Patterico's Pontifications

3/13/2012

Alabama, Mississippi, Hawaii and… American Samoa

Filed under: 2012 Election — Karl @ 4:00 pm

[Posted by Karl]

There’s more voting today, especially on the GOP side.  Here’s your Google Map for tracking results.  Most people will focus on Alabama and Mississippi, which have a quasi-proportional allocation of delegates, based on a 20% and 15% threshold, respectively.  Although the polls have been close in both states, the demographics do not favor front-runner Mitt Romney.  However, Romney wasn’t letting that bother him (publicly):

“You don’t know from polls what will happen but obviously if the polls are anywhere near correct, we’ll end up with, I don’t know, a third of the delegates,” he said, balancing a box of St. Patrick’s Day cookies in his hands.  ”And if that’s the case, why that inches us closer to that magic number.”

Indeed, if Romney gets above 25% in the South, he is likely on track to the nomination.

Plus, Romney is favored to win the Hawaii caucus, which has goofier rules than the typical state.  Mitt will likely sweep in American Samoa, which reportedly has a sizable Mormon poulation, but is decided by about 50 people in a bar.

Update: Santorum wins Alabama, although it looks like Gingrich and Romney will also pick up delegates.  If Gingrich does not win Mississippi, there will be more talk about how he should leave, even though there’s little data suggesting that even a united NotRomney has the critical mass to beat Romney.

Update 2: FNC calls Mississippi for Santorum.  However, Romney may do better in the delegate count here.  IIRC, Santorum never led in a poll there, but the turnout was low and churched.

–Karl

107 Responses to “Alabama, Mississippi, Hawaii and… American Samoa”

  1. Per Drudge, Romney takes Mississippi. Things are tight in Alabama.

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  2. “he is likely on track to the nomination”

    On sheer, antiseptic probability I’d have to agree. But he’s already complaining that Potatohead and Honey Badger need to drop or risk damaging the Nominee.

    Gamesmanship, sure, but does anyone honestly believe this Turbot has anymore game than he’s proven to date?

    He’s just rejected Santorum as not conservative enough.

    No, by August the 117 RNC delegates, 24 of whom having endorsed George’s boy, will have had time to think this thru 50 more times. Not good for Rummy.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  3. I have dangled that 100 bucks in front of Gary G. for weeks now… the bet? Romney gets the nomination and Gary’s dream of a “brokered convention” is all wet.

    But the flounder ain’t no gamefish.

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  4. 3. I’m surprised Baghdad Hai remember’s what he’s said, ’cause he doesn’t remember much else.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  5. flounder not native
    to Minnesota came in
    on bottom of shoe

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  6. man up Gary G.
    one hundred smackaroos just
    rise to stinky bait!

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  7. Back in the real world, the Senate voted down ANWR
    57/41, among those giving the Sauds more walking around money, Rubio, Brown, Lee,

    narciso (87e966)

  8. CBO NEARLY DOUBLES OBAMACARE ESTIMATE…

    $1.76 TRILLION OVER 10 YEARS!

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  9. Who cares, we’re not going to do anything about it,

    narciso (87e966)

  10. 1. Not certain what Drudge is up to, he’s not in the exit-polling biz.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  11. 11. Drudge has been pro-Romney for the whole primary season.

    Sammy Finkelman (52d790)

  12. CNN’s election blog has some exit polling saying Santorum up in AL and Romney in MS.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  13. jimgeraghty “CNN offering awesomely reassuring report on how Alabama has inmates handling ballots before they’re counted.”

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  14. here he comes here comes Mitt Romney he’s a demon on wheels

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  15. RameshPonnuru RT @joshgreenman “On CNN, Gingrich adviser accuses Santorum of not being able to close the deal. Pot, kettle slink off in embarrassment.”

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  16. A little over an hour to Justified, there’s a tale with some suspense and significance.

    narciso (87e966)

  17. That Santorum did not win a clear victory in Alabama, where the ultimate Christian Chief Justice Roy Moore is running to regain the seat he lost tells me that he will never get the nomination. Santorum will never see the likes of social conservative numbers in any state from here on out.

    Ed from SFV (3ae3ea)

  18. A little over an hour to Justified, there’s a tale with some suspense and significance.

    Comment by narciso

    The comments here prompted me to check that out. 10 minutes into the episode I started with and I was hooked.

    Colonel Haiku (946856)

  19. GCB is pretty awesome so far specially if you ever lived in Dallas or even anywhere in Texas

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  20. No it’s not, and even Leslie Bibb can’t save it.

    narciso (87e966)

  21. well it’s no Justified

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  22. hmmm mittz blitz on fritz as hicks pick rick

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  23. It’s interesting seeing the standards. Romney squeaks out ahead in OH and loses Iowa to Santorum and those are big victories. Santorum wins MI and Romney finishes third? Why if that happens it’s not ‘clear’.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  24. It’s because they say so, Dustin, no one really wants to deal with those icky lifeydoodle bitter clingers, honestly, we want rich cultured people, who looked on other people’s uncreased slacks, while liberty dies a slow death, get with the program,

    narciso (87e966)

  25. I doubt there will be a brokered convention. Romney may not be near to clinching the nomination, but everyone else is even further away. To me the most plausible scenario will involve various members of the GOP establishment getting together to have interventions with both Rick and Newt, explaining that there is no chance either one of them can actually win the nomination, and therefore they need to end the farce and focus on the main fight against Obama–and then considerately leave the details of how Rick and Newt will fall on their swords (metaphorically speaking) to be decided by Rick and Newt. I don’t know when that might happen–May perhaps but that’s just a guess. But they won’t wait until July or August to do it.

    JBS (46fd97)

  26. tonight we have struck a mighty blow against contraception-on-demand my friends

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  27. Well they are doing a heck of a job, with oil fields, coal mines, thousands of pages of regulations, to ‘nudge’ us in the right direction.

    narciso (87e966)

  28. feets(15)!

    I resemble that remark.

    Karl (6f7ecd)

  29. hah! I just bought some Racer X stuff a couple weekends ago

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  30. Uh, Karl you forget who else on was the ticket, besides McCain,

    narciso (87e966)

  31. Justified is far more interesting than the primary. So is Atop Shot. And Top Gear.

    JD (d246fe)

  32. Is there a materical difference between Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney on contraception issues? I mean their current positions. I’ve heard them all asked about this stuff and they all make approximately the same noises.

    I think it’s all about who can effective take the fight to Obama in 2012 and take the fight from him as well. Fortunately, at this time I think all three can beat him. Obama’s that bad.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  33. I love Top Shot, JD. Top Gear had a good finale.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  34. No, not really, Dustin, and that’s a relatively minor point, that illuminates real principles,

    narciso (87e966)

  35. I’m sure I don’t need to explain my view on their principles, but in a way I suppose the fact they all make the same noises today says something.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  36. One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.”

    It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.

    That is Mr. Rick Santorum’s official position on the contraceptions. Mr. Governor Romney has never said (on the record) that he wanted to be president for so he can natter on about how wicked it is to use contraception. Gingrich neither.

    Just Rick. He sorta owns the whole I’m a lecture you about contraception issue.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  37. narciso,

    I have no empirical data showing McCain won Mississippi — or anywhere else — big because of Palin. These are states that reliably vote big for the GOP.

    Karl (6f7ecd)

  38. AuH2O here we go, once more with feeling!

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  39. That is Mr. Rick Santorum’s official position on the contraceptions.

    Well, that’s his personal opinion of it. I was wondering if there was any material difference in these campaigns’ actual policy agendas on this issue.

    I’ll tell you what’s worse than lecturing people about sexual immorality: that’s using government to force people to buy health insurance even if they don’t want to, sending demand through the roof and slapping everyone upside the head with Adam Smith’s invisible hand.

    But as far as contraception goes, it doesn’t appear that Rick’s government would do things differently from Romney’s.

    It’s true, though, that Rick has explained he wishes to use the bully pulpit to promote his family values, which is not something I’ve heard from Newt (lol) or Mitt.

    I don’t think the role of government is to encourage lifestyle choices, especially with looming issues like the deficit, but I also am not offended by Rick’s views. In fact, I think we all need to be honest about the decay in our society.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  40. btw, I’m not confident in Santorum being ready to be President. I admit I admire his spine, but it’s a hell of a responsibility.

    But he’s also getting all that support because he’s a hell of a politician. I think he’s more of a general election threat than he gets credit for being.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  41. No, I don’t see that, gary, I think Santorum’s focus is a little off, but they seem to have written off Newt, even though he’s a better debater,

    narciso (87e966)

  42. The societal decay caused by contraception is precisely what is so alarming to Rick Santorum. All these people using contraception willy nilly with NO regard to the impact on society.

    It’s enough to make you want to throw up.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  43. I was wondering if there was any material difference in these campaigns’ actual policy agendas on this issue.
    Do they have any actual policy agendas specific to contraception? As opposed to stuff they say on the stump circuit?

    I happen to think Santorum is wrong on the issue (note to Rick: people have been doing the naughty thing, with or without contraception, all through history. Even Catholic clergy, as almost any routine episode in medieval or Renaissance history will inform you. (Taking those vows seriously wasn’t popular until the Counter-Reformation, and even then it took a while for even popes and bishops to get the memo.) But I find his mention of them disturbing only because it’s economic issues that matter in the battle with Obama, not socio-sexual ones.

    JBS (46fd97)

  44. What was it that crazy bitter clinger Jefferson, said about a virtuous people required for good government, I know it’s no longer the de riguer
    in European thought, however, it was the foundation
    of this country, for quite a spell.

    narciso (87e966)

  45. The societal decay caused by contraception is precisely what is so alarming to Rick Santorum.

    It’s not well focused to accomplish a balanced budget. I want someone who is driven to that end. Maybe Newt is… hard to know when he’s BSing me, though.

    But that said, it’s not like Santorum is wrong. Society is in decay in many respects. We have enormous problems with fatherlessness, leading to crime and dependency. Is contraception the sole reason? Santorum didn’t say it was. He said it was the idea of being sexually libertine, which obviously does go hand in hand with contraception.

    It would be more accurate to note that many people use contraception within marriage, of course.

    But I think this entire issue is a very foolish basis to choose one of these candidates, as there is no material difference in their agendas. It’s what the left wants to focus on.

    Like Santorum, I’m not afraid to acknowledge that the problems contraception relates to are making this country worse. But that’s the trap.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  46. I don’t know about virtuous people Mr. narciso but at the very least we should elect people who know better than to fool around with contraception.

    That’s just common sense.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  47. note to Rick: people have been doing the naughty thing, with or without contraception, all through history

    True. Though things are different today, in my opinion. I think our society is fixated on sex, it’s cheapened, and that has caused a lot of problems (to include severe economic problems).

    I find his mention of them disturbing only because it’s economic issues that matter in the battle with Obama, not socio-sexual ones.

    I agree. Sexual-social politics are related in a roundabout way, but the most constructive way to deal with our economic woes is to get government out of the way, and also to somehow reform government to be constrained to a sane cost.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  48. Mr. Dustin contraception is a slippery slope. First you’re using contraception with your girlfriend then bam it’s all Boone’s Farm-fueled orgies and dancing and you’ve got Glee on your tivo.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  49. we should elect people who know better than to fool around with contraception.

    It’s interesting to me that looking at how someone lived their life responsibly is rarely a great way to find the best leaders. Maybe this is because folks with enough sense to have a clean cut nuclear family are risk averse instead of managers if crises?

    I’m not saying we should look at which candidate is the best family man or has the best personal values. I wish our problems were such that I could focus on that. I’m just saying I’m not bugged enough by any of Santorum’s claims to see why those claims supercede his actual agenda.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  50. Mr. Dustin contraception is a slippery slope. First you’re using contraception with your girlfriend then bam it’s all Boone’s Farm-fueled orgies and dancing and you’ve got Glee on your tivo.

    Comment by happyfeet

    LOL.

    It’s not orgies I’m worried about. the Kennedies can do whatever they want. They can afford plenty of replacement Oldsmobiles to deal with the consequences.

    I’m worried about fatherless children.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  51. Fatherless children make crappy presidents.

    I have links.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  52. Mittens for sale. Maybe Illinois will buy some.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  53. 42. The snark was directed at the Libtards choosing the stiff Red Amerikkka is expected to elect.

    They cannot even get a lousy Representative elected, let alone a Senator or Governor and they want us to just go along with their choice for POTUS.

    Red Amerikkka gave McVain back 5% ’cause he pulled a Cuda out of the hat. Rubio won’t even budge the Hispanic needle.

    Turnout, buh bye.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  54. Fatherless children make crappy presidents.

    I have links.

    Comment by happyfeet

    I actually wasn’t referencing Obama with that. Obama is a family man, which makes him a better man than many others out there, though I agree he’s a crap prez.

    I was referring to the real problem with our society. It’s a lot harder to dismiss than you are suggesting.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  55. what I dismiss is the demented prudery of clan santorum

    here’s one of the nutjob groups what endorse him… as our pitiful little country is pillaged by trillion dollar deficits and raped by regulation and mandate, let’s pause and listen to this group’s concerns

    Contact Clorox on New Liquid-Plumr Ad

    Liquid-Plumr presents two sexy plumbers in their new commercial. The Clorox Company introduces the Liquid-Plumr Double Impact Snake and Gel System in this ad which is full of sexual innuendos as well. They are attempting to use sex to sell a product to unclog drains.

    The commercial starts off with a woman in a supermarket daydreaming about what this new Liquid-Plumr product has to offer. She says, “Double impact,” twice as she reads the bottle. In her dream she is at home and answers the door to find a sexy plumber. The plumber is nice looking with huge biceps and a tight shirt. He says, “I’m here to snake your drain.” She says come on in and he walks upstairs. The doorbell rings again and it is a second sexy plumber. He says, “I’m here to flush your pipe.” She answers with an okay and while he walks on upstairs she lets out a squeal and moan while letting down her hair. Then she wakes up to reality to find the two men in the supermarket. She flirts by giving sexy eyes to the one man in the deli slicing meat and the other in produce holding two melons. These two men are the same as in her dream. It may be coincidence, but the man in produce is standing beside cucumbers with a price sign behind him reading 69 cents.

    The new Liquid-Plumr ad is offensive and completely inappropriate for television.*

    the contraception stuff is just the tip of the ice cream with these people

    they are a deeply weird bunch, these nutters in Santorum’s coterie

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  56. GCB is pretty awesome so far specially if you ever lived in Dallas or even anywhere in Texas

    I live in West L.A. DO you suppose they could do one called “GJB” Or would that be defamatory? I wonder if something called “Good Christian Bitches” would even be allowed on Time-Warner Cable, given their Conditions of Use and all.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  57. here is the deeply offensive clorox commercial what has tribe santorum calling for ACTION

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  58. I thought that commercial crossed the line, actually.

    I do not think those who agree should be silenced about it. People who think that double penetration references are inappropriate ways to market bleach are not deeply weird, nor should they be ruled out of high office (the message really being that folks should shut up for their own good… clearing the way for society to decay and decay).

    Dustin (401f3a)

  59. Just Rick. He sorta owns the whole I’m a lecture you about contraception issue.

    I prefer Gingrich to Romney, who I consider a squish. But I despise Santorum. I have seen three solid tries at a small-government revolution in this country. The first two failed (1980 and 1994), although they dialed the liberal ratchets back for a time. Santorum’s nomination will mark the failure of this one, since he cares about as much for small government as Obama does.

    Rick just wants to use the federal monster to give us all Good Christian Values. For our souls. He views the secular economic stuff as less important, since Rick lives in the spiritual world, not in the secular one. I’m pretty sure there won’t be much point in the Republican Party for anyone else after the committed Christians take over. I’m not certain Santorum would be worse than Obama, but it is a debate so far down the statist axis that I’m not sure it matters.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  60. Romney is most definitely a squish, but he’s a spectacularly vain squish

    he’ll want to be known for having accomplished something beneficial for America

    That would be ok with me.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  61. The little that Santorum talks about fiscal matters is pretty scary, too. Not only does he seem to be a union hack, but his “solution” for Social Security is to take it away from people who saved “too big” a nest egg while they were working. Just another crappy socialist if you ask me.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  62. he’ll want to be known for having accomplished something beneficial for America

    That’s actually my take on Newt. He wants to prove something more than just winning an office. He wants some grand historical reform.

    Mitt, however, is a ruthless politician. There is merit to that, especially since we must beat Obama, but he’s ruthless in a particular way that means ideology is the means, not the ends.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  63. I’m not certain Santorum would be worse than Obama

    Are you serious? You think Santorum is *that* bad?

    He was Senator and Representative for close to twenty years. Without searching, can you name the most odious legislation he’s offered?

    Is it possible he’s just offering personal opinions on matters, leading by argument, and not using government policy to force us?

    I know he has quite specifically noted he does not think the government should ban contraception, for example.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  64. means-testing is just another word for state-sponsored theft at the barrel of a gun

    Gingrich is the only R in the race who understands this

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  65. Americans forced to use mittens.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  66. The elephant in the room is that Santorum keeps winning… the states that are in the pocket of the GOP in the general already. Romney is winning all the others and Santorum is claiming he can beat Obama and not Romney? The baby elephant in the room is that Romney is doing so well in the South.

    Dave B (982f20)

  67. Mr. Feets, I’m surprised 1000000 Moms even knew what 69 might mean. Shame on them.

    Dustin–from what I know of history and literature, our society is no more and no less fixated on sex than any other society in history. The only difference is that we are more open than some others on the subject–and even then, not more than most. There are plenty of lines in Aristophanes which would call down the wrath of the FCC if they were presented on TV as a new show nowadays. Of Jane Austen’s six novels, three use illicit sex as an important part of the story line (two seductions and illegitimate daughters in Sense and Sensibility; adultery in Mansfield Park; an elopement and living together before marriage in Pride and Prejudice). Tracking down the paternity of bastard children was apparently a widespread phenomonen in 18th century England–the parish councils wanted to make sure the fathers paid child support so that the public purse would not be called on support the children. The latter at least should sound familiar to anyone involved with modern American family courts….

    JBS (e1eed2)

  68. Are you serious? You think Santorum is *that* bad?

    Yes. He is not ready to be president. He is far more concerned about social issues, same as Obama. He has no interest in small government, or anything smacking of libertarian thought (probably because we have no use for theocrats like Rick).

    No one talks about “personal matters” during a campaign unless they are REALLY important to them. It is inconceivable that Rick won’t get just as distracted by social issues as President as he does as a candidate.

    Having the government tell me what to do in my private life is pretty much a deal-breaker, and Rick just won’t be able to help himself.

    If this was balanced by some small government approach (e.g. Sarah Palin), maybe I could deal with it, but Rick is pretty much a statist there, too.

    Statist Left vs Statist Right. What’s to like in the choice?

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  69. I know he has quite specifically noted he does not think the government should ban contraception, for example.

    He should not have had to. What next, saying he’s not a witch?

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  70. there is no such thing as deeply offensive clorox commercials, not when your little country are become a piggy piggy pig wallowing in the muck of debt and fail

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  71. Lets be blunt, there is no small government candidate, at this time, Newt has some aspects re repealing Dodd/Frank, and other regulatory reform,
    that ship sailed, sometime after the first debt ceiling deal.

    narciso (87e966)

  72. Dustin–from what I know of history and literature, our society is no more and no less fixated on sex than any other society in history.

    I disagree. They didn’t have the internet or TV. I don’t mean to suggest things were perfect, but we have a real problem today.

    He should not have had to. What next, saying he’s not a witch?

    Comment by Kevin M

    Well, should is a powerful word. We should have all three candidates demanded a balanced budget for the sake of a stablized USA. Hell, it shouldn’t even be partisan it’s such an urgent problem.

    Yes. He is not ready to be president. He is far more concerned about social issues, same as Obama.

    The difference is that Obama/Romney will enforce their concern over social issues with federal mandates over what I must do, bans on what guns I can’t buy or under what conditions.

    Santorum has personal opinions, and he’s honest about them, but is he actually banning contraception? Nope. Would he use the government pulpit to tell people how to live? Probably. He is leading by argumentation.

    I don’t see why Romney’s federal mandate isn’t a deal breaker and Santorum’s personal opinions, separate from actual policy, are a deal breaker.

    Statist Left vs Statist Right. What’s to like in the choice?

    Comment by Kevin M

    Can you be more specific, citing Santorum’s record or agenda? I think there is much to like about Santorum’s agenda, btw. His energy policy is excellent. He’s also much better than Obama on foreign policy. He’s also got serious reform on his resume.

    He’s a big gov republican, but he’s also much more authentic than the competition. I think he’s telling the full truth about his agenda, unlike some of the competition. I think this plays well with independents and is more resilient to a mud slinging campaign.

    Anyway, libertarian he is not, but I don’t see how he’s anywhere near as bad as a federal mandate to buy health insurance or an arbitrary bar on a needed pipeline.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  73. Kevin: If Romney had been even remotely wishy-washy about repealing Obamacare then it might be a deal breaker three months ago. But he hasn’t been. If anything many conservatives believe that of all the candidates he will be the most “possessed” to do it. Romneycare PREVENTED a government takeover of healthcare in MA and replaced it with a business oriented solution supported at the time by the Heritage Foundation. There’s other fish to fry in this election as well and the majority of primary voters want the turnaround business guy with executive experience as opposed to the career politicians and lobbyists. To many of us the latter is the deal breaker when it comes to Newt and Rick.

    Dave B (982f20)

  74. Dave B, Romney proposed the federal mandate to Obama in a 2009 USA Today column. His denial of supporting a national mandate is simply politics.

    He has been wishy washy about repealing it, too.

    No matter who supported the ind mandate, it was a very bad idea because it exploded demand. It failed. Romney thought it wouldn’t cost government a dime, but it proves costly and Romney hasn’t agreed it was a mistake.

    Romney is a career politician who has been running for office repeatedly for the past 17 years.

    Romneycare is not business oriented and has cost MA many businesses because it is a burden on small businesses. In fact, Romney’s record on business growth or jobs in MA was not at all impressive.

    We need people with experience reforming government by winning arguments against democrats instead of negotiating so much to them that they just ask for more. Santorum has that experience. So does Newt.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  75. Dustin: You can’t be serious. Repealing and issuing waivers for states is what he has said from the beginning. I live in MA and know what the guy did and why he did it. How would State run healthcare affect small businesses? Remember we’re talking MA where any stupid liberal idea is legislation. Before Romney took the reins we were losing jobs left and right, we were billions in the hole, and taxes were skyrocketing. Government was growing by the day.

    By “reforming government” I assume that doesn’t include actually governing, over 800 vetoes, eliminating wasteful programs and agencies, cutting taxes against all odds in a Democrat monopoly of a state. I don’t care if he lost elections. He ran in a blue state as a Republican, not as a Democrat which means he set out to do conservative things in a deep blue state and when he got his chance he did it. If you don’t like him that’s fine but it appears your hatred for the guy is skewing what you’re seeing. The over two million plus people that have voted for Romney to date (over a million more than whoever you support) have already thought of everything you just said. Since when has a Democrat changed his mind because of an “argument”? They either get bought off or are given political cover like the Obamacare vote. You saw what happened and the consequences of their actions in 2010 and THEY KNEW they might be ending their political careers and did it anyway.

    Dave B (982f20)

  76. Repealing and issuing waivers for states is what he has said from the beginning.

    No, in the beginning, Romney wrote a column urging Obama to impose, via the tax code, a federal mandate.

    He also edited this out of his book.

    I am familiar with the ‘democrats are worse’ argument. I agree with that.

    But democrats are even worse than usual when Romney negotiates so far to what they want.

    By “reforming government” I assume that doesn’t include actually governing, over 800 vetoes

    Yeah, again I get it. Democrats are worse.

    But Romney proposed a ten percent increase in the state’s budget. He signed into law three increases in spending in four years. He signed into law many intrusive and anti business policies. He stood outside a power plant shouting about how it kills people. As Governor.

    Newt, on the other hand, was willing to shut down the federal government to reach real spending reform.

    The over two million plus people that have voted for Romney to date (over a million more than whoever you support) have already thought of everything you just said

    The alternatives to Romney suck too. But don’t misrepresent Romney. Romney is pretty liberal. He is more liberal than Santorum and much more liberal than Newt. He’s probably going to be the nominee and I hope the flip flops attacks aren’t able to keep Obama in office.

    it appears your hatred for the guy is skewing what you’re seeing.

    It appears you are insane.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  77. Conservatives who explain the record of a liberal and note they disagree with it are not expressing hatred. Extreme partisans who interpret honesty as hatred remind me of those gushing Obama fans who boasted how gorgeous Obama was and cried racist at any democrat who criticized his inexperience.

    The GOP needs conservatives to show up in November. Obviously all conservatives have some reservations about Romney’s true record. Why call that hatred?

    Give conservatives an honest argument. The reasons to nominate Romney over Newt or Rick are not Obamacare repeal or conservatism or spending. He’s got executive experience, more polish, and more fund raising ability. He’s more centrist. etc etc.

    None of these guys are worth such devotion that we pretend those who bring valid points are just irrational haters.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  78. Anyway, no hard feelings or anything, but this is what primaries are like. One reason this primary is so much more intense is that the need to fix our country’s government is more pressing, more urgent, thanks largely to Obama’s spending record.

    We need more from the GOP than ever before.

    It’s not hatred. Unfortunately, I’m not pleased with any of these three remaining, of course Romney I like least, and I’ve already accepted that I’ll support whoever we nominate (likely Romney) with at least a general election vote.

    But I’m going to hope conservatives agitate. It’s not unhealthy and it might even make Romney better. Don’t take it personally… I realize you just want to beat Obama.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  79. Santorium is a big gov. provider. Don’t we have one of those already? Gosh darn it, I wish the gop had better choices.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  80. Nothing changed tonight. With his wins in Hawaii and American Samoa, Romney rendered moot Santorum’s two wins. Romney’s lead over Santorum, and Santorum’s lead over Gingrich, remain roughly the same.

    Icy (192e4b)

  81. Even the token opposition to Progressivism will recoil at giving away the election.

    The Beltway may be happy to force Sleazer McBain down our throats but the TEAs elected more than some House members in 2010, they elected Party captains in locals in Red Amerikkka.

    Looking at a divided map will be very hard for the RNC delegates and the 30% who are not faithless by definition in going their own way first ballot at convention.

    Willard’s count on first ballot is 10% short of the CNN/FOX/AP nominal count. He’s in real trouble.

    MO will not support him against Obama and they’ve gone with the winner since 1904.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  82. With people like rove,morris,coulter, it’s a wonder the gop is alive.
    This nation is full of chicken-shit pundits.

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  83. Icy’s analysis is right. I’m still impressed with Santorum, but that doesn’t change the overall direction we’re headed in.

    I agree, sick of rinos, that Santorum is hardly worth a full throated ‘he’s the solution to big gov’. I’m not even sure he’d be a better President than Romney. Ideologically, he’s somewhat better, but Romney’s executive experience is important. Hate to admit it, but it matters a lot that the President not be a jackass.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  84. MO will not support him against Obama and they’ve gone with the winner since 1904.

    Comment by gary gulrud

    I hope you’re mistaken. I worry about Romney’s electability. Frankly, I worry a lot about politicians who are premised mainly on electability. It feels like a weak argument.

    But I’m so out of touch with this country that I can’t really say I know what electable looks like. I figured Perry would crush this field.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  85. We will have options beside staying home. In MN the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party are on the ballot like most everywhere. The Independence Party gets 8% or more in every state-wide election.

    There is zero chance, none at all, not a prayer, Romany carries MN in Nov. WI, he’d have a prayer.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  86. That’s a pretty convincing argument. Still hope you’re wrong, but I’d be a hypocrite to condemn those principles patriots who have drawn a line in the sand.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  87. Dustin- I loved Perry getting in the race, but then it blew up in his face. His statement about making d.c. inconsequential in our lives, is something I can identify with.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  88. Yeah, I really dug that statement as well.

    I have a hard time blaming him for sucking… the most skilled candidates didn’t even run. Not that I’d run either. It’s ugly enough just being a commenter on blogs. Can you imagine the life these people are living? The grim acceptance of every family member (such as Romney’s son) being hounded for their opinions (such as his generous comment about Obama). Your family’s ability to be human is a steep price to pay.

    Dustin (401f3a)

  89. There must be a reason there running. Is it for Love of Country?
    Is it Love of attention? Or greed? Family is part of the vetting process, right or wrong. I know it must be tough on there family’s, but what about my family? Food,gas,insurance,medical, and everything else is up 10% in the last year. My woodworking skills have been paying me the same for much too long. Five years without an increase in pay. I don’t think the republicans give a shit about craftsmen building million dollar sweeping stair cases. So now it’s crawl anywhere do anything to keep the payments on time. Screw the right. They have no plan. But I am abo, positive.

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  90. Rasmussen is not having a good campaign, especially down South.

    Looking ahead, CA, TX, NY all are proportional by poll projections. This will be a contested convention. Jeb, Sarah and Bobby will be on hand just to make it interesting.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  91. gary- What about Col. West, Palin,Walker?

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  92. Walker West 2012.

    Why the hell not?

    Dustin (401f3a)

  93. Perry has a non-zero chance of being the Nominee. Jeb, Sarah and Bobby, for whom no votes have been cast, have zero chance.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  94. DaveB never fails to bring the talking points of the day for Team Romney. Never fails.

    JD (d246fe)

  95. Here is Silver’s permutations:

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/how-daunting-is-santorums-delegate-math/

    Plainly the baseline is closest to reality, and gives Willard an 18 vote cushion. But 30% of the delegates are not ‘bound’ to vote as assigned.

    Look at the map and ask yourself ‘who gives us GOP Presidents’?

    Those delegates will be asking themselves and each other.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  96. soon be time to show
    His Ruinous Fecklessness
    that we’ve had ENOUGH!

    Colonel Haiku (e907d0)

  97. The same Nate Silver, who was trying to discount the Times own poll, who was seriously suggesting
    that Republicans were extinct in 2009, and they should go for higher taxes as a campaign strategy.

    narciso (bcbb5a)

  98. Actually any of the Journolisters, almost statistically can be proven wrong 80% of the Time;

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/03/14/politicos-alex-burns-voters-are-forrest-gump-lack-most-basic-grasp-detai

    narciso (bcbb5a)

  99. 97. The syntax leaves me lost as to your import.

    gary gulrud (035984)

  100. “…and this partial score just in from the Far West: Guam Tech 23.”
    – Firesign Theatre

    mojo (8096f2)

  101. hey, Lost in Minnesota… take the damn bet!

    Colonel Haiku (e907d0)

  102. Per Drudge, Romney takes Mississippi. Things are tight in Alabama.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku — 3/13/2012 @ 3:57 pm

    Oops

    JD (318f81)

  103. After Tuesday votes in Mississippi, Alabama, Hawaii and American Samoa:

    DELEGATES WON
    41 Romney
    35 Santorum
    24 Gingrich
    1 Paul

    Colonel Haiku (e907d0)

  104. Santorum should make up a little bit of ground this weekend — he should win Missouri (the real vote that counts this time) and do well or possibly win Puerto Rico — but he will still emerge with at the most only half of Romney’s overall delegate count.

    Icy (192e4b)

  105. Yep, Icy… Romney has 498 delegates vs. 239 for Santorum, and he’s won 50% of all the delegates awarded to date and about 45% of the delegates required to win the nomination.

    Romney has also won more than a million more votes than Santorum at this point in the campaign.

    Colonel Haiku (e907d0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5277 secs.