Patterico's Pontifications

12/13/2011

Gingrich fades, Paul surges in Iowa?

Filed under: 2012 Election — Karl @ 12:38 pm



[Posted by Karl]

At least, that’s the latest from PPP:

There has been some major movement in the Republican Presidential race in Iowa over the last week, with what was a 9 point lead for Newt Gingrich now all the way down to a single point. Gingrich is at 22% to 21% for Paul with Mitt Romney at 16%, Michele Bachmann at 11%, Rick Perry at 9%, Rick Santorum at 8%, Jon Huntsman at 5%, and Gary Johnson at 1%.

***

Young voters, independents, and folks who haven’t voted in caucuses before is an unusual coalition for a Republican candidate…the big question is whether these folks will really come out and vote…if they do, we could be in for a big upset.

Paul’s supporters are considerably more committed to him than Gingrich’s are.  77% of current Paul voters say they’re definitely going to vote for him, compared to only 54% for Gingrich.  Romney has much more solid support than Gingrich as well, 67% of his voters saying they’re with him for the long haul. Among only voters who say their mind’s totally made up, 29% support Paul to 21% for Gingrich, 18% for Romney, and 11% for Bachmann.

Will those committed Paulians turn out? Iowa political activists — and Gov. Terry Branstad — rate Paul’s campaign organization as the best in the state.  Gingrich and Romney, not so much.  Does organization still matter in Iowa?  We are about to find out.

The WaPo’s Chris Cillizza (sort of) asks: “You know who this benefits?”

A Paul victory in Iowa would be a dream come true for Romney. Why? Because Paul, like former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee in 2008, has far less obvious appeal in the states beyond Iowa and would likely struggle to build his caucus victory into a broader national campaign.

Simply put: The less Iowa matters, the better for Team Romney. And a Paul victory there, while intriguing and a case study for political scientists for years to come, would almost certainly mean that the real race for the nomination begins a week later in New Hampshire.

The matchup to watch in Iowa then isn’t Newt vs Mitt. It’s Newt vs Ron. Or so Mitt hopes.

On the other hand, GOP fundraiser/consultant Nathan Wurtzel can think of arguments where Paul’s rise helps Gingrich or Perry (although the PPP poll suggests it doesn’t help Newt in IA).  Moreover, I would note that we kept seeing polls suggesting Romney is a second-choice vote for many… and yet, voters keep selecting alternate candidates as their first choice, don’t they?  If Paul somehow pulls out a win in Iowa, the real winners may be people tired of the importance pols and pundits have placed on the Iowa caucuses.

–Karl

126 Responses to “Gingrich fades, Paul surges in Iowa?”

  1. Ding!

    Karl (f07e38)

  2. Other than his clinically insane thinking re: national security and our role in the world, Paul does have some lucid thoughts on domestic issues.

    Colonel Haiku (db6c74)

  3. If you’d told me on 10-Sep-2001 that Ron Paul would one day be a serious candidate for the presidency and that I would not support him, I’d have called you crazy. I voted for Paul in ’88, I donated to his congressional campaign, and I was sure I’d support him again if he ran for president.

    I still think that if he became president he’d turn the USA into a paradise — five minutes before the Arabs blew it up.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  4. My Twitter feed is filling with Ron Paul’s earmarks, noting he’s one of just four GOPers to seek earmarks.

    If he wins IA, There Will Be Scrutiny.

    Karl (f07e38)

  5. Gingrich fades, Paul surges in Iowa?

    The fever is breaking? Nahhhhh. What a gift for the holidays.

    Guest hosting soon on the GOP Comedy Hour, Ron Paul. In weeks to come, Jon Huntman (the best they’ve got BTW) and Donald Trump, (who fired himself today.) Stay-tuned. Regular host Mitt Romney will return for the February sweeps.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  6. I like this line from PPP-the Democrat pollster:

    -Among Republicans Gingrich leads Paul 25-17. But with voters who identify as Democrats or independents, 21% of the electorate in a year with no action on the Democratic side, Paul leads Gingrich 34-14 with Romney at 17%.

    It’s like the bat whistle for the Dems to go play in the Iowa caucus…

    madawaskan (89a442)

  7. Paul is a convenient place for those who are truly undecided, or wish for the contest to be open for as long as possible, to “park” their vote, since he has no chance of becoming the ultimate nominee.

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  8. And PPP is like that movie-Field of Dreams– keep polling and posting Paul’s poll numbers-and they will come.

    madawaskan (89a442)

  9. Paul doesn’t count like a real candidate cause he’s more of a novelty item

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  10. much mischief will be afoot in those open-primary states. There oughtta be a law…

    Colonel Haiku (db6c74)

  11. No, there are too many as it is (laws, that is).

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  12. Ron Paul is going up because nobody is really arguing against him.

    But as John Heilemann wrote in this week’s New York Magazine: http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/gop-iowa-2011-12/

    Circus Iowus

    A playbill for the GOP’s midwestern gladiatorial showdown.

    2. Ron Paul’s potential. Let’s be frank from the outset about one thing: Under no imaginable circumstances short of a takeover of Earth by an Ayn Rand–worshiping species of space aliens will the libertarian Texas congressman be the Republican nominee. The level of support for his—admirably consistent yet all too often crackpot—views in the GOP makes that outcome simply impossible. Yet Paul, by all accounts, has run the best campaign in Iowa of this presidential cycle, with a solid field organization, not inconsiderable financial resources, and a deep connection to a die-hard base of voters. In 2008, Paul finished fifth in Iowa with just under 10 percent of the vote; today, he is polling at roughly double that total and is running just behind Romney, in third place.

    If that’s where Paul winds up, his effect on the broader dynamics of the race will be minimal. But many savvy Iowa political hands believe his ceiling is higher. Should he overtake Romney and finish second, it would inflict a brutal blow to the latter, who has abandoned any pretense of not competing in Iowa, thus raising the stakes for himself there hugely. But if Gingrich and Romney annihilate each other and Paul emerges in first place on caucus night—an unlikely but by no means far-fetched scenario—the impact on Newt would be equally severe, so high are the expectations running currently that he will win Iowa in a canter.

    The erason Newt Gingrich’s lead went down to 1% is that now his lead is being mneasurted against Ron Paul. Romney hasn’t budged in the poll. At least between December 3 and December 5. This poll was taken over a week ago.

    You can also see a definite Santorum rise and a continuing Bachman decline.

    Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb)

  13. In weeks to come, Jon Huntman (the best they’ve got BTW)

    This is the real reason I rejected Huntsman early. But it’s not a good reason, is it? Gives too much power to the DCSCAs of the world.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  14. One important point – Ron Paul appeals to the old anti-war Democrats.

    Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb)

  15. Whatever Paul’s true numbers are his supporters will crawl to the polls.

    29%, however, is laughably absurd. He got, what, 4% nationwide last time? Lowry is right tho, Romney could finish 4th.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  16. Paul is the one GOP candidate that could possibly get me to vote for Obama.

    Nuff said.

    Hadlowe (163d77)

  17. No one is “unelectable.” or have we learned nothing from 08?

    If Paul is president, and we end up getting nuked into oblivion, at least we would die as free men. That used to count for something in this country.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  18. Remember how John Mccain was the most electable guy? All those polls suggested he was!

    Only, it turns out that he wasn’t distinguishable enough from Obama. Obama will win any pander and progressive contest, but I think he’ll lose to someone who credibly explains the folly of that ideology.

    We can’t nominate a progressive as the GOP standard bearer. Think of the major issues of our pivotal times… we must nominate a conservative. Let the country have a real choice.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  19. well we learned that John McCain is unelectable

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  20. Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 12/13/2011 @ 1:20 pm

    …and that old moss-back coterie of isolationists left over from the 30’s-40’s:
    They’re out there, grumpy as ever after being dragged into “Mr. Roosevelt’s War”!

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  21. 17. Urkel is looking unelectable. Gallup, reported at HotAir, has Mmm,mmm,mmmm losing in all the swing states he won in 2008 not including states that are no longer counted, IN, or not yet counted, PA.

    Nate Silver has a pathway for Huntsman to victory. Right. Why not Johnson and Roemer?

    Between them, Roseanne Barr, Slick and W., I’d agree, pretty much anyone over 35 is electable.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  22. @13 Except JH is one of you. Who draws interest from moderates/indies outside the hard right circles of the three ring circus. Which you need to win. And Republicans could win this. Conservatives cannot. So please, please, please, nominate Newt. Or Mitt. What a gift.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  23. Doh, *states counted as swing states.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  24. Gingrich is at 22% to 21% for Paul with Mitt Romney at 16%, Michele Bachmann at 11%, Rick Perry at 9%, Rick Santorum at 8%, Jon Huntsman at 5%, and Gary Johnson at 1%.

    When I looked at that, I thought of another recent Iowa caucus result. Here’s a feelgood from 1996:

    Bob Dole (26%), Pat Buchanan (23%), Lamar Alexander (18%), Steve Forbes (10%), Phil Gramm (9%), Alan Keyes (7%), Richard Lugar (4%), and Morry Taylor (1%)

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  25. If Paul is president, and we end up getting nuked into oblivion, at least we would die as free men. That used to count for something in this country.

    And Ron thinks that way, too. Spare me from zealots. I think that Ron Paul formed his opinions in his twenties and vets reality against ideology, rather than the other way around. We’ve had that now for 3 years already, and we3 really don’t need it again in some other form.

    Kevin M (563f77)

  26. BTW, PPP is to pollsters as DSPCA is to commenters. Consider the source. Their analysis of Republican thinking is shallow at best.

    Kevin M (563f77)

  27. 22. 57% of the electorate will not vote for Urkel, 43% is his ceiling subject to the weather, lines for I-Phones, free money, cars and hair that needs washing, Gilligan’s Island marathons, what have you.

    Yeah, internecine hatred will diminish the GOP total–heavily dependent on third party challengers of account–but Scratch can really only count on a dozen states.

    Fifteen percent of the electorate is a lot of voter fraud.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  28. I don’t believe in PPP poll. It is a liberal poll.
    Ron Paul can’t get the nominee. He is not a Republican conservative.

    m (0f62c3)

  29. A poll taken 12/12 with the same number of likely votes has Iowa disputes the PPP poll:

    Gingrich – 27

    Paul – 17

    Perry – 13

    Romney 11

    Bachmann – 10

    Santorum – 7

    Huntsman – 4

    Other/undecided – 10

    Kevin M (563f77)

  30. 28. I’m with m, even photoshop can’t get Martians or Kolobites the nomination.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  31. A poll taken 12/12 with the same number of likely votes has Iowa disputes the PPP poll:

    Or, in English, A poll taken 12/12 with the same number of likely Iowa voters disputes the PPP poll:

    Kevin M (563f77)

  32. Pretty P*ss Poor poll

    Michael Moore (d1c681)

  33. Kevin, you’ll have to run any “English” and its’ meaning past Milhouse.

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  34. 7.Paul is a convenient place for those who are truly undecided, or wish for the contest to be open for as long as possible, to “park” their vote, since he has no chance of becoming the ultimate nominee

    AD – great comment and to a certain point Newt

    EricPWJohnson (2a58f7)

  35. A PAUL WIN WOULD REALLY HURT THE GOP BRAND

    reliapundit (e61fc6)

  36. Thank goodness I’m the secound stupidest commentator on the webb

    with deepest gratitude to:

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/jon-huntsmans-path-to-victory/

    EricPWJohnson (2a58f7)

  37. Ron Paul, today, serves the function of the “Favored Son” candidates of yore, who were bargaining chips to be taken to a “brokered convention”.
    It will be interesting to see who the Good Congressman ultimately supports, if anyone?

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  38. Kevin

    I’m no zealot. I’m just voting for the guy who says I’m not a criminal for following my doctors orders.
    I was being facetious about being nuked, because I don’t see how bringing our troops home makes us less safe.

    But, you’d rather give up liberty for a little bit of security.

    Ghost (427cfe)

  39. Glenn Beck said the only reason he can see to support Gingrich over Obama is racism.
    He then said if Paul ran as an independent he would support him.
    Why would a change like this in the polls be surprising?

    Sam (2fdd3d)

  40. Its too early and its Iowa, which always does some flukey things like Huckabee.

    I had dinner last night with two friends, one is generally Republican who doesn’t like anyone but thinks Romney is the best of a bad lot. Another is a Democrat ashamed of his 2008 vote for Obama who would only vote for Romney out of the people in the race. Romney can win the general election by a huge margin if he is facing Obama, both because he will be the business guy who can create jobs and because he will be the least malodorous to independents.

    Kaisersoze (298188)

  41. DCSCA thinks he is something.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  42. The thaught of Paul protecting us against the enemy is laughable. I think of Tim Conway in Mchales Navy.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  43. Tim Conway would at least fire at the enemy

    EricPWJohnson (2a58f7)

  44. If you are on Twitter you have to follow Iowahawkblog, who obviously has the hilarious Iowahawk blog.

    When David Frum threatened to quit the GOP recently, his comment on Twitter was that David Frum threatening to quit the GOP was like Professor Smith threatening to quit the cast of “Lost in Space”.

    Kaisersoze (298188)

  45. For everyone who has doubts about Paul (and I’m not 100% sold, I just consider him a legitimate candidate), ask yourself the following question:

    Can you trust any other candidate to do something radically different, or will they try to avoid rocking the boat and focus on their next reelection?

    Maybe Bachmann and santorum, maybe.

    Ben M. (4603b6)

  46. Letting people who were dumb enough to vote for Obama pick the GOP nominee is a recipe for a progressive president like Romney.

    Personally, I think it’s time to try something a little different than Mccain 2.0.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  47. I’m no zealot. I’m just voting for the guy who says I’m not a criminal for following my doctors orders.
    I was being facetious about being nuked, because I don’t see how bringing our troops home makes us less safe.

    But, you’d rather give up liberty for a little bit of security.

    Who here believe that he or she has lost their freedom due to provisions of the Patriot Act?

    Colonel Haiku (db6c74)

  48. Sometimes, even the most conventional of politicians rises to the occassion, when presented with an existential challenge.

    Personally, I don’t believe Ron Paul is one of those who would do so, as to go against his ingrained beliefs would cause such a degree of cognitive-dissounance that he would become catatonic.

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  49. No, there are too many as it is (laws, that is).

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS!

    IMHO, way too much freedom for Democrats (who won’t have any primaries) to skew primary results in the open primary states.

    Colonel Haiku (db6c74)

  50. Who here believe that he or she has lost their freedom due to provisions of the Patriot Act?

    Raises hand

    Mahmud Faruq Brent (cb3719)

  51. That was me. What’s the relevance?

    I was asking Haiku a specific and easy question. Instead of wallowing in this insult and scandal crap that seems to be the order of the day (and to be clear: I’m guilty too), I asked him if there was a policy issue where he thought Perry was worse than Huntsman.

    He refused to name any, of course. I don’t think he has any interest in a political debate.

    comment by Dustin

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Total bullscat and untrue. I responded that I found Perry’s policy of selling access to the state of Texas’s business and the governor’s office (I provided a list of/link to several well-documented examples), along with Perry’s policy of offering state services/ subsidies to Mexico’s unskilled labor force to be outrageous in the case of the former and fraught with troubling implications in the latter.

    You do not participate in good faith.

    Colonel Haiku (db6c74)

  52. Except for you, Houz bin Farteen.

    Colonel Haiku (db6c74)

  53. So, is the general consensus here that if (hell freezes over and) Ron Paul is the GOP nominee, everyone will vote to reelect Obama?

    I don’t know if anyone can repair the damage already done, but what I can’t seem to figure out is how simply replacing Obama will “a conservative” will magically correct decades of ignorance and apathy?

    I have to wonder exactly what the last few administrations have done prevent Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal? Oh, yeah – sanctions. And how have that strategy worked out?

    Furthermore, must our policy now be to attack and destroy any country we (1) don’t like and (2) suspect they have, might have, might be developing, or might gain possession of, nuclear weapons?

    Yeah, that Ron Paul is nuckin’ futs, alright…

    O. Tay (83c29b)

  54. Romney fading in polls, campaign in shock

    EricPWJohnson (2a58f7)

  55. The power Paul would have over foreign affairs is nucking futs.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  56. Is Ron Paul running on his list of legislative accomplishments?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  57. Another week, another front-runner.

    You can set your watch by it.

    JEA (7699d2)

  58. Paul voted to attack the Taliban after 9/11. How does that square with him being weak on national security? He wants our troops home to, what, sip cocktails in Maui? How are we safer by having our troops in 130 countries?

    Colonel,
    They’re using drones to spy on American citizens. The war on drugs is also utilizing the patriot act. I grow marijuana for medical purposes, approved by my states government. Yes, we have lost rights because of the patriot act.

    Indefinite detention, assisnations, wire tapping, and a DHS that says you are a potential terrorist. It can’t happen here? Bullpucky, it already has.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  59. Ron Paul is 75 years old. That’s even older than I am.

    Mike K (9ebddd)

  60. Sickofrinos
    That’s why they gave us checks and balances. He won’t get everything he wants.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  61. New IA thread up!

    Karl (e39d6b)

  62. How are we safer by having our troops in 130 countries?

    Those who refuse to learn from the past, are doomed to repeat it – first as tragedy, and then as farce.

    We withdrew, in 1920, to Fortress America (well, except for our little Banana Republic excursions to secure “our” SOB’s), and attempted to arrange Grand Bargains so as to disarm the competing powers in the aftermath of The Great War, and to prevent a repeat.
    Those actions did not turn out well; or, as The Grail Knight said “(We) chose poorly”.

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  63. Ghost, I do understand Libertarians — I was an LP member back in the 90’s. Even ran for office once. But it came to me eventually that the LP was little more than a purer-than-thou debate and in some respects a fraud on the members (not really trying to win, and such). Your comment about being nuked as preferable to having your liberty slighted reminded me greatly of the more pure LP members.

    Yeah, pot should be legal even though long-term use is harmful, but that goes into the grab-bag of secondary issues for me. Not becoming Europe comes well higher on the list.

    Kevin M (563f77)

  64. I think President Gingrich should appoint Ron Paul to run the Fed. Or at least the audit.

    Kevin M (563f77)

  65. I grow marijuana for medical purposes, approved by my states government. Yes, we have lost rights because of the patriot act.

    I have a couple of friends who used to grow a plant or two back in the 70’s, but they never claimed it was for medicinal purposes. It was purely recreational and then they grew up and went on to lead responsible lives.

    Colonel Haiku (601b7b)

  66. Daley… Dustin posted the following on the other thread:

    “True. As Daley notes, it was Perry who balanced a budget in hard times. It took a lot of cutting, even cuts to sacred cow agencies like education, and there were temptations along the way, such as wasting the rainy day savings instead of cutting the size of the government to what was sustainable, long term.”

    Just curious… is that an honest characterization of what you have written?

    Colonel Haiku (601b7b)

  67. Kevin,
    It’s amazing that we didn’t cross paths in our crossing over journey. I’m still a registered republican, because I understand that the two party system is better (governing with half the populaces consent is a lot better than having a 2/3 opposition), and while I still understand the want to have a strong military presence, I simply don’t see how we can afford it.

    Same with foreign aid.

    I will not take one more step in the name of “progress.”

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  68. Paul entertains the notion, that AQ’s attacks are a logical response, to our support of Israel and other parties, so what level of civilian casualties
    are acceptable, 50,000, 100,000, 1,000,000.

    narciso (87e966)

  69. Colonel,
    Congratulations. You had friends in the 70’s. I know people today who take Vicodin and Percocet, and they aren’t taking it for medicinal purposes either. We should make those illegal, too.

    I’m a productive member of society, working in biomedical research, devoted husband and father of five. I go to church every Sunday, and I also smoke weed to ease the constant pain I’m in. So kindly, piss off with your stereotypes.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  70. Paul entertains the notion, that AQ’s attacks are a logical response, to our support of Israel and other parties, so what level of civilian casualties
    are acceptable, 50,000, 100,000, 1,000,000.

    Who cares… they (Paulians) smoke two joints before they smoke two joints… and then they smoke two more.

    Colonel Haiku (601b7b)

  71. Sorry to harsh yer mellow, RastaMan.

    Colonel Haiku (601b7b)

  72. Narcisso,
    Paul has said that aq’s attacks on us were a response to our military having bases in their homeland. He is also suggesting that we stop foreign aid to those Arab countries too. He has stated the numerous reasons why aq attacked us. To say that paul thinks its just because of Israel is dishonest.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  73. You couldn’t harsh my mellow if you tried.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  74. Hang in there, Cheech.

    Colonel Haiku (601b7b)

  75. “Just curious… is that an honest characterization of what you have written?

    Comment by Colonel Haiku — 12/13/2011 @ 6:02 pm ”

    No, somebody attempting to spin something I wrote for some reason.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  76. Yeah, my weed is too good. Keep trying though. It’s fun watching the process of douchebaggery.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  77. Hang in there, Cheech… a cure for the heartbreaking pain of hangnails is just around the corner.

    Colonel Haiku (601b7b)

  78. It also eases the symptoms of being a douche. Would you like the name of a doctor?

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  79. Ghost – Your body doesn’t know whether you have paper on what you smoke or the pills you take. Vicodin and percocet, without a scrip, definitely illegal.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  80. Methinks Ghost’s mellow hath been harshed.

    Icy (1a73e7)

  81. Another week, another ad hom from one of the usual suspects.
    You can set your watch by it.

    Comment by JEA — 12/13/2011 @ 5:09 pm

    — FTFY

    Icy (1a73e7)

  82. That’s my point, Daley. Colonel was inferring that marijuana isn’t medicinal because he had friends who used it recreationally. I was simply pointing out that his argument was flawed because there are people who take medicine recreationally.

    By the colonels standards, people in pain on Vicodin are pill popping junkies who should grow up and deal with their hangnails.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  83. Thank goodness I’m the secound stupidest commentator on the webb
    Comment by EricPWJohnson — 12/13/2011 @ 2:43 pm

    — Like Avis car rentals, you’re #2 but you try harder.

    Icy (1a73e7)

  84. Icy,
    I could easily replace Ben stein as the clear eyes spokesman right now. Being mellow doesn’t mean I can’t spot douchebaggery. Like I said, its fun watching the colonel’s process.

    I mean, if he’s gonna be a dick, he could at least do it in haiku form. Here, I’ll even start it out for you:
    Ghost smokes lots of weed..

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  85. Comment by O. Tay — 12/13/2011 @ 4:45 pm
    So, is the general consensus here that if (hell freezes over and) Ron Paul is the GOP nominee, everyone will vote to reelect Obama?
    — Not even a little bit.

    I don’t know if anyone can repair the damage already done, but what I can’t seem to figure out is how simply replacing Obama [with] “a conservative” will magically correct decades of ignorance and apathy?
    — Nobody has said that it would. It’s called taking a step in the right direction.

    I have to wonder exactly what the last few administrations have done prevent Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal? Oh, yeah – sanctions. And how have that strategy worked out?
    — It had the effect of delaying that development for 30 years.

    Furthermore, must our policy now be to attack and destroy any country we (1) don’t like and (2) suspect they have, might have, might be developing, or might gain possession of, nuclear weapons?
    — If we were to attack “any country we don’t like,” we would be in a lot more wars than we’re in now. And who EVER said we are the ones that will take out Iran’s nuclear capability?

    Icy (1a73e7)

  86. “Yeah ma, I heard ya!
    I’ll get a job tomorrow.”
    “Dude, fire up that joint.”

    BigBambuHaiku (1a73e7)

  87. See? I can take a funny douchebag any day. Well played, haiku.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  88. Paul does not need congress to screw up foreign affairs.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  89. Obama is proof of that. Point made.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  90. More new jobs in growing ganja, compared to my line of work- building homes.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  91. #88 was me. And perhaps we could mellow out on using the “douchebag” sobriquet?

    Icy (1a73e7)

  92. Comment by Ghost — 12/13/2011 @ 6:12 pm

    You’re not very good with numbers, are you?
    If you completely eliminated the Dod, and all Foreign Aid, the Budget of the U.S.Government would still be in the red to the tune of $500+BILLION.
    It is not the first enumerated power of the government that is impoverishing us, but all the things that they do that are not enumerated, but have been encumbered under the “General Welfare” clause.
    When you’re ready to realistically deal with those, we can talk about maintaining a defense against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    AD-RtR/OS! (21429a)

  93. You’re not very good with numbers, are you?

    Maybe it’s all the weed?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  94. “Colonel was inferring that marijuana isn’t medicinal because he had friends who used it recreationally. I was simply pointing out that his argument was flawed because there are people who take medicine recreationally.”

    Ghost – I don’t believe that was what Colonel was inferring and I think your argument is flawed.

    Personally I think virtually all medical marijuana is a total scam, but that’s just me.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  95. When did I say that the military was bankrupting us? I said we can’t afford it, because we’re going bankrupt. Are you seriously contesting that? I don’t think the govt should do 90% of the things they do domestically. From the DMV to the light rail bs. Just because I also think its unwise, financially and strategically, to spread our troops across 130 countries, or to keep giving money to dictators (not talking about Israel here).

    Icy,
    My apologies. I saw the haiku and assumed it was the colonel.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  96. The scam was making it illegal in the first place.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  97. The scam was making it illegal in the first place.

    Another flawed argument.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  98. Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason, in that it attempts to control a mans appetite through legislature, and makes crimes out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which the government was founded.
    Abraham Lincoln 1840

    If you say so. You can believe all you want that marijuana doesn’t relieve my pain. You’re also free to believe that the TSA will make you safe. You can even believe in Santa Claus. If facts can’t change your mind, then I gues we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  99. and makes crimes out of things that are not crimes.

    Huh? That is for the Legislature to determine, no?

    JD (8edcef)

  100. Well the TSA seems to work with the ‘Southern efficiency’ of the DMV, so there is that.

    narciso (87e966)

  101. JD,
    That’s why that first part (seeks to control mans appetite) is relevant. And when they ban salts and trans fats, because by golly, we just know better than you, and through legislature, they make crimes out of things that are not crimes, it will still be wrong.

    Freedom isn’t lost over night in this country. They just chisel and chip away while we’re busy watching the kardashians. Don’t believe me? Ask yourself this fun little rhetorical: when was the last time a cop was behind you in traffic and you thought, “oh thank god, the police are here, now I’m safe”?

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  102. Of course, those most intent on banning transfats and firearms, are often most insistent on allowing other things, that have no constitutional protection

    narciso (87e966)

  103. Perrybots and Romneybots need to get laid.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  104. “it attempts to control a mans appetite through legislature”

    Ghost – Some people have an appetite for rape. We have laws against that as well. Your complaint is just against where society decided to draw its lines.

    Change the law. That’s how our society works, not by making flawed arguments against legitimately enacted statutes.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  105. Wake and bake, baby!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  106. Daley, that’s kind of a stretch. Tell me whose liberty is Wong violated by me hitting a bong.
    Rape laws exist to protect women from rapists. Drug laws protect you from yourself. If you can’t tell the difference there, then stay away from my weed, ya pervert plant raper.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  107. Oh, and we did change the law. Medical weed is legal in 16 states now. I’m sorry you don’t think it works. But yes, the law has been voted on and changed. Now, im voting for the one guy who will change that law at a federal level.

    You compare weed to rape. I compared it to alcohol. Whose argument is flawed?

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  108. Why do I keep hearing Bob Marley music? Also, the person spells too well to be the weedhead he claims to be. I smell a casual cannabis using rodent, folks, here to argue.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  109. Goddam autocorrect. “Wong” should be “being.” how’d you fvck that one up, iPhone?

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  110. Simon,
    I try to destroy as many stereotypes as I can. I’m also a white conservative who isn’t racist, I own a pug and I’m not gay, and I (was) a single father with full custody of my kids.

    And it’s Pink Floyd. Marley wasn’t my thing.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  111. “You compare weed to rape. I compared it to alcohol.”

    Ghost – Wrong. I compared it to your phrase “it attempts to control a mans appetite through legislature.”

    You can believe all you want that marijuana doesn’t relieve my pain.

    Also not a claim I made.

    You are really not very good at this.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  112. And I showed how that comparison is wrong. Apples and oranges.

    So, just so we’re clear, marijuana can ease pain, but medical marijuana is a scam. Methinks I’m not the only one who’s high…

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  113. For some reason I’m hearing Everybody Wang Chung Tonight! but I could be *Wong*….

    madawaskan (89a442)

  114. Doesn’t pass the sniff test, dude.

    Nor the spliff test.

    I know it is December, but these are just reindeer games.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  115. And…

    “…I try to destroy as many stereotypes as I can…”

    That is one of the few honest things you have written, in my opinion. But I don’t mean it the way you do.

    Cura te ipsum.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  116. Good thing I don’t need your permission to spell correctly. You have an example of something dishonest I’ve written? Or are you just being pretentious?

    Ghost (1af8b8)

  117. One of the thing I like about people like you, is your complete lack of self-awareness coupled with seemingly unconscious projection.

    Nothing new.

    You remain both obvious and unintentionally hilarious.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  118. Sadly, this is the ugly reason for some inspiration to try to stop the fine Private Sector CEO in Mr. Romney:
    “The new political director for Newt Gingrich’s Iowa campaign “agreed to step away” from the job after it came to light that he had said some evangelicals believe God would reject Mitt Romney because of his Mormonism.”

    Ugly religious bigotry, and the unseemly populist resentment of a “wealthy” success, etc., is simply not conservative.

    This is a misguided identity shell game, which keeps enabling the opposite, which is the disastrous Democratic Party.

    Gingrich is an entrenched Beltway Insider, a Public Sector product who has been profiteering off of Our Federal Government, while he publicly tries to exploit Our Base with a vivid con. Newt is fare more like McCain in so many ways, entertaining Amnesty, Federal Mandates, Cap and Trade, etc. His latest anti-Capitalist Rant mimics Obama, revealing his out of touch Washington Celebrity animosity for the Private Sector. Newt will only reelect Obama, as will many others.

    Romney is clearly the best offering, Ann Coulter is absolutely right again.

    Old Fan (2d813e)

  119. That you are a fan, there is no doubt.

    JD (8edcef)

  120. In other words, no, you don’t have an example of me being dishonest. You’re just being a twatwaffle. I’ve been having fine debates with Daley, icy, and Kevin. You’ve attempted to insult me because I don’t fit your preconceived notion of a pothead.

    And the best you can do is that I spell correctly so I’m obviously lying about smoking pot.

    No, it makes perfect sense. Go back to the kids table. The grown ups are having a discussion.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  121. Boy, doesn’t “Ghost” sound kinda familiar, folks?

    Also verrrrry irritable, despite all the mellow.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  122. He’s more passive aggressive than Yelverton, well initially anyways.

    narciso (87e966)

  123. Way to step up your game, chief.

    Ghost (6f9de7)

  124. I’m only aggressive towards dbags who don’t know how to politely converse.

    Ghost (6f9de7)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 2.0397 secs.