Republican Endorsements? Romney Leads But The Party Has Not Decided

Data - facts, so rare in the blogosphere and cable TV. Mark Blumenthal (Huff Post) has them. He demonstrates the extent of the standoffishness seen by Republican party leaders in the pre-primary presidential race.

Of course we all know it's Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. (I predicted Romney with confidence a couple of months back.) So why aren't the party's big elected names jumping on one bandwagon or the other? They've got time, I guess, but why not choose a horse now when it might count for something?

Surely they know that Herman Cain - the flavor of the week - isn't going to be their candidate. Must be that he's a Tea Party favorite, so no gain in going after him. Michele Bachmann - the eyes have it. Newt - he's history. Santorum - not a prayer. Jon Huntsman - punished for rationality.

They'll jump on board - after they are sure they are making a safe choice. Maybe after a couple of debate implosions by Rick Perry, or Herman Cain's pizza to get overcooked, or Michelle Bachmann's brain to completely fry.

My guess is they want to appease - for lack of a better term- Rush Limbaugh. They've got time. They'll get on board as the train leaves the station.

Republican Endorsements? Romney Leads But The Party Has Not Decided:

by Mark Blumenthal

"...an analysis by the Huffington Post shows that the current rate of endorsements for all candidates, Romney included, remains behind the pace of the last five contested Republican nominations. Christie's nomination may serve as an important signal to Republican insiders, but by the yardstick of modern campaigns, the Republican party establishment is far from a consensus. Many of the major officeholders that traditionally endorse a presidential candidate are still on the sidelines."

'via Blog this'