Only one state - Mississippi - explicitly bars same-sex adoption by statute. Miss. Code Sec. 93-17-3(b). Utah is frequently cited as another state that bars same-sex adoption, but that prohibition applies to any cohabitation relationship involving persons of any gender who are not married.  And, regardless, the point Gov. Romney is making is that this is a state issue, which is what he thinks it should be.

We have good news and bad news for you, Mitt Romney.

The bad news: You're not going to win the auto bailout argument. The good news: Despite your alarming indifference to that reality, you're better positioned than many pundits realize to steal Michigan's coveted 16 electoral votes away from President Obama this November.

It won't be easy. As a matter of fact, you'll probably have to run a near-perfect campaign if you hope to paint your home state red for the first time in a presidential election since 1988. But it's possible, considering your connections to the state, your organization on the ground and your moderate profile. Yes, it's possible, but only on one condition: Stop talking about the damn auto bailout.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott didn't endorse Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney until last month, after rival Rick Santorum dropped out. It was a tardy and lackluster show of support. "Mitt Romney will be our party's nominee, and it is critical that all Republicans coalesce," Scott said in a written statement, as if forced to acknowledge the inevitable, like it or not. The two former corporate executives, who could probably spend all day swapping success stories, have never campaigned together.

Still, if Democrats have their way, voters will see Romney and Scott as the great bromance of the 2012 election. That is, when President Obama's party is not trying to yoke Romney to two other tightfisted, unpopular governors--John Kasich of Ohio and Scott Walker of Wisconsin--in an effort to drag down the GOP nominee in pivotal states.

Polling conducted by one influential Democratic group found that 11 percent more Florida voters said they had "very major doubts" about Romney when he was linked to Scott. The poll, which was not released publicly, tested a negative policy message against Romney, then tested it again while also tying the message to Scott.

Voters are not necessarily biased against a candidate who belongs to the party of a politician they don't like, but Democrats assert that the strategy can be effective if there is obvious common ground.

Click here for full story, only available to subscribers.

Vice President Joe Biden's speech in Iowa on Wednesday was more than a full-throated attack on Republican Mitt Romney's economic policies. It was also the latest indication that the Obama campaign intends to champion its manufacturing policies in battleground states in the Midwest, inviting voters, as Biden did Wednesday, to compare the president's program to what it casts as the likely Republican nominee's downplaying of manufacturing as a key part of America's economic recovery.

Biden pointedly quoted the Wall Street Journal, a newspaper rarely cited by Democrats, as stating, "Romney appeared to scoff, first in Detroit, then in Florida, at the notion of manufacturing as a job engine for the future." That, Biden said, sets up what he called the "choice in this election" between "our philosophy that believes manufacturing is central to our economy, and their philosophy that scoffs at it."

When Mitt Romney enthusiastically embraced the idea of Puerto Rican statehood during January's Hispanic Leadership Conference, there was no shortage of theories affixed to Romney's motives. Was he trying to curry favor with Hispanics in the final days before Florida's critical primary election? Was he working to secure the endorsement of Puerto Rico Gov. Luis Fortuño, a rising young star in the Republican Party? Or was he simply extending an olive branch to the Latino community, a key demographic that has turned sharply away from Republicans in recent elections?

Viable theories all, but they overlook a simpler reality: Puerto Rico awards 23 delegates to the Republican National Convention, and the U.S. territory's March 18 primary election is the month's only winner-take-all contest.

Politics is chess, not checkers. Whether working the campaign trail or whipping votes once elected, the politician who can plan multiple moves ahead of his opponent is always at an advantage. That principle has manifested itself throughout this year's presidential race: Romney's team gained an early edge by building a long-term strategy around new RNC rules mandating proportionate delegate allocation; and since then, in every phase of his state-to-state primary campaign -- from organizing on the ground, to scheduling visits, to securing high-profile endorsements, to purchasing air time -- Romney has remained several steps ahead of his competitors by executing that strategy.

There is a way to think about the up-and-down GOP nomination fight that at least partially explains its volatility and the seemingly endless array of short-lived challengers to front-runner Mitt Romney as well as Romney's surprising resilience.

It's been the battle between the rationals and the notionals.

Three senior administration officials just laughed when asked if they had decided to schedule a President Obama press conference for Tuesday to insert the White House into a busy news day that otherwise was guaranteed to be dominated by Republicans fighting for delegates in ten states. Noting - accurately - that reporters had been lobbying for an Obama press conference, they insisted that the scheduling just worked well for Tuesday.

Regardless of the motivation, putting the president out for a long give-and-take that will be carried live on multiple television channels does serve the purpose of pushing the Republicans aside, if only for an hour. This comes only a week after the White House worked to have the president break through the Republican news focus last Tuesday as well, with a fiery campaign-style speech to a gathering of United Auto Workers at the same time Republican voters were going to the polls in Michigan.

He was born there. He grew up there. His siblings still live there. His father was governor. He won the state four years ago. His campaign infrastructure from 2008 was resurrected and revamped. His name recognition is high there. He's long been considered the frontrunner, both nationally and in the state. His campaign vastly outspent his competitors there. He had endorsements from the current governor and most of the congressional delegation. And his childhood hero was Al Kaline.

So why are we surprised that Mitt Romney won Michigan?

I'm not sure. But here's a theory: In attempting to bring clarity to a historically chaotic nominating process, there is a temptation to base our expectations on the day-to-day agitations of polling, headlines and cable news rather than trusting what we know in our head and what we feel in our gut. We find ourselves all too often missing the forest for the trees -- possibly because they're just the right height.

Winning means different things to different people, a fact that should not escape even the most incidental of political observers tonight as Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum take the stage to spin the results of Michigan's hotly-contested Republican primary election.

Much has been made of the potential ramifications of a Santorum "victory" over Romney in his home state, but Michigan's delegate apportionment process muddles the definitions of winning and losing. The state will award a total of 30 delegates tonight: two delegates to the winner of each of the state's 14 congressional districts, and two additional delegates to the winner of the Wolverine State's popular vote.

With that math in mind, there are two ways Santorum can claim "victory" over Romney in Michigan:

A new poll in Tennessee underscores the stakes for Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum in tomorrow's Michigan primary.

Like the Quinnipiac University Ohio survey released on Monday, the Vanderbilt Poll showed Santorum marshaling powerful support in Tennessee from the key elements in the GOP's populist wing- particularly tea party supporters and evangelical Christians, while remaining competitive with (or even leading) Romney among more managerial voters. Tennessee, along with Oklahoma and Georgia, loom as, in effect, the top second-tier of contests on March 6, behind Ohio, which is likely to hold center stage on that day. With polls in the GOP race gyrating wildly all year, the results in Michigan are likely to cast a long shadow over those contests.

The Tennessee survey, conducted from February 16 to 22 for Vanderbilt University's Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, showed Santorum leading Romney overall by a resounding 38 percent to 20 percent, with Ron Paul (15 percent) and Newt Gingrich (13 percent) lagging. Santorum's lead is grounded in big advantages among groups at the GOP's ideological vanguard. Three-fourths of Tennessee voters in the survey identified as born-again Christians and they prefer Santorum over Romney by 39 percent to 15 percent. Among the nearly two-thirds of likely primary voters who say they support the tea party's ideas, Santorum led Romney even more decisively-43 percent to 13 percent.

For more than a year, Rick Santorum has labored to cast himself as an outsider ready to go to Washington to challenge business as usual, which makes it all the more puzzling why he decided to use the crucial debate in Mesa to sound like the ultimate Washington insider. Over and over again, Santorum came off as a defender of Congress, a champion of earmarks and a master of legislative minutiae.

Legislative ratings, Title X, Title XX, earmarks, voting for things you opposed - these are the things that the former Pennsylvania senator talked about. At one point, his tortured explanation prompted Mitt Romney to admit -- or taunt -- he hadn't understood what Santorum was talking about. At other points, his inside-Washington talk and use of legislative jargon set him up for jabs and jibes from Rep. Ron Paul.

It could not have been what Santorum wanted to do in what could be the final Republican debate, the first one held since Santorum surged into the lead in many polls. Perhaps his worst moment was his attempt to explain why he voted for No Child Left Behind even though he opposed it. There were echoes of John Kerry's "I voted for it before I voted against it" only without Kerry's coherence. He said he voted for it because President George W. Bush asked him to do so. "I have to admit I voted for that. It was against the principles I believed in. But, you know, when you're part of the team sometimes you take one for the team, for the leader. And I made a mistake." Not a great answer when you're running to be a leader of a party deeply suspicious of Washington's ways.

 Forget the polls. You don't need to monitor the public opinion polls to track which Republican presidential candidate is surging. All you need to do is see which rival Texas Rep. Ron Paul is attacking - and how sarcastically he gets doing it. In the earlier debates, Paul went after Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Wednesday night, in Mesa, it was Rick Santorum's turn in Paul's sights.

The first question from CNN moderator John King was why Paul is calling Santorum a fake in his television commercials. With the bluntness that has gained him a cult-like following, the veteran congressman man responded, "Because he's a fake."

Mitt Romney has finally acknowledged what seemed painfully obvious to so many three years ago: The most politically perilous aspect of his 2008 op-ed piece in the New York Times wasn't its content, but its headline, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt."

Romney has suffered widespread Democratic derision for his well-known opposition to the bailout of Chrysler and General Motors, a position shared by many fellow conservatives. And while the crux of his argument -- that the automakers could have obtained private financing for a managed bankruptcy -- has been dismissed as everything from dishonest to fantastical, the brunt of the backlash against Romney centers around his seemingly callous dismissal of the city where he was born.

After three-plus years of reflection -- interrupted by constant criticism from his political opponents -- Romney now recognizes the headline is hurting his campaign. The Republican presidential hopeful told the Detroit Free Press editorial board on Thursday that, if given the chance to go back to December 2008 and re-title his opinion piece, he would change the headline to "How to Save Detroit."

President Obama has been quite insistent that he is not ready to engage the Republican presidential candidates until the GOP settles on its nominee. "Once they narrow it down to one of two, I'll start paying attention," he said several times. And in his Super Bowl interview with NBC's Matt Lauer, he insisted he will hold his comments "until the Republicans decide who their nominee is going to be." He added, "I think most people are thinking the election is nine months away; the last thing we need is to start it right now when the other side hasn't determined its nominee."

But it's not too early to call attention to the success of one of his policies that was opposed by the leading Republican candidate. And as the good news keeps rolling in from the U.S. auto industry, the president has not been at all bashful about calling attention to what the White House sees as the politically unpalatable position taken on U.S. automakers by that Republican candidate - even if the president is always careful not to mention him by name.

Under fire from Republicans for a promise he won't be keeping about cutting the deficit, President Obama might consider emulating Franklin D. Roosevelt, who found himself in a very similar bind eight decades ago. In October 1932, Roosevelt told a crowd in Pittsburgh that he would balance the budget and cut government spending by 25 percent in his first term. But when he got in office, the only way to combat the Depression was to increase spending.

It was the right course for governing. But it presented Roosevelt with a real political challenge when he was running for a second term and returning to Pennsylvania. He asked speechwriter Sam Rosenman how to handle questions about the broken promise.

Much has been written in the past 48 hours regarding Rick Santorum's chance to score a major upset victory over Mitt Romney in Michigan, Romney's home state, where Santorum's manufacturing message and blue collar appeal are likely to resonate with voters ahead of the state's Feb. 28 primary.

On Tuesday, Romney responded with an unambiguous message: You're not the only one with roots in the Rust Belt.

In today's Detroit News, Romney used an op-ed -- written with the primary purpose of defending his opposition to the auto bailouts -- to reintroduce himself: "I am a son of Detroit. I was born in Harper Hospital and lived in the city until my family moved to Oakland County. I grew up drinking Vernors and watching ballgames at Michigan & Trumbull. Cars got in my bones early. And not just any cars, American cars."

The national Pew Research Center poll released Monday confirms that President Obama, at least for now, is reassembling the coalition that powered him to his 2008 victory.

The Pew survey, closely tracking last week's ABC News/Washington Post poll, shows that in a potential general election match-up against Mitt Romney, Obama's support among many of the electorate's key groups has converged with his 2008 showing against John McCain. In almost all cases, that represents gains for Obama since polls from last year.

As the Republican presidential race continues its unexpected twists and turns, Arizona has suddenly emerged as a critical state in the fight for the GOP nomination. The Grand Canyon State, along with Michigan, will host presidential primary elections on Feb. 28, and represent a final opportunity for the Republican contenders to pick up delegates -- and perhaps more importantly, momentum -- heading into the March 6 Super Tuesday contests.

With so much at stake, the Arizona primary contest has suddenly been pinned under the media microscope, with observers obsessively opining over whether Rick Santorum can parlay his new-found momentum into another upset victory over Mitt Romney. There's only one problem: Santorum, and the rest of the Republican field, seem content to concede the state to Romney.

President Obama's about-face on soliciting donations under a Supreme Court ruling he denounced is another reminder that we're living in times not unlike Teddy Roosevelt's -- and that Obama is no TR.

This isn't the first time Obama has defied TR's legacy.

President Obama's ad-makers may have to pay royalties to Clint Eastwood after a remarkable two-minute Chrysler commercial that aired on the biggest of all stages - the Super Bowl - and gave a pretty good preview of what the president's reelection commercials might look like. At the very least, the ad and Eastwood's powerful narration make it much, much more difficult for Republican front-runner Mitt Romney to keep pushing his line that Washington should have let the automakers go into bankruptcy.

And don't think that Team Obama wasn't watching the Super Bowl along with millions of other Americans and immediately grasped the boost they could get from the commercial. White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer quickly tweeted "Saving the America auto industry: something Eminem and Clint Eastwood can agree on." Senior strategist David Axelrod tweeted "Powerful spot. Did Clint shoot that, or just narrate it?"  Former White House aide Bill Burton tweeted, "Clinton Eastwood #winning."

Of course, this isn't the first time Eastwood has been identified with cars -- he starred in Pink Cadillac in 1989 and Gran Torino in 2008. But those weren't in the Super Bowl with a bigger audience than probably saw both those movies combined.

RELATED: Chrysler Super Bowl Ad Removed From YouTube

With 30 second spots selling for $3.5 million, the commercial cost Chrysler an estimated $14 million and was kept under wraps by the automaker, which, with the help of the Obama administration, has come back from the dead after being counted out in 2009. And one can only guess what the automaker paid Eastwood. Whatever, it was worth it for it was a master stroke. The 81-year-old actor has told interviewers he has always voted Republican for president, though he has endorsed some Democrats in California and has praised libertarians.

The commercial itself was reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's "Morning in America" commercials, though with the famous Clint Eastwood tough guy touch. Shown shortly after Madonna's halftime performance, it began with the silhouette of Eastwood, walking in the dark and recognizable only for his gravelly voice. "It's halftime. Both teams are in their locker room discussing what they can do to win this game," he says. "It's halftime in America, too." With scenes of an iconic front porch and a city skyline," he continues, "People are out of work and they are hurting. They are all wondering what they are going to do to make a comeback. And we're all scared because this isn't a game."

With more every day scenes flashing on the screen, Eastwood adds, "The people in Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together. Now Motor City is fighting again." With the music punctuating his remarks, Eastwood goes on: "I've seen a lot of tough eras, a lot of downturns in my life. Times when we didn't understand each other. It seems that we've lost our heart at times. The fog of division, discord and blame, made it hard to see what lies ahead." As scenes of protesters give way to black and white photos of kids and firefighters, Eastwood builds, "But after those trials, we all rallied around what was right and acted as one. Because that's what we do. We find a way through tough times. If we can't find a way then we'll make one. All that matters now is what's ahead. How do we come from behind? How do we come together?

At this point, viewers see Eastwood in the light. "And how do we win? Detroit is showing us it can be done,. And what's true about them is true about all of us. This country can't be knocked out with one punch." To conclude, a close-up of Eastwood fills the screen. "We get right back up again and when we do the world is going to hear the roar of our engines. Yeah, its halftime America and our second half is about to begin."

All that was missing was him turning to Mitt Romney and challenging him to "make my day."

MIAMI -- When Newt Gingrich pounded Mitt Romney's immigration policy as inhumane and unrealistic at last Thursday night's GOP debate, the sound of silence was deafening at the debate-watching party of a prominent Republican Hispanic group here.

After a day in which he was blind-sided by multiple attacks and suggestions that he was never quite the Reagan disciple he has intimated during the campaign, Newt Gingrich fired back hard in the Jacksonville debate, blaming rival Mitt Romney for the broadside.

"It's increasingly interesting to watch the Romney attack machine coordinate things," said the former Speaker. "All of a sudden today there are four different articles by four different people that show up" questioning his Reagan credentials.

Perhaps the most biting article was written by former Reagan assistant secretary of state Elliott Abrams, who said the young Gingrich "often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides and his policies to defeat Communism." He quoted Gingrich in 1985 calling Reagan's Cold War policies "pathetically incompetent."

He didn't start the fight, but he certainly seemed intent on finishing it.

With Mitt Romney's recently released tax returns serving as a major story this week, many expected the issue to surface during Thursday's debate, putting him on the defensive over what Newt Gingrich described as Romney's world of "Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts."

Shortly after Rick Santorum criticized the continued questions about Gingrich's consulting work and Romney's personal wealth -- saying they are "distracting" voters from the "most important issues" -- CNN's Wolf Blitzer tossed a softball at Gingrich, asking him to expand on his criticism of Romney's lavish lifestyle.

Just after offering a robust defense of his hard-line immigration policy, Mitt Romney stepped in it when he claimed to have not seen his own ad attacking Newt Gingrich.

The ad airing on Spanish-language radio in Miami says Gingrich referred to Spanish as a "ghetto'' language. PolitiFact called the ad "mostly true.

"I haven't seen the ad,'' Romney said. "Did he say that?"'

Even if he was telling the truth, Romney came across as disingenuous. That's not helpful for a candidate who frequently struggles to come across as authentic. As CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer helpfully reminded the audience, at the end of the ad, Romney says, "I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this ad.''

As Rick Perry would say: "Oops.''

Minutes later, the Gingrich campaign was happy to e-mail blast a copy of the ad so anyone could hear Romney's disclaimer -- which he recites in not-too-shabby Spanish.

Just a side note: Gingrich has apologized for the "ghetto'' remark but in the heat of the debate he insisted it was "taken totally out of context.''

Florida is a must-win state for Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. The race is tied. Debates matter. That makes tonight a must-win debate. 

If you want to know more about the sky-high stakes in the CNN debate at 8 p.m., read on:

After months of campaigning in which they rarely encountered Latinos, the Republican candidates are suddenly hunting for votes in the state with the third highest number of Hispanics. But in the Tampa debate, neither Mitt Romney nor Newt Gingrich backed down from their tough stands about the English language and immigration - even when confronted with what seems to many to be a little hypocrisy in their campaigns. Beth Reinhard of the National Journal noted that both candidates want to make English the official language and outlaw ballots being printed in Spanish. But Gingrich is sending out Florida press releases in Spanish and Romney is running some Spanish language advertising.

Both candidates insisted there is nothing hypocritical about this. "I think campaigning, historically, you've always been willing to go to people on their terms and in their culture, whether it is Greek Independence Day or something you did for the Irish on St. Patrick's Day," said Gingrich. "I'm perfectly happy to have a lot of support in the Latino community." But he said that "it is essential to have a central language" to unify the country. He added, "Look, English is the language of this nation. People need to learn English."

The only dissenting voice was Ron Paul who favors English as the national language but chided his rivals for trying to impose their policy on the states. "Our system really gives us a way to be more generous," he said. "Because if Florida wanted to have some ballots in Spanish, I certainly wouldn't support a federal law that prohibited Florida" from having them. The others, he said, were "dictating one answer for all states."

The imperative of the issue is clear from the numbers. In the three states where the candidates have spent most of their time campaigning, there is a grand total of only 371,000 Latinos - 37,000 in New Hampshire, 130,000 in Iowa and 204,000 in South Carolina, according to the Pew Hispanic Center numbers for 2009. In Florida, there are 3.9 million. Hispanics in the other three states are either three or four percent; in Florida, they are 22 percent of the population.

"Angry Newt" took the night off. In a striking role reversal, Newt Gingrich looked more like a firefly than a firebrand in a high-stakes debate Monday night, while rival Mitt Romney called the surging former House Speaker a disgraced, influence-peddling, Washington insider.

Somebody must have awakened the cool-and-nonchalant Romney out of his debate slumber and told him the GOP nomination was slipping away. Gingrich stunned the political world -- and frightened much of the GOP establishment -- with a landslide victory in South Carolina on Saturday night that erased Romney's lead in national and Florida polls.

It took less than a minute into the latest Republican presidential debate for longtime front-runner Mitt Romney to show what lesson he took from his surprisingly big defeat in South Carolina: Bare the teeth and go for the jugular of the man who beat him so solidly.

The attacks on former House speaker Newt Gingrich were almost non-stop. Before most viewers had a chance to settle in to watch NBC's broadcast, Romney had lashed Gingrich as a Washington "influence peddler," a disgraced speaker forced out of office, a failed political leader, a lobbyist and a traitor to the conservative cause.

Asked by moderator Brian Williams how he squared those attacks with his lament last week that he wanted to avoid personal criticisms of other Republicans, Romney adopted a tight smile and recalled his Saturday shellacking. "I learned something from that last contest in South Carolina," said Romney. "And that was I had incoming from all directions, was overwhelmed with a lot of the attacks. And I'm not going to sit back and get attacked day in and day out and without returning fire."

Gingrich was not bashful about fighting back, though he refused to get dragged into many of the specifics. He seemed more saddened than angry at the barrage from Romney. "He just went on and on and on," he said of Romney, adding that "he may have been a good financier. He's a terrible historian." Yet Gingrich, who really is a historian, offered up some questionable history himself.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich finished an astonishing comeback Saturday night to defeat front-runner Mitt Romney in South Carolina, plunging the Republican Party into a wrenching and potentially lengthy period of soul-searching: Can either of these jokers beat President Obama?

Mitt Romney employed some of the toughest rhetoric of his campaign in Thursday's South Carolina debate, ripping into President Obama as a job-destroying disaster who practices "crony capitalism," listens to labor "stooges," and so misunderstands capitalism that Romney will have to "stuff it down his throat" in the fall campaign.

And that was just in Romney's first response in a debate he clearly wanted to serve as a preview for how he'd go after Obama.

The GOP front-runner was also the first in the debate to attack the president for his decision this week to kill the Keystone pipeline. "Because he has to bow to the most extreme members of the environmental movement, he turned down the Keystone pipeline, which would bring energy and jobs to America," said Romney. "This president is the biggest impediment to job growth in this country. And we have to replace Barack Obama to get America working again."

Romney also raised the Obama administration's $535 million loan to Solyndra, the California solar company that went bankrupt last year, accusing the president of "practicing crony capitalism." He added, "He stacks the labor stooges on the NRB so they can say no to Boeing and take care of their friends in the labor movement."

Romney also turned an attack on his work for Bain Capital into another attack on Obama. "There's nothing wrong with profit," he said, adding that much of Bain's profits went to pension funds and charities and hired more people. "I'm going to stand and defend capitalists across this country. I know we're going to get it hard from President Obama. But we'll stuff it down his throat."

As Rick Perry ignominiously departs the presidential race and sheepishly returns to Texas, his oh-so-short campaign should serve as a humbling reminder to those who prognosticate about politics. For when Perry burst on the scene with an Aug. 13^th announcement in South Carolina that overshadowed the Iowa Straw Poll, no one foresaw that he would crash and burn only 159 days later, not even making it to the South Carolina primary.

The experts inside the Republican Party, political analysts and journalists were aware of potential pitfalls for Perry when he announced. But they were all more impressed by his executive experience in Austin, his ability to raise money, his influential backers and a jobs record he could highlight in an election that all expected would be dominated by the economy. Fueled by the high expectations and advance reviews, everything seemed to be falling into place. Only ten days after his announcement, Gallup reported "Perry Zooms to the Front of the Pack for 2012 GOP Nomination." He was beating second-place Mitt Romney by 12 points, 29 to 17 percent.

But the collapse was almost as quick and agonizingly inexorable. Accusing the head of the Federal Reserve of treason; calling Social Security "a Ponzi scheme"; aligning himself with the already-discredited birthers. And all that long before that "oops" moment or any of his other missteps in the many debates.

CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Mitt Romney is still waiting for his victory lap. Three different national surveys released Wednesday showed his overall support among Republicans at 33 percent or less -- hardly a stirring number after his feat of becoming the first Republican other than a sitting president to win both Iowa (at least until final results are announced Thursday) and New Hampshire under the modern primary calendar.

This morning's front-page headline in the State, one of South Carolina's leading papers, offers the bookend to National Journal's report on the movement toward Mitt Romney among business-oriented managerial Republicans. The headline reads: "S.C. Evangelicals Split, Frustrated."

Though evangelical Christians constituted a solid 60 percent majority of GOP primary voters in 2008, they "are divided among the faith-and-values trinity of the 2012 S.C. GOP primary, supporting Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry or Rick Santorum," writes reporter Adam Beam. Beam quotes Oran Smith, the executive director of the Palmetto Family Council, a leading local social conservative group: "I do sense frustration that there is not a single candidate that is being put up against Romney."

The Monmouth University survey released Tuesday - which showed Romney holding a double-digit advantage overall in South Carolina - quantifies the reason for Smith's frustration. It showed Romney attracting 29 percent among self-identified evangelicals - much better than his 11 percent with them in 2008, but not much more than the 27 percent John McCain won among them that year while amassing a narrow plurality win in the state. 

Four years after it was trendy in Democratic circles to liken Barack Obama to Franklin D. Roosevelt, it is safe to conclude that no one in the Obama re-election campaign will be borrowing FDR's "Happy Days are Here Again" as the theme song for 2012. Judging by recent speeches by the president and the first lady, a much likelier choice is the 2009 tune by He is We, "A Mess it Grows." Or maybe Avril Lavigne's "I'm With You," with its line, "'Cause nothing's going right. And everything's a mess."

Both Obamas left little doubt this week that things are still a mess even after three years of Obama rule. In a speech in Richmond, the first lady talked about "this mess." But she struck the right campaign theme, adding ,"Fortunately, over the past three years, we've worked very hard to dig ourselves out of this mess. Your president has worked very hard. And there's been a lot of wonderful progress made."

Then on Friday, the president pitched his government reorganization plan, even making rare use of a colorful chart. "I don't usually use props in my speeches," he acknowledged to laughter. But he wanted to show how complicated the current government makes things. "This is the system that small business owners face.  This is what they have to deal with if they want even the most basic answers to the most basic questions like how to export to a new country or whether they qualify for a loan."  Reflecting on the way, government treats businesses, he concluded, "It's a mess."

Somewhere, Lee Atwater is looking down on his home state in disbelief. This can't be what the father of the modern political attack had in mind: a Republican using the modern version of his diabolical invention against another Republican in South Carolina.

King of Bain: When Mitt Romney Came to Town, the newly-released destroy-the-front-runner vehicle from the super PAC run by rival Newt Gingrich's political operatives, blames Mitt Romney for everything from endlessly high unemployment, to the demise of American manufacturing to the destruction of the modern marriage. Visually, it's a montage of smoke-filled rooms, suitcases filled with cash and glinting corporate headquarters juxtaposed with images of cracked sidewalks in broken small towns and the haggard faces of former factory workers.

Over the top? Sure. A gross violation of Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment to Republicans to speak no ill of fellow Republicans? Hands down it is. Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul condemned the film as full of "blatant falsehoods and fabrications."

But the most important point about Gingrich's movie is that it works. And if it is unleashed full force on South Carolina voters as promised, it has the potential to do serious damage to Romney's lead in the state's Jan. 21 primary. That's how powerful it is.

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint swears neutrality in the Republican presidential primary, but anyone attempting to connect the DeMint dots this week would be excused for thinking he's effectively a silent surrogate for Mitt Romney.

That DeMint sounds like a Romney supporter isn't surprising: The conservative kingmaker and tea party icon endorsed Romney's maiden White House bid in 2008, and has consistently spoken positively about the former Massachusetts governor despite declining to endorse him again.

But a series of comments made by DeMint this week -- and actions taken by some of his closest confidants -- suggests he's unofficially advocating for Romney, if not outright supporting him.

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- The only five men standing between Mitt Romney and the Republican presidential nomination took a walk Saturday night -- attacking each other and the media as the former Massachusetts governor coasted toward the brass ring.

Mitt Romney may have pulled off the zinger of the night Saturday when, in answer to aggressive questioning by George Stephanopoulos about whether he would support a state ban on the sale of contraceptive drugs and devices, Romney insisted it was a non-issue and a "silly" one besides.

"States don't want to ban contraception," the former Massachusetts governor scolded, so why, he seemed to suggest, was Stephanopoulos wasting precious time at the Republican candidate debate in New Hampshire asking whether a state ban would be proper or not? And then this: "Contraception, it's working just fine. Just leave it alone," Romney zinged.

(VIDEO: See Romney's Zinger)

The audience whooped, and Stephanopoulos pursed his lips.

But more important for Romney than getting off a memorable line was his success landing a punch in the face of the liberal elite media, which Stephanopoulos -- the chiseled, articulate former top aide to President Bill Clinton -- embodied for the Republican audience at the 14th debate of the GOP primary contest.

Sure, House Speaker Newt Gingrich gets the credit for coming up with the bash-the-liberal-media strategy at several earlier debates, but Romney gets high marks for perfecting it.

MANCHESTER -- Before tonight's debate, expectations were running high for a giant pile-on, with frontrunner Mitt Romney at the bottom of the pile. Yet about a half hour into the debate, most of the backbiting has occurred over Romney's untouched head.

Mitt Romney's strong showing in Friday's CNN/Time/ORC South Carolina poll shows how narrow a window his opponents may have to derail him.

The poll offers a powerful reminder of how much each caucus and primary resets the dynamic in the states that follow -- the same way each shot in billiards reshapes the table. Compared to the most recent CNN/Time South Carolina survey in December, Romney posted gains across the board. Most important, the new poll shows him significantly advancing among the overlapping circles of evangelical Christians and tea party supporters who have resisted him in surveys all year -- and who reaffirmed that resistance in the Iowa caucuses, according to entrance polls.

If you're wondering what Mitt Romney's campaign strategy will be in South Carolina -- the state that has picked every Republican presidential nominee since 1980 -- look no further than the new TV ad he released in the Palmetto State today.

The 30-second spot features footage of Romney addressing the issue of right-to-work during a September visit to Boeing Co.'s factory in North Charleston. Until a recent settlement, the plant had been imperiled by legal action from the National Labor Relations Board, which alleged that Boeing built the plant in South Carolina -- a right-to-work state -- in response to ongoing internal labor disputes elsewhere.

Not coincidentally, Romney launched the labor-themed ad one day after President Obama announced three recess appointments to National Labor Relations Board -- a move that Romney described as "doling out favors to his big labor political allies and giving them a dangerous level of power over businesses and workers."

There must be something in the Iowa air that impels politicians to give off-key speeches after the votes have been cast in the caucuses. Eight years after Howard Dean committed political suicide by screaming out the names of states and four years after Hillary Clinton put so many oldsters on stage that she looked like she was taping an AARP commercial, the Republican candidates Tuesday night gave us so many fresh memories to cherish.

There was Ron Paul declaring, "I'm waiting for the day when we can say we're all Austrians now." The Texas congressman was referring to the Austrian school of economics and his favorite economist, Freidrich von Hayek. But television viewers could be excused if they wondered whether the rally would break into a rousing singing of "Edelweiss." And Paul wasn't finished with the strangeness. In a first in modern American politics, he welcomed to the stage an active-duty soldier wearing his camouflage uniform and critical of American foreign policy.

Corporal Jesse Thorsen, of West Des Moines, is only 28 years old so perhaps he could be excused for forgetting the Defense Department regulation hammered into all members of the Armed Forces that they may not "participate in partisan political... rallies" and "cannot appear at any kind of political forum in uniform." But Paul, himself a veteran, should have known better than to put Thorsen in a position where he could be disciplined by the Army.

A lighter - but also odd - touch was in Rep. Michele Bachmann's valedictory after her sixth place finish. She praised her husband, Marcus, but drew a wince from him when she disclosed that on the day before the caucuses "he was out buying doggie sunglasses for our dog Boomer."

Iowa voters logging onto the Des Moines Register website this morning were confronted with a headline that seemed improbable mere months ago: "Mitt Romney: 'We're going to win this thing'"

It's quite the ironic twist of fate that a candidate whose campaign worked obsessively in recent months to lower expectations in Iowa -- and succeeded in doing so -- would awake on caucus day to a Joe Namath-esque prediction in the state's largest newspaper.

Romney's approach to Iowa this cycle has, in many ways, redefined the political art of "expectation setting." After investing unrivaled time and resources into winning Iowa in 2008 -- only to suffer a crippling loss to Mike Huckabee -- the Romney campaign was determined to proceed with caution the second time around. From the outset, they worked feverishly to reduce Romney's footprint in Iowa, knowing another loss there could hurt Romney only if it appeared he truly was invested in winning the state.