create the new law.

Two hours after Sam Stein asked the question, by the way, the Romney campaign assured the women of America that he “would not repeal” the Lilly Ledbetter Act (not that he supports it, of course, because it’s a law signed by “that one”.) So you can all just settle down and not worry your pretty little heads about it, m’kay?

This week Romney has been trying to say that it’s actually President Obama that’s waging a war on women, saying, “Over 92 percent of the jobs lost under this President were lost by women. His policies have been really a war on women.”

Sounds good but it’s bullshit. Politifact rates it “Mostly False”. The Obama campaign responded quickly:

Independent fact-checkers and economic experts have labeled Romney’s claim highly misleading. To insist that the President’s policies have caused women to lose jobs “ignores critical facts.” As Princeton University economist Betsey Stevenson said, “I don’t think you could point to a single piece of evidence that the pattern of job loss: men first then women, is due to the president’s policies. It’s a historical pattern that has held in previous recessions.” MSNBC reports that Romney’s numbers “don’t tell the whole story.” [More HERE].

Over at Talking Points Memo, they were even more harsh and came up with this graphic that proves the lie:

I’m not sure what to expect next from Mitt Romney when it comes to his attempt to regain the support of women. Maybe he’ll trot out Phyllis Schlafly and put her on his payroll? I wonder if she’d make as much as Romney’s male surrogates?

Adding… Two Michigan Democratic women legislators have weighed in on Mitt Romney’s bizarre reaction to Sam Stein’s softball question.

First, we have this from State Representative Rebekah Warren of Ann Arbor:

“If Michigan women had any thought whatsoever that Mitt Romney’s extremism on women’s issues was a temporary condition brought on by his desire to win his party’s primary, today’s embarrassing refusal to answer whether he supports the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act removes all doubt. The fact that Governor Romney – on his first full day as the presumptive Republican nominee – can’t say for sure if he supports equal pay for equal work only reaffirms that he can’t be trusted to do what’s right for Michigan women.”

Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer had this to say:

“What does Mitt Romney need to think about when it comes to supporting fair pay and equal treatment for women in the workforce? As a mother of two daughters, I find it outrageous and dispiriting that the presumptive Republican nominee for President can’t – or won’t – take a clear position on the Lilly Ledbetter Act that ensures equal pay for equal work. Today’s display only reinforces what has become increasingly clear as this election has gone on: Michigan women can’t trust Mitt Romney.”

UPDATE: The absurd claim that 92% of the jobs lost were held by women and are due to President Obama’s policies is getting soundly debunked across the internet. MSNBC’s First Read has a good round-up. I think the best overall picture is given by the Washington Post:

First of all, readers know we frown on the somewhat arbitrary dividing line of measuring jobs statistics by presidential terms. It is a common journalistic — and political — metric. But restarting the employment clock from the moment the president takes the oath of office doesn’t tell you much about his performance, especially since it takes time for the new president’s policies to take effect.

We’ve argued, without much success, that it would make more sense to measure Obama’s job performance from the end of the recession — June 2009 — since that would also allow at least five months for his policies, such as the stimulus bill, to kick in.

The RNC calculated [the 92% figure] by comparing the decline in the number of all nonfarm employees from January 2009 to March 2012 with the decline in jobs held by women in that period. The numbers, derived from Bureau of Labor Statistics data, do add up.

But there is less to this stat than meets the eye. First of all, why start in January? Obama, after all took office on January 20. If you start the data in February, then the overall job loss is just 16,000 jobs—while women lost 484,000 jobs. [...]

How could women lose more jobs than the overall total? It’s a function of the dates one picks. In fact, the picture becomes clearer if you start running the data from the date the recession began — December 2007. With that starting point, the total decline in jobs was just over 5 million, with women accounting for nearly 1.8 million of those jobs.

Now look what happens when we just look at the past year, March 2011 to March 2012. Men gained nearly 1.9 million jobs while women gained 635,000 jobs.

In other words, men did lose more jobs in the recession. Now that the economy is growing again, men are recovering jobs at a faster pace than women. In fact, the latest employment report shows that male participation in the work force was up 14,000 while female participation fell 177,000, in part because women tend to work in retail or government jobs (such as teaching), which have been cut in recent months.

Missed it by THAT much

As of this afternoon, we won’t have Rick Santorum to kick around anymore. He has suspended his campaign which, in politispeak, means he reserves the right to get back in if Romney crashes and burns. It’s a shrewd move because if anyone could crash and burn when he has the advantage, it’s Mitt Romney.

So, good-bye, Rick. Goodbye to the teleprompter-using candidate who thinks teleprompters should be illegal.

Goodbye to the guy who fought tooth and nail in Michigan for one lousy delegate (smart!)

Goodbye to the man aspiring to be the Leader of the Free World™ who thinks wanting American kids to get a college education if they want one is “snobby”.

Goodbye to the candidate who boldly stood with the 1%.

Goodbye to the politician who lost his last election by 18%.

And, finally, goodbye to the guy who got played and played again by Mitt Romney, the worst Republican candidate since forever.

Goodbye, Rick. We’ll miss ya.

Now it’s just Mitt and Newt. And the whole damn world is laughing at us.

This oughta be inneresting…

Newt Gingrich said this week that a brokered GOP convention this year is a real possibility and that “a series of brand new players” could emerge. Rick Santorum thinks so, too.

Who might be a lead contender for the nomination if that happens? According to a PPP poll out this week, it’s Sarah Palin.

The talk of a brokered convention never seems to die down and one interesting finding on this poll was that Sarah Palin is far more popular than any of the actual Republican candidates in the race. Her net favorability is +48, with 68% of voters rating her favorably to only 20% with a negative opinion. That compares favorably to +29 for Santorum, +19 for Romney, and -26 for Paul.Palin is someone GOP delegates might be able to unify around in the case of a hopelessly deadlocked convention. She is seen positively by Gingrich voters (85/7), Santorum supporters (80/10), and Romney ones (57/27) alike. That’s a contrast to Romney who is disliked by both Santorum (38/48) and Gingrich (32/54) voters and Santorum who is disliked by Romney (38/48) voters and only seen narrowly favorably by Gingrich (46/42) backers.

Palin has already said she’d be open to accepting the nomination if it were offered to her.

I said it before and I’ll say it again:

Ohpleaseohpleaseohpleaseohplease…

[Image credit: Wikimedia Commons]

Rick, you’ve been Romney’d

All the headlines this morning are blaring “RICK SANTORUM WON THE DAY AND YES I’M SHOUTING!!!

[Image credit: Daily Kos via Newseum]

But they are wrong. As it turns out, even in Mississippi where Santorum got the most votes, Mitt Romney walked away with more delegates that poor Rick. In fact, yesterday Romney ended up with 43 delegates and Rick Santorum got only 36. (Newt Gingrich got 24 and Ron Paul got 1.)

That’s what happens when you have rich friends who are Superdelegates and you and your SuperPACs outspend your rivals by leaps and bounds:

[Chart courtesy of Zeke Miller | Buzzfeed]

And yet Mitt still can bring it home, can he? In Alabama, he outspent Santorum and Gingrich combined nearly two-to-one yet they both got more delegates than Romney did there.

The Republicans don’t need the Democrats to tinker with their primaries. They are making a complete Clown Show hash of it all on their own.

Adding… Let’s not forget that Mitt’s tax proposal, which is supposed to reduce the deficit, is lopsidedly in favor of the über-rich:

The central feature of Romney’s new plan is an across-the-board 20 percent tax cut — on top of continuing the Bush tax cuts, by McIntyre’s reading. For the top earners, that means the tax rate drops to 28 percent. The plan also cuts the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, repeals the estate tax, and maintains the current tax rate of 15 percent on income from capital gains.Bottom line?“The wealthy will pay far less in taxes than they do now, including a wealthy person named Mitt Romney,” McIntyre says.

As Obama Campaign Manager Jim Messina put it:

Mitt Romney yesterday on how to reduce the national deficit: “Planned Parenthood, we’re gonna get rid of that.” THAT’S his solution?

— Jim Messina (@Messina2012) March 14, 2012

And, as my blogging partner LOLGOP responded:

Anyone who would pretend to go from pro-choice to shutting down Planned Parentood in less than a decade is corrupt beyond all hope.

— LOLGOP (@LOLGOP) March 14, 2012

The never-ending Clown Show™

As I wrote about yesterday, Rick Santorum is fighting tooth and nail for that one Michigan delegate that they believe was inappropriately awarded to Mitt Romney. So, they staged a protest rally outside the headquarters of the Michigan Republican Party (MRP) headquarters.

It drew three. Not three busloads. Not three dozen.

Three. People.

These Republicans could sure learn a thing or two about how to protest, amirite?

Only three people showed up to a rally at Michigan GOP headquarters in Lansing to show their dissatisfaction with the party’s allocation of delegates between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum following the Feb. 28 primary.The three people talked to leaders inside GOP headquarters.State GOP leaders apportioned the at-large delegates on the day after the election, saying that Santorum would get 14 and Romney would get 16.

Leaders explained to the three Santorum supporters that the AP erroneously reported that both candidates would receive 15 candidates.

More from MichiganRadio.org in their piece “Santorum rally in front of GOP headquarters fizzles”:

A rally was scheduled for last night to protest the Michigan Republican Party’s decision to award both of the state’s at-large national convention delegates to Mitt Romney. Supporters of Rick Santorum say he was denied his fair share of the delegates because he won almost half the statewide vote.But only a handful of people showed up at the state Republican headquarters in Lansing, and they were quickly invited inside for a closed-door meeting with party officials.One of them was Spencer Austin, who said he was with Students for Santorum.“I’m here to, uh, I’m not going to say protest — because I think that’s a flaky term – I’m here just to prove a point: I feel that Santorum was cheated out of delegates,” Austin said.

Yup, iamrite.

My buddy Bruce Fealk did manage to get MRP Communications Director Matt Frendewey to speak to him briefly.

“I gotta talk to real reporters.” LMAO. (Bruce Fealk is a reporter for the Rochester Citizen.)

In other news, the Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, Robert Schostak, is taking full responsibility for the confusion surrounding their robbing denying Santorum the extra delegate by what appeared to be last-minute rule changes. Easy to do when there are only three people in the state that really seem to give a damn, I suppose.

[CC photo credit Shown By Photos.]

Time to ship the Santorum Surge to the Smithsonian’s collection of Unfortunate Metaphors

 

With Eric Cantor, Tom Coburn and John Ashcroft’s endorsements, Barbara Bush making robocalls and the Drudge Report ignoring the biggest story of the campaign, the GOP establishment is determined to make Super Tuesday Mitt Romney’s big night. And it will probably work.

I think the story of the night will be that Rick Santorum would have won Ohio if he’d been on the ballot all over the state. He’s not. Instead, Mitt will take most of the delegates and Gingrich will do second best.

By the end of the week, Santorum’s campaign could be over. Why do I say that? The way he’s walked back his comments on JFK and college along with his complaints about spending his kids’ college fund indicate he’s looking at his watch. It may be time to go.

Then the interesting question becomes can some sort of explosives team be sent in to defuse Newt Gingrich. Rick Santorum depends completely on the GOP elite to make his easy money. Newt is a bit of an industry unto himself.

The biggest tactical error Mitt Romney has made so far in this campaign filled with tactical errors was going after Newt in a vicious way in Iowa. Newt would have self-destructed but Mitt didn’t have the confidence to wait. Now Newt Gingrich is determined to make his stand all the way through this summer.

Of course, I hope that’s what will happen. There’s nothing funnier that a high and mighty Newt in a huff, unless you’re married to him.

What do you think will happen on Super Tuesday? Who will be the big winner, besides President Obama?

Dele-gate

Honestly, I never thought that Michigan GOP Primary Clown Show™ would still be the gift to Democrats that keeps on giving a week later but, well, it is.

Though the state’s primary was almost a week ago, the Rick Santorum campaign is continuing to dispute the primary’s results. The campaign has taken their fight over the way the Michigan Republican Party apportioned two of the state’s at-large delegates to the Republican National Committee.The campaign is also organizing a rally to be held later today in front of the Michigan Republican headquarters in Lansing. Santorum supporters will call on Michigan GOP leaders to reconsider their decision to award both the party’s statewide delegates to Mitt Romney.They say party leaders changed the rules to avoid awarding one apiece to Romney and Santorum, who ran a close second in last week’s Michigan primary and won half of the state’s congressional districts.

Hah hah! A rally! Sponsored by the tea party! To fight for ONE delegate! Bring your lawn chairs! That’ll change the minds of all those establishment Republicans who were in the bag for Romney from the start.

By the way, it starts at 5 p.m. and is at the Michigan Republican Party Headquarters at 520 Seymour, Lansing, MI in case you want to watch the fun.

Maybe all of this is the reason for the results obtained in a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll out today:

Four in 10 of all adults say the GOP nominating process has given them a less favorable impression of the Republican Party, versus just slightly more than one in 10 with a more favorable opinion.Additionally, when asked to describe the GOP nominating battle in a word or phrase, nearly 70 percent of respondents – including six in 10 independents and even more than half of Republicans – answered with a negative comment.Some examples of these negative comments from Republicans: “Unenthusiastic,” “discouraged,” “lesser of two evils,” “painful,” “disappointed,” “poor choices,” “concerned,” “underwhelmed,” “uninspiring” and “depressed.”

And perhaps most significantly, the GOP primary process has taken a toll on the Republican presidential candidates, including front-runner Mitt Romney, who is seen more unfavorably and whose standing with independents remains underwater.

Between the fight to deny women contraceptives and other basic health care and the characterization of Rush Limbaugh’s odious anti-women comments this week as “a poor choice of words”, it’s frankly a wonder there are any women left in the country that will support a Republican anywhere on the ticket. I wonder what Republicans think the right choice of words actually is when you are calling a woman a whore or a slut?

During the coverage of the Michigan primary last week, Santorum’s people were defending Democrats who crossed over to vote for him, saying that Santorum’s message is resonating with Republicans, Independents AND Democr- BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!! [Sorry.]

What did we do to deserve this magnificent Clown Show™? Must be good living.

UPDATE: I just got off the phone with Bruce Fealk who informs me that the protest rally at the Republican Party headquarters drew three. Not three dozen. Three. People.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!

[CC photo credit Shown By Photos.]

The best nomination money can buy

Yesterday, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney squeeked out a win over his opponent Rick Santorum by a mere three percentage points.

He got 410,517 votes across the state to Santorum’s 378,124. Romney and his supporting PAC (Restore Our Future) outspent Santorum and his supportive PACs (Red White and Blue Fund & Susan B. Anthony List) nearly two-to-one ($4.27 Million to $2.27 Million).

Doing some quick math, Romney spent $10.40 for each vote. Santorum himself spent $6.00.

Also, 9 out of 10 Romney ads were negative. While that might not be “setting his hair on fire” (seems there is at least one thing Romney is not willing to do to win the nomination – muss his majestic coif), it does show how important Michigan was to him.

A three-point win can legitimately be called a loss for the Michigan native who strangely loves the height of our trees.

By the way, just to give you an idea about how much money the GOP is spending on this primary, have a look at this:

It’s enough to make you want to open a media company, isn’t it?

[CC Image credit: Freefoto.com]

Basically, Mitt Romney has already lost Michigan.

In 2008, Mitt Romney won the GOP primary in the state where he was born—the state where his father was governor for three terms—easily. And as of last night’s polls, Mitt was losing to Santorum by a point, knowing that Rick Santorum has outperformed polls consistently in this primary.

Despite any mischief and hilarity today may bring, the key moment of this Michigan GOP Primary took place during Romney’s speech at a nearly empty Ford Field.

During the Q &A, Romney was asked if he was the GOP candidate with the best chance of beating President Obama. In a rare moment of candor, Romney said, “”I don’t think if I have the best chance, I think I have the only chance.” When he got almost no reaction from the crowd he added, “Maybe I’m overstating that a bit.” Then he added, “That’s my family leading the applause.” No applause was audible.

It was a perfect example of a pained attempt to seem severely “resolute” and failing miserably.

How to be Mitt Romney
1. Make a bold statement.
2. Backtrack.
3. Make an awkward joke.

In the silence of the crowd, the sad truth at the heart of Mitt’s campaign torn out and put on display.

The audience was from the Detroit Economic Club. They had paid to see Mitt Romney. They gave up time on a workday to so. If Mitt wins, they’d each likely get millions in tax breaks.

Some people call these scions of big business the elite. George W. Bush called them “my base.”

And they didn’t leap to their feet when Mitt Romney made the central argument of his campaign: Only I can beat this President.

I imagine how a Clinton or Obama audience would have responded in the heat of the campaign to such a claim. I can’t imagine them not leaping to their feet.

Of course, these were conservative businessmen. A little “Here here!” or cheerful hurumphing would have been fine. But Mitt got basically nothing. That’s not encouraging.

Some Michigan Democrats are afraid they won’t get a chance to vote against Mitt Romney in the general elections. Or they want to make sure that he’s not even on the ballot. I think Democrats win when they let the GOP pick their own poison.

Mitt Romney kicked Michigan when Michigan was down. Today we’ll find out if Michigan does the same the same to Mitt.

CC image by dno1967b

***
Update 10:39 AM

The big story this morning is about Democrats voting to throw this Primary to Santorum, who should be the underdog. Romney claims he’s the underdog, though he probably shouldn’t mention dogs at all.

Jonathan Chait points out that savvy Michigan voters have swung elections away from the establishment’s choice numerous times.

Here’s a fact about Rick Santorum. If he weren’t the Internet’s most notorious homophobe, he’d be likable. In person, it takes almost a conscious effort not to like him. I’ve said before that his self-righteousness is far more appealing that Mitt Romney’s sense of entitlement.

That fact that this election is even close, though, is no dirty trick. The fault lies not in the stars, dear reader, but in Mitt Romney.

***
Update 1:30 PM

It really looks like Mitt could lose Michigan, even among Republicans.

That’s what the late polls show and would explain the full-frontal assault on Santorum’s efforts to lure Democrats in the state by Mitt and the Drudge Report, which has become Mitt’s Fox News. Does anyone doubt that if Drudge had decided that take Mitt down, Mitt would already be done.

***
Update 3:17 PM

What’s funny about Mitt Romney is he believes that he apparently isn’t pandering. Today he said, “I’m not going to light my hair on fire to try to get support.”Sounds like he has a very low opinion of what his party wants from him.

But the fact is Romney is warmongering on an epic scale. He’s lying about the sanctions that the US has put on Iran, which are much more crippling than anything George W. Bush ever considered. And he’s beating the drum of war in a way that makes the world more volatile and gas more expensive.

Mitt Romney’s warmongering makes his bromance with Ron Paul all the more strange. Ron Paul has not attack Romney once in a debate. And he’s never pointed out that Romney is pushing exactly the kind of of Neo-Con aggression Paul claims to deplore. Why?

I think it’s because Mitt Romney is an Ayn Rand character come to life. Here’s a man who puts his own accomplishments over any sense of truth or obligation. And it turns Ron on.

***
Update 4:47 PM

Mitt Romney is running away with Arizona, the state that loves Jan Brewer, the state that wants to see your papers.

It’s imperative that I at this point note that I’m giddy. This entire liveblog is written with an air of giddiness. I smell Mitt Romney’s defeat tonight in Michigan. It’s why Mitt subjected himself to a humbling press conference. It’s why expectations are being lowered.

That said, I may have been snuckered. It’s almost impossible to imagine Mitt Romney losing Michigan. But from what I see of the news: people are beginning to expect it.

***
Update 6:22 PM

If Mitt Romney were a Transformer, he’d turn into Mitt Romney.

Read this tortured explanation on Mitt Romney’s ever evolving, ever hedging stand on a woman’s right to an abortion, and you’ll realize this is a man who is beyond hypocrisy.

This morning, Mitt Romney called Rick Santorum angling for Democratic votes a dirty trick. But the hypocrisy in that statement is preposterous, as usual. Mitt Romney admits that he once registered as a Democrat just to vote for Paul Tsongas. Also, his campaign fought for an open primary, having never assumed that Mitt Romney would have to be the right of Dick Cheney’s cane by the time he hit Michigan.

I hope the news tonight is that Romney has lost a majority of Republicans in Michigan. Nothing could be a starker rebuke of this very weak candidate.

And it will be a chance for America to reflect what has happened to moderate Republicans in America. Moderates are forced to betray their own beliefs and wrap themselves in party orthodoxy or they’re forced out. Either way, this GOP is hungry, and it’s slightly edifying to watch them eat their own.

***
Update 6:50 PM

Everyone follows @PourMeCoffee, right?

***
Update 7:18 PM

When you have an appearance with Kid Rock and Kid Rock is the one who ends up losing credibility, things are not working out for you.

***
Update 7:37 PM

I don’t think anyone thinks Rick Santorum will come out of tonight smelling like roses. It’s important to point out that he was against Democrats voting in Republican primaries before he wasn’t.

***

Update 7:53

Detroit Free Press is reporting low turn out across Michigan. I can’t see how this is good news for Romney or the Republican Party. Romney’s argument makes a lot more sense if he provided even a glimmer of a hope of beating the President here. And there is no glimmer.

***

Update 7:59

And to speak about something actually presidential

Did you see this? It’s led to gratuitous use of the “barn-burner.”

***
Update 8:21 PM

@DanaHoule tells me that 4 counties in the UP are on Central Time. So we want know anything until 9 Eastern. I’ll be back in about 25 minutes to finish this up.  Gonna break the diet and eat some ice cream.

***
Update 8:51 PM

So Santorum is up 2-3% with 12% of Michigan reporting. I think it’s safe to say there will be no bailout for Mitt Romney from Michigan.

***
Update 9:00 PM

Arizona for Romney, easily.

Michigan is too close to call. Iowa redux.

***
Update 9:04 PM

So the “real” exit polls are showing Romney winning his native state, which he won by 9% in 2008, by 2-3%.

***
Update 9:18 PM

Here’s how strange this primary is: Rick Santorum is now suffering from inflated expectations. All day long people were feeling as if he were going to win Michigan. Now it seems he’ll lose by a few percent.

I’ve never doubted that Mitt Romney is going to be the nominee. The question is: how damaged will he be? And the answer is: everywhere it matters, Romney is weaker than he was in 2008.

That’s all I have for tonight.

Good job, Michigan. But not a great job.

***
Update 9:59 PM

So Michigan is clearly going for Mitt by 3-6%. Karl Rove predicts the high end. He also predicted the Iraq war would pay for itself.

Eclectablog points of that Romney had to outspend Santorum 2:1 to barely win. Get those checkbooks out, Kochs. You’ve got an expensive candidate to finance.

***
Update 5:50 AM

Clearly I was giddy last night. My assessment that Mitt is weaker than 2008 in incorrect. He is slightly stronger. And he hasn’t had to self-finance, yet.

In Mitt’s speech last night, he asked his supporters for money. It’s rich, isn’t it?

Sorry, Mitt. My money is in a blind trust that tends not to want to invest in America until I’m definitely running for President.

Breathe deep and think about what you are doing

Tomorrow is the Michigan primary. A significant number of Dem-leaning pundits and commentators are encouraging Democrats to cross over and vote for Rick Santorum in the GOP primary.

You can do that. It’s totally legal. I’m asking you not to.

I’ve already gone on record as to why I think this is a truly bad idea. Stupid. Misguided. Ill-informed. All that.

Are you really going to walk into your local voting location, declare yourself a Republican and then vote for the guy you hate the most? That’s democracy to you?

Don’t do it.

Rick Santorum literally thinks making college accessible to all American kids is snobby and elitist.

My good friend and Angry Black Lady co-blogger Nicholas Wilbur has a GREAT piece up today titled “Michigan Dems, Don’t Play Dirty Politics”. Here’s a snippet but I encourage you to read the whole thing before you pull the trigger on voting for Rick Santorum as Republican tomorrow.

Republicans are already disenchanted by their options. Voter turnout in almost every primary state thus far has been well below expectations. There is no clear frontrunner in the race, and it is unlikely that a nominee will be chosen before the party’s convention in August. More importantly, Obama is a campaign juggernaut who will slaughter whomever challenges him in November.Moulitsas admits the Republican primary race is a “clown show” already. The Michigan race is expected to be “razor thin” even without Democrats “meddling” in it, and “anything less than a resounding performance by Romney here would taint the achievement”; a “resounding performance” by Romney is unlikely given the small margin of victory pollsters are projecting, so the race will be deflating for his candidacy whether he wins or not. How much he wins by won’t matter. And furthermore, Santorum very well may pull off the Michigan primary without the help of Democrats.

All of that is to say, Why interfere at all? [...]

There are times when you have to get down in the mud with the elephants. But when you do, you get dirty. And when you’re drenched in the same filth as your opponent, you become indistinguishable, politically and morally, from the foe you’re trying to defeat.

The problem is, fighting fire with fire only creates a bigger fire. And our democratic process is the burn victim.

Read the whole thing HERE.

You can follow the misguided guidance of Markos Moulitsas who sent out an email today titled “This will sound strange” that ended with the statement “So please, head to your usual polling place on Tuesday, February 28, and vote for Rick Santorum. It might be painful, but you will be doing both President Obama, the Democratic Party and the entire country a big favor.”

If you find it painful and strange, you might wish to ask why you feel that way.

You can follow the truly bad advice of Michigan Democratic consultant Joe DiSano who wrote a piece for Huffington Post titled “Michigan Dems, Independents Should Vote for Santorum in Michigan Primary”.

When he says, “I am not concerned with the ethical or moral implications of voting in the GOP primary and neither should you be”, you might want to ask WHY you shouldn’t be concerned with the ethical or moral implications of this choice.

Primaries are for parties to choose their candidates. Choosing to interfere with that is an intentional decision to interfere with the democratic process. Period. Justify it however you want, you are still interfering with the democratic process if you are a Democrat and choose to vote in the Republican primary for Rick Santorum.

The Republican party is a completely cluster-fucked mess of disorganization at the moment. Why on EARTH would you give them something to coalesce around NOW???

Don’t do it. If you don’t have a non-presidential issue or race on your ballot tomorrow, stay home. You’ll have your chance to vote for President Obama at your May caucus when it will actually mean something. If you DO have ballot issues or races to vote on as a Democrat, by all means, get thee to the polls.

Because THAT is what democracy looks like.