Well, Romney was only eight votes from getting Rick-rolled. (Sorry. Couldn't resist. Don't say I didn't warn you!). And I heard some punditry that Romney actually lost against his 2008 Iowa vote total by an even less whopping six votes! That does not bode well for the Republican Party to take back the White House.
The best part about being an unpaid pundit is that I can't get fired. Actually, I didn't do that badly with my predictions. I aced Bachmann quitting. And Perry is next, he just hasn't figured it out yet. And I said the winner would win it by a squeaker, I just had the top three all jumbled.
I am glad to see the Gingrich bubble burst (as we saw coming) even if "angry newt" comes out now. It's nice to see him go after a fellow Republican rather than some disfavored ethnic or religious group. (Hmm, good thing he's a newt rather than a salamander).
And I'm pleased to see Ron Paul will be in it as long as he can to promote his unique viewpoint, particularly on anti-war issues, but he is not a serious threat for the nomination as Santorum overtook his spike. In fact it looks like the peaking and fading of the anti-Romneys is speeding up. Within the past month, we've seen Newt spike, then Ron Paul, and then, luckiest of all, Santorum just in time for the Iowa Caucus. If only Huntsman could get a turn.
I'm trying not to go too sour on Romney too soon. I do think he's second best in the field after Huntsman. Well, mainly because all the others are so bad. But, boy! is that guy platitudinous! I was interested in the speeches of the various candidates last night. Then Romney came on and gave a version of his stump speech including his recitation of "America the Beautiful" with commentary. Is that really necessary?