Mitt Romney measured on prospects for Iowa win

Hours before joining his rivals in Iowa, where he plans to launch a three-day bus tour, Mitt Romney made two quick stops in New Hampshire seeking to lock down his support in this critical state before turning his attention to the Jan. 3 caucuses.

With the new Boston Globe/University of New Hampshire poll showing the former Massachusetts governor holding on to a comfortable double-digit lead in the Granite State, Romney stopped at two tiny venues in Londonderry and Portsmouth where his campaign packed in the crowds to capacity. Romney, who has waged an under-the-radar campaign in Iowa, was careful to downplay his potential for a victory in that state.

“I don’t have any expectations to set for you; I don’t really jump into the expectations game,” Romney said after speaking to more than 100 supporters at the tiny Coach Stop in Londonderry. But asked about his second-place finish in Iowa in 2008, Romney said “expectations” were “very different this time.”

“Of course you want to do well in every state; you’d like to win every state. But that’s not going to happen. I’m hoping to do well enough to get the 1,150 delegates,” he said. “A couple of weeks ago I was a distant third in Iowa, and you just don’t know what’s going to happen in this process.”

A recent poll in Iowa by American Research Group showed Romney clustered with Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich atop the field.

As he did last week, Romney kept his focus on President Obama rather than his GOP rivals during a brief speech and a question-answer session with voters. He demurred when given the chance to criticize Gingrich’s plan for dealing with illegal immigrants – choosing instead to describe his own plan. Without mentioning Gingrich by name, he took issue with the former House speaker’s provocative statements about how he would rein in judges. (Gingrich has threatened to subpoena judges and force them to testify before Congress to explain their rulings).

“The best thing I can do to curtail extreme rulings is to appoint members of the Supreme Court that overturn extreme rulings,” Romney said, adding that he would appoint judges and justices who “strictly follow the Constitution.”

“What I don’t want is to say, ‘We’re going to create a supreme branch of the government known as the Congress--and Congress is going to subpoena judges to come in and explain their rulings--or potentially remove justices.’ ”

That sort of policy, he said, would turn Congress into a “super branch” of government. “We have a balance of power constitutionally. I don’t want one branch, Congress, or even the president to assume power above the other branches. And by the way, if I wanted that – recognize that someday it’s possible that there would be a Democrat president or Democrat Congress – and if that were to happen, then they might go through and take out all the rulings that they didn’t like. That’s not something I would do.”

“I believe the right thing to do is to appoint people of capacity, wisdom and judgment to the Supreme Court who will follow the Constitution, and if I’m president I will do just that,” he said.

On his way out the door, Romney was asked by a reporter whether Gingrich was “getting desperate.” After a pause, he offered a comment about Gingrich’s recent failure to qualify for the ballot in Virginia.

“Obviously the Virginia setting was not the best hour of his campaign,” he said.

maeve.reston@latimes.com