Presidential Primaries 2012

IMST said:
I still can't imagine Romney getting nominated by this party between "Mormon" and "Romneycare funded abortions". And yet none of these other idiots seem to be willing to be palatable for more than a week at a time.
Click to expand...

It makes you wonder if guys like Mitch Daniels of Indiana realize they're missing out on a once in a lifetime opportunity. The front runner has all kinds of issues within the party, the other major contenders just seem to be the loon of the week club and the incumbent Democrat is vulnerable and could be beaten by a solid opponent.
 
IMST said:
I still can't imagine Romney getting nominated by this party between "Mormon" and "Romneycare funded abortions". And yet none of these other idiots seem to be willing to be palatable for more than a week at a time.
Click to expand...
Here's my semi-conspiracy theorist take. Romney was the biggest remaining fish left from 2008 who was running. He's also a relative moderate which is antithetical to the party right now.

So, he immediately has frontrunner status due to his notoriety, but they'd kick him to the curb if they could due to his moderate stances. It's a win-win for the Republicans. If they win in 2012, Romney will be afraid of his own party and will do whatever the fringe wants him to do. If they lose in 2012, they never have to worry about moderate Romney again.

Christie was smart enough to wait for another election that he has a better chance of winning. Let's face it, Obama is still a fairly strong candidate given how bad the economy has been.

Romney is just the best of the worst.
 
willhaven said:
Here's my semi-conspiracy theorist take. Romney was the biggest remaining fish left from 2008 who was running. He's also a relative moderate which is antithetical to the party right now.

So, he immediately has frontrunner status due to his notoriety, but they'd kick him to the curb if they could due to his moderate stances. It's a win-win for the Republicans. If they win in 2012, Romney will be afraid of his own party and will do whatever the fringe wants him to do. If they lose in 2012, they never have to worry about moderate Romney again.

Christie was smart enough to wait for another election that he has a better chance of winning. Let's face it, Obama is still a fairly strong candidate given how bad the economy has been.

Romney is just the best of the worst.
Click to expand...

A "conspiracy" among millions of rank-and-file Republican voters?
 
M. Bachmann's badly listing tramp steamer of a campaign is taking on more water. Her entire New Hampshire staff just dove overboard. Maybe they'll look for work with the about to be tumbling out of the race H. Cain, newly revealed as a pro-choice (or pro-confusion) candidate.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66555.html
 
IMST said:
I still can't imagine Romney getting nominated by this party between "Mormon" and "Romneycare funded abortions". And yet none of these other idiots seem to be willing to be palatable for more than a week at a time.
Click to expand...
The thing is, the actual nomination will be done by voters, not by party talking heads and not by the media. You'd be surprised on non-crazy many Republicans are. They truly wish people like Bachmann and Santorum would stop embarassing them. Also, you are going to get a number of crossover votes. Like mine. I usually (but not always) vote Democratic in the general election, but I always vote in the Republican primary. That is because I know that in Texas (my part of it, anyway) whoever gets the Republican nomination is almost sure to win the general election. Therefore, any real choosing I get to do is done in the primaries.

There is one strategy that says "vote for the person most likely to lose", but I don't subscribe to that philosophy for the simple reason that if I'm wrong and they actually win, then we're totally screwed. So I usually vote for the least obnoxious Republicans, and in this election (assuming Huntsman is out of it) it is Romney.
 
Huntsman's reportedly banking everything on New Hampshire. The fringe will vote for Paul, and the mass bloc will vote for Romney, so the real question is whether Huntsman can out-poll Perry and Cain, I guess. If he doesn't, I say he pulls out - particularly if Paul sneaks in with his 10/12% of Freemen votes.

Hard to say how Cain's waffling on abortion is going to play out. I don't think it'll do a bit of harm in the GOP, which is his short-term goal, but he just made himself unelectable in the Election.
 
And now Perry is playing the birther card.

These clowns are so outlandishly out of touch with reality on a daily basis that it's barely newsworthy anymore.
 
varwoche said:
And now Perry is playing the birther card.

These clowns are so outlandishly out of touch with reality on a daily basis that it's barely newsworthy anymore.
Click to expand...

I'm reminded of the sports writer Bill Simmons' 'Tyson Zone,' (named after Mike Tyson). Basically, an athlete or celebrity has entered the zone when there is no news story, however outlandish, that you would refuse to believe it about that person. Charlie Sheen is a recent example.

We may need a political equivalent of the Tyson Zone for when there is no position so extreme, so stupid, or so crazy that Politician X couldn't conceivably adopt it. Call it the 'Bachmann Zone,' maybe.
 
Tricky said:
The thing is, the actual nomination will be done by voters, not by party talking heads and not by the media. You'd be surprised on non-crazy many Republicans are. They truly wish people like Bachmann and Santorum would stop embarassing them. Also, you are going to get a number of crossover votes. Like mine. I usually (but not always) vote Democratic in the general election, but I always vote in the Republican primary. That is because I know that in Texas (my part of it, anyway) whoever gets the Republican nomination is almost sure to win the general election. Therefore, any real choosing I get to do is done in the primaries.

There is one strategy that says "vote for the person most likely to lose", but I don't subscribe to that philosophy for the simple reason that if I'm wrong and they actually win, then we're totally screwed. So I usually vote for the least obnoxious Republicans, and in this election (assuming Huntsman is out of it) it is Romney.
Click to expand...
It has been Romney from day 1.
The ridiculous candidates only serve to make Romney appear more moderate, and allow him to present himself to the Independants as the candidate who wasn't afraid to "stand up against his own party"

It is a charade and a deliberate distraction, as these last 16 pages can attest.
 
I got the following, latest, average of Republican polls here:

Cain 25.9%
Romney 24.4
Perry 11.6
Gingrich 9.3
Paul 8.4
Bachman 4.4
Huntsman 1.9
Santorum 1.5
undecided 12.6

Were the candidates to go into the Republican convention with these standings, with the main contest being between Romney and Cain, we might expect Rerry, Bachman and Santorum to support Cain, giving him 43.4%. If Gingrich and Huntsman support Romney, he would have 35.6%. Paul's 8.4%, added to Romney's total, would give Romney 44.5%. Added to Cain's total, it would give Cain 51.8%, putting him over the top, despite what the undecided 12.6% choose to do. If Paul supports Romney and the undecideds split evenly between Romney and Cain, then Romney would squeak by with 50.3% to Cain's 49.7%. Either a Cain majority of 51.8% or a Romney majority of 50.3% could split the Republican party down the middle.

Of course, all of this is idle speculation. A few more primaries could put Romney way out in front, and the 12.6% undecided could go entirely his way at the convention. My feeling is that, upon further examination, Republicans will see Cain's 9 -9-9 plan as simplistic and will go with Romney.
 
TimCallahan said:
I got the following, latest, average of Republican polls here:

Cain 25.9%
Romney 24.4
Perry 11.6
Gingrich 9.3
Paul 8.4
Bachman 4.4
Huntsman 1.9
Santorum 1.5
undecided 12.6

Were the candidates to go into the Republican convention with these standings, with the main contest being between Romney and Cain, we might expect Rerry, Bachman and Santorum to support Cain, giving him 43.4%. If Gingrich and Huntsman support Romney, he would have 35.6%. Paul's 8.4%, added to Romney's total, would give Romney 44.5%. Added to Cain's total, it would give Cain 51.8%, putting him over the top, despite what the undecided 12.6% choose to do. If Paul supports Romney and the undecideds split evenly between Romney and Cain, then Romney would squeak by with 50.3% to Cain's 49.7%. Either a Cain majority of 51.8% or a Romney majority of 50.3% could split the Republican party down the middle.

Of course, all of this is idle speculation. A few more primaries could put Romney way out in front, and the 12.6% undecided could go entirely his way at the convention. My feeling is that, upon further examination, Republicans will see Cain's 9 -9-9 plan as simplistic and will go with Romney.
Click to expand...

I think Cain will start sliding in the next few weeks. It will be interesting to see if Perry can resurrect himself, he does have a ton of cash and if he can make a showing in Iowa he may be back. It's possible all the Bachmann supporters will move to him, since she's dead in the water.

Then it stands to see if anyone else will pop up out of the pack. Bachman, Santorum and Gingrich aren't going anywhere. Huntsman would take a miracle. This could actually be Ron Paul's most realistic chance at getting the nomination. He has a lot of money but he needs help though and for every rational idea he seems to have dozens of wacky ones.

I think it all depends on Romney stumbling. He basically hasn't stopped running for president since 2007 and it's given him a lot of time to get his ducks in order. If after the big primaries he doesn't have a commanding lead, I'll be surprised.
 
Distracted1 said:
It has been Romney from day 1.
The ridiculous candidates only serve to make Romney appear more moderate, and allow him to present himself to the Independants as the candidate who wasn't afraid to "

It is a charade and a deliberate distraction, as these last 16 pages can attest.
Click to expand...

Wrong on 2 counts -- It's not deliberate and Romney will never "stand up against his own party."
 
Puppycow said:
Koran-burning pastor dude Terry Jones is running for president.

Linky
Click to expand...

You call him Koran-burning pastor dude. I call him funny facial hair gets me noticed dude.

I like this item from his platform:
4. Deport all illegals. We must immediately begin the deportation of the 20 million illegal aliens living in our country. This would be an operation similar to what Eisenhower did to provide jobs for the soldiers who were coming home after the war.
Click to expand...

Eisenhower became president in Jan, 1953, 7 years after most GIs got home. This is Bachmann-level history knowledge.

In any case, he doesn't make the list until he files papers.
 
Top Cain aide has checkered past

What on earth were the Cain people smoking when they decided to make this joker the center of attention?

ATLANTA—He is the mustachioed man who takes a rebellious drag on a cigarette in the Herman Cain Internet ad gone viral.

Meet Mark Block, Cain's unorthodox campaign manager. Perhaps no one is as responsible for the Georgia businessman's meteoric rise in the presidential polls than Block, a Republican strategist and tea party leader who has left a trail questionable -- and possibly illegal -- campaign work behind him.

Block has been accused of voter suppression and was banned from running Wisconsin political campaigns for three years to settle accusations he coordinated a judge's re-election campaign with a special interest group.

Records show Block has faced foreclosure on two different homes, a tax warrant by the IRS and a lawsuit for an unpaid bill. He's been busted for drunken driving -- twice, according to court records.

On the presidential trail, some former Cain staffers say Block broke promises. Traditional GOP strategists have been scratching their heads at his renegade strategy to win the White House, all but ignoring some early states in favor a book tour and a swings through states without early primaries.
Click to expand...

I guess they want to keep pushing the "unorthodox" button to show that Cain isn't a polished politico.
 
One of the most laughable aspects of Palin's 2012 flirtation was the notion that she added something meaningfully different to the mix. But that equation has changed now that the upper tier crazies have flamed out one by one. (Prematurely declared for Cain, by a day or so.)
 
So. Apparently China's seeking Nuclear weapons.

This race has been so much fun!
 
varwoche said:
One of the most laughable aspects of Palin's 2012 flirtation was the notion that she added something meaningfully different to the mix. But that equation has changed now that the upper tier crazies have flamed out one by one. (Prematurely declared for Cain, by a day or so.)
Click to expand...

That reminds me. I haven't checked the old Intrade odds recently. Cain still leads in the most recent polls, but I don't think there's a poll out yet since the recent string of bad news for Cain.

Puppycow said:
Just wanted to get an update before the debate. Is this Cain's high-water mark? Is he past it already? We'll see.

Romney: 66.3% +7.3%
Perry: 14.3% -5.5%
Cain: 8.5% +0.3%
Huntsman: 3.0% -0.7%
Paul: 2.8% +1.4%
Gingrich: 2.5 +1.6%

Punters still seem to be piling on the Romney bandwagon, despite Cain's recent run of favorable poll numbers.
Click to expand...

Romney: 70.3% +4.0%
Perry: 11.1% -3.2%
Gingrich: 7.9 +5.1%
Cain: 5.3% -3.2%
Huntsman: 2.8% -0.2%
Paul: 2.5% -0.3%

Looks like Newt may have a turn as the next "flavor of the week" pretty soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom