• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Newt wins South Carolina

Hows this for irony?

To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine. (Cheers, applause.)
Click to expand...
South Carolina GOP CNN debate, Jan. 19, 2012. Transcript - Lynn Sweet


In reviving the presidential sex scandal just one week before Election Day, Gingrich and his chief strategists aimed to energize their most loyal supporters, whose enthusiasm appeared to be waning after House conservatives lost the budget fight and the Clinton scandal fell off the front pages.
Click to expand...
1998: Washingtonpost.com Special Report: Clinton Accused
 
With the Santorum retroactive win in Iowa does he have a chance?

Does the Mitt slapdown portend doom?

I do notice there are no evangelicals left.

Whatever's happening, it does cheer me to see pundits having to regroup around actual results.

Santorum vs. Obama. Go Rick. I really want a GOP nominee who wants to yank health care, pass a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and deport Mexicans who have homes, businesses and U.S. citizen kids. Because, more than the others it seems, he's stepped in it big-time and moderates will run like hell from this guy. There are too many Latino voters, people who are either gay or support gay rights, people with pre-existing conditions, people who don't like abortion but don't want to outlaw it, etc.
 
Last edited:
Minoosh said:
With the Santorum retroactive win in Iowa does he have a chance?

Does the Mitt slapdown portend doom?

I do notice there are no evangelicals left.

Whatever's happening, it does cheer me to see pundits having to regroup around actual results.

Santorum vs. Obama. Go Rick. I really want a GOP nominee who wants to yank health care, pass a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and deport Mexicans who have homes, businesses and U.S. citizen kids. Because, more than the others it seems, he's stepped in it big-time and moderates will run like hell from this guy. There are too many Latino voters, people who are either gay or support gay rights, people with pre-existing conditions, people who don't like abortion but don't want to outlaw it, etc.
Click to expand...
Yep. It's breathtaking just how blind many on the right are. GWB figured it out as far as immigrants go. Trading on xenophobia and homophobia were once potent GOP staples. Fortunately reason is hard to keep down forever.

It's a bit scary to think of Santorum being a general election away from president but his chance of winning the GE is almost nil. Thank goodness we have turned a corner and religious bigotry is waning.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/05/most-republicans-support-recognition.html
 
mortimer said:
You left out how the Jews controlled the primary.
Click to expand...

I'd have added that in for him, but I'm too busy pulling other strings from my Jerusalem bedroom-office.

Anybody want to see another cruise line accident? I'm taking suggestions.
 
I just read an article that mentioned one of the reasons he won SC is because of Tea Party support. What do they see in him--I thought they were against Washington insiders? Anyone have any ideas?
 
jimtron said:
I just read an article that mentioned one of the reasons he won SC is because of Tea Party support. What do they see in him--I thought they were against Washington insiders? Anyone have any ideas?
Click to expand...

1) He's not Obama
2) He's not Obama
3) ????
4) Profit!!!
5) He's not Mormon.
 
Vorticity said:
Huh.

Well, if this primary teaches us anything, it's that the ladies can't get enough of the Gingrich.

What has he got that I ain't got? :(:(
Click to expand...
Everyone's knowledge that he is a Compleat Anal Orifice aka An Arse Entire.
 
Newt the bogus "intellectual" shows that he doesn't know the meaning of the word "grandiose"--

From Thursday's debate:

Newt said:
You're right. I think grandiose thoughts. This is a grandiose country of big people doing big things, and we need leadership prepared to take on big projects.
Click to expand...

ETA: And the audience applauded that line, showing that they too are ignorant of the meaning of the word "grandiose"--or at least that they're entirely comfortable with equivocation.
 
Last edited:
Cain said:
Wonder how he did among women whose husbands left them.

Maybe it's just a rumor but I heard that Gingrich might quit the presidency halfway through if the White House gets cancer.
Click to expand...

Or MS. Really any major health issue.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
I still really think it's going to be Romney. He's just going to emerge as Mr25%.
Click to expand...
I think you're right. While this was a stunning upset for Newt, he doesn't have the resources or the people in place to keep it going for the whole primary season. Even if Santorum drops out (which I suspect he will do after Florida) and throws his support to Gingrich, it's still not enough to keep up with Romney's money machine.

My bet is that they will continue to hammer Mitt about his tax returns, the one point where Romney has visibly stumbled. The problem is (for the GOP) that this plays right into the hands of the Democrats.
 
Tricky said:
My bet is that they will continue to hammer Mitt about his tax returns, the one point where Romney has visibly stumbled. The problem is (for the GOP) that this plays right into the hands of the Democrats.
Click to expand...

According to AP, the Romster is going to release his tax returns next week....

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Sunday that he will release his 2010 tax returns and 2011 estimates on Tuesday, acknowledging it was a mistake for his campaign not to have done so earlier.

Stung by a loss to Newt Gingrich in Saturday's South Carolina primary, the former Massachusetts governor and venture capitalist said it was "not a good week for me" and he cited all the time he had spent talk about his tax returns as his rivals pressed him to make them public.

After months of resistance, Romney had said last week that he would release tax information for 2011, but not until April, close to the tax filing deadline. That also was seen as a time, before the South Carolina race rattled his front-runner status, when the GOP might have been decided.

'I think we just made a mistake in holding off as long as we did. It just was a distraction. We want to get back to the real issues of the campaign: leadership, character, a vision for America, how to get jobs again in America and how to rein in the excessive scale of the federal government," Romney told "Fox News Sunday."

snip

During 2010 and the first nine months of 2011, the Romney family had at least $9.6 million in income, according to a financial disclosure form submitted in August.

Further focusing attention on his wealth was Romney's offhand remark to reporters that his income from paid speeches amounted to "not very much" money. In the August disclosure statement, he reported being paid $373,327.62 for such appearances for the 12 months ending last February, a sum that alone would him in the top 1 percent of U.S. taxpayers.

In addition, Romney owns investments worth between $7 million and $32 million in offshore-based holdings, which are often used legitimately by private equity firms to attract foreign investors. Such offshore accounts also can enable wealthy investors to defer paying U.S. taxes on some assets, according to tax experts.

An Associated Press examination of Romney's financial records identified at least six funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a small Caribbean island chain that has long been used as a base for international investments because of low tax rates and financial secrecy. Romney has acknowledged that some of his investments are based in the Caymans, but he has not identified all of the specific accounts and the amounts based there. There is no indication Romney uses the accounts to dodge any U.S. tax obligations.
Click to expand...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10053857

I think it's remarkable that the Republicans are making this an issue in their primary - rich men paying low tax (and wanting to keep paying low tax) are the self same constituent as the right-wing guys in the media and those writing the big donation cheques....
 
Last edited:
andyandy said:
According to AP, the Romster is going to release his tax returns next week....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10053857

I think it's remarkable that the Republicans are making this an issue in their primary - rich men paying low tax (and wanting to keep paying low tax) are the self same constituent as the right-wing guys in the media and those writing the big donation cheques....
Click to expand...
It is bizarre situation as I do not know what is dictating the results.

Is it economic?
Romney is, on the books, a poster child for the type of economic policies that republicans support. (e.g., Low taxes on "job creators") Yet this voter backlash against this suggests that perhaps southern conservatives don't fully agree with the current state of the tax code. Does this mean that the Occupy movement had made more of a social impact with conservatives than what people would like to think? Or does this mean that SC republicans are thinking that this issue may be too devastating in a general election and are merely playing "which candidate would more likely win"?

Is it social?
Personally, (And this is why I think the situation is bizarre), I think Romney is much more likely to get the moderate vote and win the general election than Newt. His track record in Boston is much more in line with moderate democrats and if he ran on that basis, he would be practically impossible to beat. But maybe it is this fear of the secret liberal that SC is responding to.
 
Oliver said:
Is this correct ... ?
Click to expand...

I could believe it, but then again, I don't think it's as big a barrier as it seems. In many states (like Iowa) the primary/caucus delegates aren't binding.

Missouri has a primary election February 7th (and I'm pretty sure Newt failed to get on the ballot here), but it doesn't count for delegates to the GOP Convention. The Missouri GOP has a caucus March 17th that actually selects the delegates. A lot can change in that intervening time to change what the party wants to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom