Patterico's Pontifications

Ding!

Karl (f07e38) — 1/17/2012 @ 2:24 pm

Head to head polling is unreliable because things change and people become much better informed about the nominees.

Tom Jensen is focused on Mitt’s unfavorables, which could be the Bain issue, but may also represent a lot of conservative disgust with Romney’s increasingly-likely nomination.

Disgust with the campaign, maybe.

There should be a way to break it down.

Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 1/17/2012 @ 2:37 pm

You got that right Sammy.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:15 pm

Jensen is a classic hack with an agenda, he probably re weighted the number of Democrats
in his sample.

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:17 pm

In other words Jensen is a manwhore for the democrat party.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:20 pm

There’s no profit in him reweighing the sample when he’s reporting what the sample is. Most everyone who would be paying attention to a PPP poll knows to check the sample of any poll.

Karl (f07e38) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:24 pm

Well I don’t see the breakdown, but I know his pattern;

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:25 pm

You know Jensen is a pathetic douschenozzle.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:26 pm

Doesn’t Jensen post here as Jukeboxbizzatch?

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:34 pm

What surprise? Independents loathe mittens.

sickofrinos (44de53) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:36 pm

By the way if you see my spelling mistakes……….please know I’m a fast typer.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:44 pm

That is because Independents are fickle mistresses.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:54 pm

Karl – why is it, other than bias, that polling firms routinely over sample Dems and/or under sample Reps?

JD (d5e24e) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:57 pm

We shouldn’t worry too much about these polls, but the fact is that Obama will be tough to beat, and tougher still if we take Obamacare and conservatism itself basically off the table by nominating a prime time ‘most electable before anyone thinks about it’ type again.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/17/2012 @ 3:59 pm

……………………..To the Romneyroids Palin did not attack Romney and his work at Bain got it?

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 4:10 pm

Speaking of PPP, here’s another poll that caught my eye. One thing’s for certain… we can’t nominate a guy who can’t even maintain a lead in the state he’s doing such a bang-up job of governing… or at least we’re constantly told he’s doing such a swell job.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/01/romney-dewhurst-lead-in-texas.html

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 4:11 pm

Here’s another reason why this incompetent, cult-of-personality clown occupier of the Oval Office needs to be sent packing come November:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/288368/genachowski-rubs-it-sam-batkins

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 4:19 pm

jimgeraghty: Of the 40 FL, TX, NC, SC, NH, IA, and national GOP primary polls released in 2011, Mitt Romney has led 38 of them. http://t.co/SJmZNNI2

jimgeraghty: The worst poll out for Romney today is the Monmouth University one of SC, which has him up 11 points.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 4:28 pm

Why are critics of Islam pegged far-right?

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 4:46 pm

You can’t forget the Chavez loving Mark Lloyd, his Zampolit at the FCC.

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 4:56 pm

if I had to pick between Romney and Obama I would pick Romney not Obama because I think Romney would be a much better president than Obama

happyfeet (e3f0bc) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:08 pm

What I find utterly remarkable is you’ve had 4 years to come up with a candidate to oppose what you all literally loathe. Our President.

And the best you can come up with is the guy who lost to McCain with only Republicans voting. Mitt Romney.

You’d think you could at the least nominate a Christian. Or maybe at the least a conservative. But no.

Kinda says something about you folks and today’s GOP, huh.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

jhp (323d52) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:08 pm

If anyone believes that outside NYC the tally will be Dog + Kitteh = 95% of the popular vote please turn in your Higher Being card.

These cretins will struggle to break 40% inbetween the asyla formerly known as the East and West Coasts.

You know who you are.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:10 pm

22. jhp keeps their card.

Nikki admits she will not be “loved of Kitteh” because her stern is FLOTUS material.

Haley B. anyone?

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:18 pm

“You’d think you could at the least nominate a Christian.”

Stupid.

btw, if you follow a faith pertaining to or derived from the story of Christ, you’re a dictionary definition of a Christian, so Romney is OK on that count.

But he’s a shameless flip flopping liberal who is utterly unworthy of the Presidency.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:21 pm

Romney, huh? Who woulda think it.

happyfeet (e3f0bc) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:22 pm

I’m not a fickle mistress or a deaf dumb republican.

sickofrinos (44de53) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:25 pm

Jharpy is such a pathetic troll.

JD (d5e24e) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:27 pm

25. “dictionary definition of”

Deep, really, like the Styx.

Mulligan.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:32 pm

Vote mittens-The establishment said so.
Lock step march to complete collectivism via the republican way.

sickofrinos (44de53) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:36 pm

13. As of a couple days ago Rasmussen is weighting Repubs 35%, Dimmis 33% which is silly, GOP faithful is actually 27%.

But they may get good results with the arithmetic as Indies are mostly quite conservative.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:40 pm

Me and sicko will take Hai Colon and Icy on, best of three falls, no resusitation, round girl is a brunette, three inch heels max, no gouging the eyes or pudenda, boys, no nibbling ears.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:47 pm

Some stat whores, via Hotair, have Perry third behind Princess and Zany in a tight contest.

I thought Texans were provincial and loyal. What gives?

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 5:59 pm

Tight contest IN TEXAS. Doh.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:01 pm

gulrud, ya pencil-neck geek, I’d have you hoisted by your short n’ curlies before the end of Round One. I’d bet you your next coffee enema on it.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:08 pm

Gulrud you pencil-neck geek Haiku will use his sonic voice of death to PWN you.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:11 pm

35. No doubt, I’m counting on sicko, the farm boy, to tag only if he needs to pee.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:11 pm

From RCP, courtesy of Hugh Hewitt…
“Today’s polling data must disquiet everyone not named Romney, including President Obama and the House and Senate Democrats.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/

http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/30dbd409-c47f-4559-8051-8262ff21d020

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:14 pm

Just dropping by report on anecdotal evidence of just how highly efficient and organized the Romney campaign here in Florida actually is.

Preface–I’ve always been a registered Democrat. When I ‘converted’ to libertarian (small-l) I remained registered as a Democrat because I live in a highly Democratic area, and it makes more sense to vote for the most conservative Democrat in a primary, if there is one, than to simply vote for the Republican in the general election. The conservative Democrat at least has a chance at winning the primary. (I’ve mentioned before that Debbie W-S is my Congresscreature. That’s how Democratic this area is.)

The other voter in the household is my mother, who would have been either mortified or insulted if anyone mistook her for a Republican before the Alzheimer’s finally took over.

And a reminder that Florida is a closed primary, so I can’t vote in the GOP primary.

Now the data point, which is much briefer:

Tonight I received the second robocall in the last week from the Romney campaign soliciting me to vote by absentee ballot in the primary.

JBS (abe1f8) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:15 pm

WTF?!

JD (d5e24e) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:15 pm

BTW, although I don’t listen to TV that much, the only ads I’ve seen so far are Romney’s.

JBS (abe1f8) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:17 pm

Sorry to hear about your mother, JBS, but please make sure she only votes once next November.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:19 pm

Well we here Newt’s commercials on the radio, notably the Clear Channel station.

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:20 pm

also sorry to hear you suffer under the Poodleman-Shultz regime.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:20 pm

42. I laughed, audibly and from the heart.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:21 pm

The closest one comes to a conservative Democrat around here, is the former Mayor of Ft. Lauderdale, who did support W, but as you see that’s former.

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:24 pm

41. Rush’s show has featured Neut’s PAC ads.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:29 pm

Of the 40 FL, TX, NC, SC, NH, IA, and national GOP primary polls released in 2011, Mitt Romney has led 38 of them. http://t.co/SJmZNNI2

I call bull*hit. Romney led most national polls (as in more than half) but there were a darn sight more than “40” polls in 2011 even if you only consider national polls, and Perry and Gingrich led a goodly number of them.

Same for Iowa, South Carolina and Florida. It is true that Romney led New Hampshire wire-to-wire.

[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:29 pm

Hmmm, perhaps he meant 2012.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:36 pm

the Texas vultures
circle the vote-parched carcass
in their lazy loops

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:37 pm

wily coyote
stalks as helpless Rick regrets
one he did not shoot

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:42 pm

tarantula crawls
apparition? no! Rick cries
eh tu, coyote?!?

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:46 pm

eyes have no mercy
why has God forsaken me?
something I forgot?

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:49 pm

coyote bites chews
that ’69 Roadrunner
would come in handy

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:52 pm

he goes out smilin’
thoughts of wrasslin’ anita
black vinyl back seat

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:54 pm

Stupid Wasilla Populist C*nt says if Nikki would give her the time of day because she were a constituent she’d make her mark next to Neut Bane of All That is Good and Decent.

Almost an endorsement, in a trailer trash slutty sort of ignorant moosey way.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 6:56 pm

Ronbrin is a mendoucheous twatwaffle, on steroids.

JD (d5e24e) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:05 pm

coyote shudders
spits up hair, gristle and check
Rick’s mouth could not cash

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:05 pm

Comment by narciso — 1/17/2012 @ 6:24 pm

You’re probably right (although I thought that mayor was Republican). but I don’t live in Fort Lauderdale (where there are enough Republicans to help vote Alan West into office at least). I live in Pembroke Pines. Conservative Democrats may be hard to find around here, but electable Republicans are pretty close to non existent.

I think back in 2008, I was the only person in a long line at 8AM at my precinct who was not voting for Obama.

JBS (abe1f8) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:06 pm

The Perry Chronicles…

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:06 pm

Stay assy Gary.

Also you shouldn’t talk about your mom like that.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:10 pm

Oh crum, Romany was head of Dain Bammage into 2001, thru the Olympic tenure when the French effed the figure skatin’ up.

Hope the Fwench get downgraded and are forced to eat Idahoes without trans fats.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:12 pm

When you cut taxes your taking from the school……so lets raise property taxes by 1 zillion percent.

/Democraps and Teacher Unions

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:13 pm

60. Irony Doh, /sarc off. Public school kid? My apologies to the ‘rents.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:14 pm

I’m not a public school kid………by the way NJ democraps said that so you should take ity up with them.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:16 pm

it*

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:16 pm

I tink ‘Cuda could do a better job with POTUS Tuesdays and Thursdays, staying home with the kids MWF and doing Hannity and Greta weekends than the GOP can do happy hour grub stakes.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:22 pm

I think you need to stop posting under the influence.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:24 pm

69. Or start?

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:25 pm

I know Palin is trying to steal your soul but man your paranoid.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:37 pm

Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean there isn’t crazy people out there;

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:44 pm

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/sarah-palin-if-i-were-in-south-carolina-id-vote-for-newt/

Paranoid? The borg assimilates.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:48 pm

If she had backed Mittens, like Haley and O’Donnell, then I would have suspected pods.

narciso (87e966) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:54 pm

Newt is the only option, Texican abogados notwithstanding.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 7:55 pm

Yoda on hope: “there is another”.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 8:00 pm

61. Mom’s gone over to the dark side, politely, in a most lady-like fashion. All of her kids are rightys, but she loves us anyways.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 8:11 pm

Let me get this straight lower taxes is the same as slavery but yet Obama supports a payroll tax cut.

i’m beginning to hate the left and their hypocrisy.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/17/2012 @ 8:12 pm

Tim Scott, Rep. 1st District Rep. SC, on Laura Jan. 17, argued eloquently, for Romany/and or [a real Nominee] as someone we all will get behind as he will sagaciously choose sa the most useless employee in America, as Vice President a TEA party fave.

Thanks Tim, I like you a lot, clean up your room and we’ll see about ice cream.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/17/2012 @ 8:57 pm

I believe that during primary season an unopposed President polling against candidates for a nomination should kick their ass in every poll… but he isn’t. Primary voters who back a candidate tend to want to show their own nominee as the only one that can beat Obama and skew the others. I’m guessing if Romney is losing to Obama by only a couple of points it actually means he’ll kick Obama’s ass in November. The fact he has actually been ahead of him in most of the other polls indicates a possible landslide if nominated.

Dave B (982f20) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:44 am

Gary- I was bummed listening to the drivel coming from Tim Scotts mouth. I thought he was more of a conservative than a republican.
I’ll take the round girl when I finish.

sickofrinos (44de53) — 1/18/2012 @ 2:26 am

I live in Pembroke Pines. Conservative Democrats may be hard to find around here, but electable Republicans are pretty close to non existent.

My area’s like that too, but I registered as a Republican so I can vote in statewide and presidential primaries. It’s not as if there’s ever anyone worth voting for in the D primary; the most “conservative” D around here is still far left, so what’s the point?

When I go to vote in R primaries they automatically start filling in a green card and I have to point out to them that I’m listed on the roll as a R. Usually they then have to open the package of pink cards, which has lain unused on their table from when the polls opened. One time they were unaware that there was a R primary, and tried to tell me that I couldn’t vote!

Milhouse (ea66e3) — 1/18/2012 @ 3:47 am

I hadn’t seen the last debate but I had listened to pundits and talk show hosts that I listen to in order to formulate my opinion and listened to their highlights. Then I finally had an opportunity and watched it. Then to make sure I wasn’t completely crazy I watched it again. Had I listened to the media I would have thought that Romney completly blew it, that Newt kicked his ass, that SC and Fla were now Newt’s to lose and that all the others made him look like a weak liberal and Newt was so powerful that even Sarah Palin was moved to vote for him and Romney got “booed” for his stances. I originally thought that this was Romney’s “Waterloo” , was “confused” and “unprepared”and he would quickly be dethroned as the frontrunner.

Then I watched the damned debate. It was nothing of the sort. Not even close. Romney was on his game as usual, and Newt got the biggest applause lines because he really doesn’t have to worry about being the frontrunner in the general election and that’s what he aims for. All the candidates were good, even Paul.

I caution all of us conservatives to see with clear eyes, not clouded ones. Pelosi declared that Romney is the weakest candidate. Since when does she give Republicans advice that will benefit them?

I watched that debate a third time just to make sure. Romney did what he always does. He finished second to Newt but just barely. When Newt was the frontrunner he actually lost the debate because of his frontfunner status and questions posed to him. Romney did a much better job.

If there are fellow conservatives that want to keep the debate going and keep the primary from being a one man race then can we at least be honest about what is transpiring in front of our eyes? I understand, truly I do, why conservatives would choose one candidate over another but I can’t understand any distortion of reality by people that are supposed to be pragmatic, logical, and fair.

Dave B (982f20) — 1/18/2012 @ 4:03 am

In Mass. they have a listing of Dem,Rep, or U
I am a unenrolled. “U”.
The dolt at the table said I was “Unitarian”.
The peeps in this state are Useless.

sickofrinos (44de53) — 1/18/2012 @ 4:03 am

Excellent analysis. Way to break down those poll samples to give the more realistic reading. Despite the headlines accompanying this poll in the MSM, lots of bad news here for the Great Uniter …

ombdz (2a81ef) — 1/18/2012 @ 4:28 am

82. “Newt got the biggest applause lines because he really doesn’t have to worry about being the frontrunner in the general election”

Rod Serling wrote sumpin like this, we, the protagonist, wake up one day, the wife ain’t right, the kids are wacked, and Fido don’t fetch.

Everyone, everywhere, is going thru the motions, reading their lines on the corneal teleprompter, but they’re all ALIENS, EVERY LAST ONE.

YEargghhhhh!!!!!

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 6:10 am

“Mr. Sanders, ‘To Serve Man’ it’s a cookbook’

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 6:12 am

83. Been there, the breadwinner is there today. Like NYC everyone with alpha wave activity is an import, the Midwest or abroad.

My deepest sympathies.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 6:21 am

61. See? It’s an affliction. I see dead people.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 6:23 am

Romney is a gutless nobody who will continue Obamacare while being universally despised by both sides.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 6:35 am

Deep, really, like the Styx.

Mulligan.

Comment by gary gulrud

It’s not meant to be deep.

If you want to debate whether Mormons are proper Christians, that’s an interesting discussion I’m sure and there are places to go and do that. And there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with debating which claims about God and Jesus are the right ones.

But the word “Christian” is a very broad one, and I don’t see why Mormons, who follow Christ, aren’t included. They are, in my opinion, just another denomination. I don’t understand why it matters, apart from my fear that the media will go unhinged as I think some on the left did in California.

I wonder what negative impact that persecution has had.

Anyway, Romney was a champion for Abortion Rights and Roe v Wade and flip flopped on human life for political expediency (spit). He has shown hatred for the human right to own a gun. Newt is ~~much better~~ less bad.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 7:23 am

90. The rule is if our drive doesn’t leave the tee, we have to moon the witnesses.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 7:37 am

Romney is like Bloomberg he hates guns and thinks southerners are gun toting anti-communist survivalists.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 7:41 am

I was encouraged by Newt. He’s still in after all, and he’s all that’s left.

sarahW (b0e533) — 1/18/2012 @ 7:51 am

93. “he’s all that’s left”

Yeah, the choice between the Dog and the Dog’s Breath isn’t what I’m after. Either way I scoop.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:16 am

This is becoming so tiresome:

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/18/rasmussen-natl-poll-showing-second-gingrich-boomlet/

Cue the “Ate his first born at wife’s deathbed” and the pudding too!

Bastard. When he denies it hit him with the “undisciplined, zany, terrorist scum” meme all over again.

The TEA vermin will never make the connection between Newt’s byline and theirs, planarians.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:29 am

Actually as a cop in Massachusetts I know exactly how Romney stands on gun control and the 2nd amendment. He’s for it. Period. All you outsiders that don’t have a clue about his voting record want to interpret his voting for personal reasons are way off base. You don’t have a clue on what we have to put up with in this state and what he did to protect gun rights. Almost every cop in our state supports Romney. Almost every conservative in the state supports Romney. Maybe you could find some other way of defiling him but it won’t be gun rights or the 2nd amendment. I know. I live here. Try something else.

Dave B (982f20) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:35 am

You are a lying POS.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:39 am

Nice try romneyroid.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:39 am

Ed HEnry# Breaking: A source tells colleague Wendell Goler State Dept will announce later this afternoon it is NOT going forward w/Keystone Pipeline

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:41 am

Why the eff not !?!?

Oh it might harm the enviroment…………..so China and Brazil can drill for their own oil but not us?

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:42 am

. You don’t have a clue on what we have to put up with in this state and what he did to protect gun rights.

The NRA endorsed the democrat who ran against Romney (his campaign claimed the opposite and were embarrasingly corrected).

Gun control was much stronger after romney’s term than it was before it.

The fine for buying a gun in MA was $25 when Romney took office. $100 when he left. Most of that increase was Romney’s doing. $25 of it was the democrats doing what they always do when a republican moves left (move farther left, naturally).

You don’t have a clue on what we have to put up with in this state

He put up with citizens wanting to exercise their rights. He said he could handle being governor.

aybe you could find some other way of defiling him but it won’t be gun rights or the 2nd amendment. I know. I live here.

You have said that you know about a dozen times in a single comment, without explaining any specific facts.

Tell me, Dave B, what is Mitt Romney’s position on “strong gun control”? Is he quoted as for it?

Tell me, Dave B, did Mitt Romney increase the “fee” for buying a gun in MA?

Tell me, Dave B, did Mitt Romney ban any guns?

Pretty straightforward questions. They answer to all three is yes.

Almost every cop in our state supports Romney.

Since when did our second amendment rights become something the police in MA have special authority over? How many appeals to authority are you going to cram in a single, fact-free comment?

You say I “Defiled” Mitt Romney, but all I did was accurately explain his terrible progressive “strong gun control” record. It’s Mitt Romney who defiled Mitt Romney.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:55 am

All you outsiders that don’t have a clue about his voting record want to interpret his voting for personal reasons are way off base.

And other thing: Romney isn’t running for MA office. He’s running for national office. I’m not an outsider to the USA and the second amendment applies here in Texas. The gun fee in Texas is $0. There is no gun registration, either.

And it’s just plain weird to say “personal reasons” must be the reason conservatives disagree with a self avowed “progressive” who has promised he supports “strong gun control”.

You’re not arguing with me, Dave. You’re arguing with Mitt’s terrible left wing record.

Only in a state as hardcore insane left as MA would Romney, with those hardcore left views, been electable. The only state that rejected Reagan for reelection.

Mitt Romney did worse than the other Republican governors because he collaborated far too much with democrats, instead of being a clear alternative. This is why he was so unpopular he didn’t even attempt a reelection. Polls show he would have lost.

But he’s very slick and he’s flip flopped on everything, so some claim it’s wrong to care about anything but what romney claims to support today. Even Romney’s record (which is all that matters to me, and is terrible).

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:00 am

The only state that rejected Reagan for reelection.

Minnesota’s the only state that Reagan didn’t carry.

Only in a state as hardcore insane left as MA would Romney, with those hardcore left views, been electable. The only state that rejected Reagan for reelection.

Mitt Romney did worse than the other Republican governors because he collaborated far too much with democrats, instead of being a clear alternative.

Those two paragraphs contradict each other. The second paragraph which implies he never opposed the Democrat legislature is BS as is the suggestion they wanted a Democrat because he didn’t oppose the Democrats enough.

Saying Romney has hardcore left views is absurd.

Gerald A (b4fe48) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:10 am

And no disrespect to Dave or other police officers in MA, but this is what I think of when I think about law enforcement in MA.

I greatly disagree with this kind of view of our most basic right. I realize the guy in the patrol car didn’t make these policies, but it’s a very bad system and the results are very predictable.

Austin and Boston are similar in some ways, but you are five times as likely to be murdered in Boston, and more than twice as likely to be assaulted or robbed. Violent crime is a huge problem for such an affluent city. Why? Because the citizens are much less able to take care of themselves. The gun tax in Boston is $100 (thanks mostly to Mitt Romney). There is no gun tax or registration in Austin.

Austin is substantially larger than Boston, yet has a fraction of the violent crime. I didn’t poll the Austin police department about this, though.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:11 am

The second paragraph which implies he never opposed the Democrat legislature is BS

I didn’t say that. I said he collaborated far too much with democrats, which is a perfectly valid opinion. Mitt Romney thanked Ted Kennedy and called him a collaborator on Romneycare. I think this approach made MA much more liberal.

Saying Romney has hardcore left views is absurd.

Why? Mitt Romney thinks the individual mandate is conservative. I disagree. Mitt Romney has claimed Roe v Wade is “good law”. I disagree. Mitt Romney has praised “strong gun control” and criticized the Reagan administration. I disagree.

Romney has called himself “progressive” and it’s absurd to call him hardcore left? Why? Because he flip flopped?

I noted I only care about their records. Romney has a hardcore left record.

I grant that the democrats inevitably went to the left of Romney on everything. That’s how it naturally works. When the Republican party moves 8 inches to the left, the democrats will want to go 9 inches.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:15 am

Minnesota’s the only state that Reagan didn’t carry.

Yeah, my mistake on that.

but my point is that MA is very far leftist on the political spectrum, compared to other states.

That is why Mitt Romney was electable there. That’s why he began his political career there.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:17 am

96. ” Maybe you could find some other way of defiling him ”

After all he isn’t the guy who said Cambridge police ‘acted stupidly’.

He doesn’t mumble, like a Boston mayor, and he saved the ‘Big Dig’ from being an insidious wasteful government boondoggle.

You guys are killing the good in a Quixotic tilt after the second coming of the Risen Lord, wingnuts.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:28 am

Those two paragraphs contradict each other.

Liberals can’t win in Texas, but moderates can win in MA.

Not a contradiction. And in no way does it help Romney.

I could go on all day noting how liberal Romney is. He explained that MA needed to “invest” in education more, despite already having a very highly funded education system. Despite being one of the worst states on debt, Romney asked for (and of course got) more funding for education.

The results were nonexistent.

Romney appointed a governor’s counsel and then appointed jurists to the bench via that counsel. They were 75% liberal democrats. Even after Romney’s fake flip flop on abortion, he was appointing pro choice jurists. Very, very liberal.

Romney encouraged amnesty.

Here’s one of Romney’s many varying explanations about business:

{I will] personally bring together industry, labor, Congressional and state leaders and together we will develop a plan to rebuild America’s automotive leadership.

That’s a lot of government and political lobbyists. Why? What business is it of DC whether a business prospers?

“I am not open to a bailout, but I am open to a work out. Washington should not be a benefactor, but it can and must be a partner.”

Romney’s instinct is that the government needs to get in there and fix our problems. That’s how he dealt with guns, human life, business, health care, car companies, etc etc etc. It’s an endless list.

Sorry, guys. Romney wants the government to be powerful and consequential. He’s a liberal. I’ll grant that a lot of Republicans are liberals, but if you’re saying it’s absurd to call Romney liberal, then you are just trying to avoid the argument.

It’s easy to point to things Romney has said that contradict just about everything in Romney’s record. This leads to a lot of heated arguing as people only familiar with Romney’s lies think that’s who he is.

Take it up with Romney’s record.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:31 am

You guys are killing the good in a Quixotic tilt after the second coming of the Risen Lord, wingnuts.

Comment by gary gulrud —

I’m after the most conservative candidate who can win. I think that’s Newt. It’s quite a compromise. I think we will realize Romney couldn’t beat Obama if we nominate him. If that happens, don’t pretend anyone would have done worse.

Rudy would have beaten Obama. Even Palin probably could have. We need someone who can make an argument. Romney will be on defense the entire time. There are very few attacks he can make that he won’t appear hypocritical on, and he’s going to be annoyingly weak on ‘tax cuts for the rich’.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:35 am

The wingnuts should have been the tipoff, Dustin.

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:36 am

106. The state bird isn’t a loon for nothing.

Just a couple nights ago a 19 and 21 year old went down in 45 feet surfing snow ‘mobiles'(‘machines’ if you can see Russia from your porch).

We’re having the warmest winter in my life, such as it is, a week of cold weather and they were headed to a party or something.

Jesse ‘the Body’ Ventura and Al ‘the Fool’ Franken are among our most esteemed citizens.

Is it a great country or what?

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:36 am

The wingnuts should have been the tipoff, Dustin.

Comment by narciso

Yeah, it was. I knew he was kidding. It’s me who is bad at sarcasm, not Gary.

I think the calls for unity before the primary is over are basically just a trick. Romney is burning through the cash and cannot last. Newt doesn’t need money the way Romney does (to plaster a state with wall to wall negative ads).

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:39 am

111 ‘those words you are using, . . .

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:44 am

A preview of what the conservatives will be forced to deal with if we nominate Romney.

if you instead think America’s biggest problem is high unemployment and a lack of economic growth, then you should be outraged that Romney is paying any income taxes at all. Really.

Funny, but MA took in record capital gains revenues when Romney was governor of MA. Did he want then cut? Nope. Did he increase taxes? Yep (relying on doublespeak like ‘closing the loophole isn’t a tax increase). Did Romney take all this record revenue and pay off MA’s huge debt (one of the worst in the nation when Romney’s watch was over)? Nope. He grew the government to scale with the increase of the revenue, basically leaving the same budget gap he found (over a billion).

And that’s how weak RINOs govern in boom years. When the boom years end, then the pundits start noticing the entitlements (like Romneycare) are subsidizing so many people that bankruptcy is in the future.

This is liberal.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:53 am

btw, the blog I linked above makes some great points.

but Romney is too weak to make them.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:53 am

113. Arnold Toynbee said a while back “America is great because Americans are good”.

That is our quest.

I’ll be in the rear commiserating with the stragglers and layabouts. Lead on.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:54 am

Since when are eastern big city cops supporters of the 2nd Amendment anyway? That they support Romney’s gun policies does not mean he’s pro gun rights.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/18/2012 @ 10:15 am

The new Rasmussen national poll has it 30% for Romney, 27% for Gingrich. Gingrich is up 11% since their last national poll and Santorum is sinking fast. Add in Perry’s 5% and the not-Romney-but-sane vote is 47%.

Add this (from behind the pay wall at Rasmussen):

Among Republican primary voters nationwide, 34% think Romney is the GOP candidate who would do a better job managing the economy, but almost as many (29%) feel Gingrich would do the better job. Paul’s a distant third at 14%. When it comes to national security and defense, Gingrich is the clear leader: 43% think he would do a better job versus 18% who say the same of Romney.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/18/2012 @ 10:19 am

Rasmussen attributes the changes largely to Gingrich’s stunning performance at the Monday debate (the poll (1,000 Likely Republican Primary Voters) was conducted Tuesday).

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/18/2012 @ 10:21 am

If MA cops are anything like NY cops, then they are all enemies of the 2nd amendment, and if they’re for Romney then that’s a good reason to be against him.

Milhouse (d7842d) — 1/18/2012 @ 10:40 am

Comment by JD — 1/17/2012 @ 3:57 pm

#

Karl – why is it, other than bias, that polling firms routinely over sample Dems and/or under sample Reps?

There’s actually now a tremendous number of refusals.

Now they don’t set out to oversample or undersample anyone, but they don’t correct for party. That’s treated as an unknown. They do try quota sampling: age, sex, race. location. The party question is always something like what party are you closest to or what do you consider yourself. Most states no longer have party registration, so this is a number that changes a lot from year to year.

The reason for the oversampling of Democrats is that Republicans don’t trust polls. It wasn’t always this way. It used to be that Democrats did not trust polls.

This goes back to 1936 and the Literary Digest poll. What they tell you, what Gallup tried to claim at the time, was that the Literary Digest used telephone numbers and these were richer people etc. This is not true, The Literary Digest mainly used voluntary responses and they left a lot of blank ballots at Post Offices and other public places. It was a straw poll. It worked very well in 1920, in 1924 in 1928 and in 1932. In 1932 it clearly showed Herbert Hoover losing.

What probably really happened, although I’ve read nobody say so, or any confession, was that the ballot box was of this straw poll was stuffed. The Literary Digest had Landon winning almost 2 to 1 when he really lost almost 2 to 1.

After tat for years it was harder to get people who intended to vote for the Democrat to answer polls. There was statistical bias. This lasted until about 1960. After 1968, the bias began trending the other way.

They used to interview people in person but this moved to telephone calls, using random digit dialing by the 1980s. In some other countries they still did it in person but in the United States this was by telephone. This was fairly goo. Practically everybody had a telephone (land line of course)

After the 1980s more and more people refused to take part in surveys because they got so many sales calls.

Now they get so many refusals that polling is much more an at than a science. They have to decide how to weigh responses

By the way, they stopped reporting Don’t Know. in newspaper articles. They used to in the 1960s.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:05 pm

Sarah Palin actually semi-endorsed Newt Gingrich. hShe didn’t actually endorse him – she said if she lived in South Carolina she would vote for Newt Gingrich in order to keep this thing going. Test out the candidates.

I was expecting her to endorse Santorum if anyone.

And both have to stay in race if you are looking for altogether different person, although that’s nott oo likely anyway.

By the way it won’t be long now that columnists for Romney may be deprived of the argument that Romney won the first two states, and anyone who wins the first two becomes the nominee

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:12 pm

It was McGovern in 1972, who only carried Massachusetts.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:15 pm

Prairie Dog populations are increasing in the USA.

The left and their chicken little threats ain’t fooling me.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:18 pm

Newt Gingrich cannot win the general election. This is the media age. His physical appearance (fat, jowly, crooked greyish teeth) will not compare well next to tall, slender handsome Obama. 60% will hear one word of his supposedly brilliant oratory. Instead, they will decide on Obama just do the visual. That is the way it is in 2012. Also, the first family and first lady issues will also not compare well at all to the average person. Beyond that, he is not competent to lead this country. Erratic, thin-skinned, in love with himself. An ex-professor. We have all of that now. And he is not all that conservative. He is a terrible choice. I hope the Republicans do not make that huge mistake.

bio mom (a1e126) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:35 pm

Comment by Dustin — 1/18/2012 @ 9:31 am

Romney encouraged amnesty.

Now he’s all the way on the other side

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/01/17/transcript-fox-news-channel-wall-street-journal-debate-in-south-carolina/

BAIER: OK. Next round of questions, Juan Williams.

WILLIAMS: Governor Romney, your father was born in Mexico. You still have family there, yet you have taken the hardest line of anyone on this stage on immigration reform, including opposition to key parts of the DREAM Act, which is supported by 80 percent of Latinos in this country. Are you alienating Latino voters that Republicans will need to win the general election?

ROMNEY: You know, I think Latino voters, like all voters in this country, are interested in America being an opportunity nation. People come here because they believe they want to have a brighter future and that’s been the story of America. The president looks out across the country and says it could be worse. I can’t believe saying that. The American people recognize it’s got to be better.

[Without saying so, Romney tried to argue this is not an important issue for Latinos.]

In my view, as long as we communicate to the people of all backgrounds in this country that it can be better, and that America is a land of opportunity, we will get those votes.

[Sure.]

Now with regards to immigration policy, I absolutely believe that those who come here illegally should not be given favoritism or a special route to becoming permanent residents or citizens that’s not given to those people who have stayed in line legally. I just think we have to follow the law, I think that’s the right course.
(APPLAUSE)

[Romney is saying, here and everywhere, whatever seems to be the “right thing” to say.]

ROMNEY: And I have indicated I would veto the DREAM Act if provisions included in that act to say that people who are here illegally, if they go to school here long enough, get a degree here that they can become permanent residents.

I think that’s a mistake. I think we have to follow the law and insist those who come here illegally, ultimately return home, apply, and get in line with everyone else.

Look, I want people to know I love legal immigration. Almost all of us in this room are descendants of immigrants or are immigrants ourselves. Our nation is stronger and more vibrant by virtue of a strong legal immigration system.

But to protect our legal immigration system we have got to protect our borders and stop the flood of illegal immigration and I will not do anything that opens up another wave of illegal immigration.

[Notice this is completely consistent with greatly expanding legal immigration, and the truth is, that might psss through the Congress more easily. Instead of DREAM act which gives the right to stay to anyone brought here at an early age who graduates from college, maybe you would pass a bill saying that anyone college graduate from anywhere in the world who speaks English could come. He’s just opposed to giving anyone here illegally a legal advantage.]

Here’s one of Romney’s many varying explanations about business:

{I will] personally bring together industry, labor, Congressional and state leaders and together we will develop a plan to rebuild America’s automotive leadership.

This is Romney on getting a consensus. There doesn’t seem to be any thinking himself on any issue. Look at this:

ROMNEY: Well, Juan, in my state we had a piece of legislation that was crafted both by the pro gun lobby and the anti-gun lobby. Massachusetts has some very restrictive rules and the pro gun lobby said, you know what, this legislation is good for us, it includes provisions that we want that allows us, for instance, to crossroads with weapons when we’re hunting that had not been previously allowed.

And so the pro gun folks in our state, the the Gun Owners Action League and others said, look, we would like you to sign this legislation. And the day when we announced our signing, we had both the pro gun owners and anti-bun folks all together on the stage because it worked. We worked together. We found common ground.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:42 pm

Here’s Romney staking out a position:

“I’m not letting felons who had committed violent crimes vote. I think it’s a — a position that’s reasonable, and that’s the position I’ve got.”

Whatever seems to be the “right thing” to say.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:45 pm

bi-lingual vulture
dear rick perry it is time
to strip dem bones clean

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:49 pm

Mn. has Paul Bunyun and his Blue Ox, Babe.
Kieth lower the voting age to 16 Ellison.
Bob Dylan and Prince, what a state of mind.

sickofrinos (44de53) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:53 pm

Comment by Kevin M — 1/18/2012 @ 10:21 am

Rasmussen attributes the changes largely to Gingrich’s stunning performance at the Monday debate (the poll (1,000 Likely Republican Primary Voters) was conducted Tuesday).

That was quick.

Another nationwide poll was about 39% Romney, Gingrich and Santorum both 14% (total 28%) Ron Paul 12%.

Now it’s 30% for Romney, 27% for Gingrich, Santorum about 15%, Perry 5%. Not-Romney and (you mean?) Not-Paul 47%.

47% is barely viable. This vote or delegate total has got to get up to near 55%. At 55% Not-Romney but sane Romney is finished. At 45%, Not-Romney has very small chances. Between 45% and 55% different outcomes are possible.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 12:56 pm

In 1984, the Democratic Presidential nominee, Walter Mondale, was from Minnesota.

In both 1972 and 1984 the Democratic nominee also carried the District of Columbia with its 3 Electoral votes.The Democratic nominee always gets about 82% there.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:00 pm

More to the point, McGovern didn’t carry his home state, to my recollection.

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:01 pm

JonahNRO “Ooof. Newt Gingrich loves private equity http://t.co/l6g8O2g6 “

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:02 pm

Only in a state as hardcore insane left as MA would Romney, with those hardcore left views, been electable. The only state that rejected Reagan for reelection.

Mitt Romney did worse than the other Republican governors because he collaborated far too much with democrats, instead of being a clear alternative.

Those two paragraphs contradict each other.

Liberals can’t win in Texas, but moderates can win in MA.

Not a contradiction. And in no way does it help Romney.

If moderates can win in MA, then MA is not “hardcore insane left”. And if it’s not “hardcore insane left” then Romney winning there doesn’t prove he’s hardcore left. You’re simultaneously saying Romney won because he’s hardcore left and he wouldn’t have gotten reelected because he wasn’t moderate enough. MA is both hardcore left and moderate simultaneously, depending on whether we’re looking at when he won or when he couldn’t win again.

I can’t really take anything you say seriously at this point. You’re like a Paulbot or something.

Gerald A (b4fe48) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:02 pm

Bisexual vulture

dear Jukeboxgrad it is time

to get your head out of your arse.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:08 pm

If the likes of Gina McCarthy, the EPA’s Dr. Kevorkian of Coal, ‘electricity prices will necessarily skyrocket’ can rise in the Weld/Cellucci administration, therein lies the problem

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:08 pm

Rubio used to support SOPA but then withdrew his name………….Rubio is an idiot.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:10 pm

bi-lingual vulture
circles Texas carcasses
rick dustin death-clench

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:12 pm

Gerald zeroes in
on Texas dichotomy
wrapped in fustercluck

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:17 pm

‘Cual es tu problema, Coronel,’

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:19 pm

the Tao of Dustin
repeat same crap million times
hope someone believes

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:20 pm

http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/shhh-obama-proposed-secret-talks-with-iran/

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:20 pm

lying Lebanese
must try the baba ghanoush
prawn of Arab loins

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/18/2012 @ 1:26 pm

47% is barely viable. This vote or delegate total has got to get up to near 55%. At 55% Not-Romney but sane Romney is finished. At 45%, Not-Romney has very small chances. Between 45% and 55% different outcomes are possible.

Sammy, it depends on how you count the Paul delegates. At 13%, they could be thought of as notRomney, but they are also largely notRepbulican. As much as I would like, you can’t ignore them since they will probably show up and vote. Most likely they just create a higher bar for anyone getting the nomination if it is still contested. There is also 11% other or undecided.

See also:

Marianne loves long stories, straight talk, and rueful laughter at the infinity of human foibles. Her eyes go wide when she hears his line about being four to Callista’s five. “You know where that line came from? Me. That’s my line. That’s what I told him.”

She pauses for a moment, turning it over in her mind. Then she shakes her head in wonder. “I’m sorry, that’s so freaky.”

But she’s happy to say nice things about him, too. As a husband, she says, he was affectionate, fun, awkward, eager, endlessly inquisitive. Once, she asked him why he was always so full of questions, and he said, “I found that if I listen, I’ll learn more. And people like to talk to me.”

That’s completely Newt, she says. There was something missing inside, so he had to think his way into doing the right thing. “Newt trained himself. He wasn’t a natural. He doesn’t have natural instincts and insights. Everything has to be a thought process first. It took years and years. It wasn’t, ‘I have this insight, I am compelled, I can do no other.’ It was step by step by step by step, and it was all mental, all learned behavior.”

It’s kind of touching, really. “He was a shy boy underneath it all,” she says.

This is I think what supposedly could end Newt’s campaign: (it really wouldn’t)

From the Esquire article:

to this day, for example, the official story is that he started dating Jackie when he was eighteen and she was twenty-five. But he was really just sixteen, she says.

[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:23 pm

Yes paulnutters Israel using a wall to keep in jihadists is the same as a wall communists used to keep in its victims.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:26 pm

And he’s also killing jobs, betraying our allies, destroying our industries, one by one, hyperbole
can get out of hand,

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:28 pm

narciso – They’re both anti-capitalist and want to limit the amount of money people make, so they also have that in common.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:34 pm

Button up boys — and girls — four more years of Obama or someone you don’t like.

The decision is yours.

Ag80 (ccff59) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:35 pm

Also from zesquire:

One night, Marianne says, Bill Clinton called from the White House. She answered the phone and the president asked if he could please speak to her husband. Could the Speaker come over immediately? After he hung up, Newt summoned his driver and went in the back door to the Oval Office. During that meeting, he would tell her later, Clinton laid it out for him: “You’re a lot like me,” he told him.

Whatever else happened at that meeting, Newt Gingrich was muzzled in the critical run-up to the ’98 midterms. Three weeks before the election, Gingrich got a visit from Kenneth Duberstein, a senior Republican who had served as chief of staff to Ronald Reagan. “He says, ‘What’s going on? We’re gonna lose seats if something doesn’t change.’ ” Marianne jumped in, too. “I asked Newt, ‘What are you doing? Why aren’t we out there blasting them?’ ”

This was his true turning point, she believes. As his personal failures and his political contradictions closed in on him, she began to entertain fears about his fundamental decency. “I used to tell him I don’t care if you lose Congress as long as you’re standing for what you believe in and what we’ve worked for — as long as you don’t sell out,” she says. “But he wanted the life he wanted. You can call it opulent. You can call it self-indulgent. You can call it anything you want to. But that’s not me.”

Marianne remembers watching the election results with Gingrich in their war room down in Georgia, the dismal feeling as one Republican after another went down. The Republicans held on to the House majority, but not by much.

The next morning, Appropriations Committee chairman Bob Livingston of Louisiana threatened to run against Gingrich if he didn’t resign as Speaker. His unpopularity was dragging the party down. He faxed a list of demands to their house in Georgia, Marianne remembers, insisting that Newt cede him complete power over the appropriations process.

The next day, Gingrich called Marianne into his office and told her he had come to a decision. He was going to step down as Speaker. And resign from Congress, too, though he had just won another term. Later that week, on a conference call with a few party confidants, Gingrich said, “I’m willing to lead but I’m not willing to preside over people who are cannibals… . Frankly, Marianne and I could use a break.” His political career was over.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:36 pm

Newt want to start the environmental studies department at the college where he taught back in the 1970s, so his questionable roots go way back. His Pelosi commercial was no accident.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:37 pm

Obama is a multimillionaire too but he doesn’t need to pay his fair share.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:38 pm

Keystone Pipeline excuse: Congress did not give him enough time, if it had given him more, he might have approved it.

The state Department says the application cannot be amended – they must start all over. President Obama called Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to tell him of the decision, and Harper says that now the oil will go to China.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:41 pm

But we will be Brazil’s ‘best customer’, as per Soros’s demands, and even Cuba will be drilling
off the Florida coast,

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:45 pm

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/romney-gingrich-poll-carolina/2012/01/15/id/424272

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 8:55 pm

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/up-next-obamas-new-energy-regulations-will-put-32-coal-plants-out-of-business/

narciso (87e966) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:09 pm

That poll is outdated – it is from Sunday.

* Romney: 32 percent
* Gingrich: 21 percent
* Paul: 14 percent
* Santorum: 13 percent
* Huntsman: 6 percent
* Perry: 5 percent
* Other: 2 percent
* Undecided/ No opinion: 7 percent

That was one debate ago, and another one is stll to come before the South Caolina primary.

Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:29 pm

Yes paulnutters Israel using a wall to keep in jihadists is the same as a wall communists used to keep in its victims.

How about the Maginot line? Not that it worked, but was it wrong? And how about the wall that used to be on Wall St?

Milhouse (ea66e3) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:48 pm

Yes paulnutters Israel using a wall to keep in jihadists

No, it’s meant to keep them out. And that’s the difference between a legitimate wall and an illegitimate one. At the height of apartheid, I was struck by a Michael Barnard piece pointing out that while the USSR’s armed border guards were facing in to keep people from escaping, RSA’s armed border guards were facing out to prevent black Africans from sneaking in to this supposed racist hellhole.

Milhouse (ea66e3) — 1/18/2012 @ 9:50 pm

From that Esquire article:

The Ethics Committee found him guilty of laundering donations through charities […] Seven years after he had destroyed Jim Wright for a lesser offense, the committee punished Gingrich with the highest fine ever imposed on a Speaker of the House, $300,000.

This is complete bullshit. First of all, Wright’s offense was not lesser; what Wright did was actual corruption. The committee did not find Gingrich guilty of laundering donations or of any other corrupt behaviour, and the $300K was not a punishment but a reimbursement for the extra work the committee supposedly had to do because the information Gingrich gave it was incorrect.

[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

Milhouse (ea66e3) — 1/18/2012 @ 10:12 pm

Anyone who would use a bitter divorce to damage his opponent — and make no mistake, the timing of this was queued up by Romney — is someone I don’t want in the White House. This is so very dirty that I hope like hell it backfires on him, because I really don’t want to have to decide between two total pond scum.

And no, I have no “proof”, but then I don’t need any.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/19/2012 @ 12:17 am

The state Department says the application cannot be amended – they must start all over. President Obama called Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to tell him of the decision, and Harper says that now the oil will go to China.

I bet you they spent much less time on Solyndra.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/19/2012 @ 12:20 am

Anyone who would use a bitter divorce to damage his opponent

You mean Obama and Ryan?

Milhouse (ea66e3) — 1/19/2012 @ 2:04 am

“four more years of Obama or someone you don’t like.”

I can’t decide whether I want four years of Barack Romney or four years of Mitt Obama.

Dave Surls (46b08c) — 1/19/2012 @ 3:53 am

These are tough choices.

Do I want to be forced into Romneycare or forced into Obambicare?

Do I want to be taxed into pauperdom by a Democrat, or would it be better to have a progressive Republican do it?

Thank God, I have months to mull it over before I have to decide which fork of the road to hell I prefer.

Dave Surls (46b08c) — 1/19/2012 @ 4:02 am

Pew Poll has Ogabe handing Romany his butt if Paul runs. And Americans Elect will have a torpedo as well.

Romany is a guaranteed loser.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 4:50 am

184. Doesn’t exactly tell me our government has a friggin prayer, except to Belial.

Burn it down.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 4:55 am

I imagine that information was obtained through IGI’s Terry Lenzner, whose organization at one time was headed by Ray Kelly, yes that Ray Kelly,

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 5:38 am

http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2012/01/03/51732/

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 5:42 am

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/us/politics/poll-shows-obamas-vulnerability-with-swing-voters.html?_r=1&hp

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 5:50 am

http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/government/elections/2012-01-18/poll-gingrich-takes-lead-south-carolina?v=1326937376

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 6:31 am

No, Rick, N00000000000000000000000000000000000!!!!!!!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/19/breaking-perry-to-drop-out-thursday/

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 6:44 am

In like a lion, out like a coyote.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 6:54 am

Rick “Nancy Sinatra” Perry… These Boots Are Made For Walking.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 6:55 am

Out like a wet fart…

JimPethokoukis: “On Sept. 5, Intrade gave Perry 38.9% chance of being GOP nominee, high point. 1 month later, just 19%; 2 months, single digits”

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 6:59 am

Methinks Colonel has a Brokeback Miuntain kind of love for Rick. What else could explain his infatuation with a non-factor of a candidate?

JD (318f81) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:02 am

jimgeraghty Three disappointments sank the Perry bid: Fifth place in Iowa, not competing in New Hampshire, and… um… and…

EdMorrissey Pretty sad to see some conservative tweeps don’t comprehend diff between cap-gains and income for tax purposes, playing into Obama’s hands.

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:03 am

Colonel loves it when JD talks gay with his “methinks”…

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:04 am

Somewhere in Texas, a coyote howls, for it knows there will be much murderous vengeance wreaked upon his kind…

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:08 am

Rest assured in a few month, you” be saying ‘I do not know this man Mittens’

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:08 am

He’s still the best candidate in the race, the only one I can support without holding my nose.

Milhouse (d7842d) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:09 am

Does that take two hands, Milhouse?

Colonel Haiku (b486eb) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:10 am

Speaking the truth about Romney is whackadoodle far right fringe………..die a slow painful death Colonel.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:24 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/industries/hovensa-oil-refinery-run-by-hess-venezuelas-pdvsa-in-us-virgin-islands-to-shut-down/2012/01/18/gIQA38tk7P_story_1.html

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:32 am

On the horizon, is that a wave?

http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/19/exclusive-100-tea-party-leaders-to-announce-support-for-newt/

gary gulrud (1de2db) — 1/19/2012 @ 7:47 am

http://blog.american.com/2012/01/al-qaeda-terror-training-manual-found-at-gitmo/

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:13 am

Perry gave a pretty good speech. Nailing the entrenched interests job one and saying Newt could distill and convey Conservatism and is capable of bold leadership.

Not quite 2 weeks to FL, plenty of time.

gary gulrud (1de2db) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:22 am

Rick is dropping out of the race and endorsing Newt.

The hate machine is really gearing up for some Newt bashing. Drudge has a cutesy cute link to Perry criticizing adultery in the past.

It’s been a very clear pattern for a long time: whoever is the biggest threat to Romney gets an amazing degree of negative press and ads. This kind of thing is tearing the GOP apart.

He’s still the best candidate in the race, the only one I can support without holding my nose.

Comment by Milhouse

That was how I felt too. It’s a shame Perry didn’t bring whatever showbiz debate skills he needed to handle the array of critics he found, and he lost fair and square, but he was the only guy I could say really had a consistent record.

Newt has baggage, and they will exploit that baggage to the fullest. Partly because if Newt fails, the next president will either be a liberal Mitt Romney or a liberal Barack Obama. The spending our elites need will continue if Newt Gingrich fails.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:24 am

I can’t decide whether I want four years of Barack Romney or four years of Mitt Obama.

Comment by Dave Surls

I don’t think anyone really knows that Mitt Romney would be a better president than Barack Obama.

I think he would be, though.

It is like being forced to vote for Ted Kennedy or Arlen Spector. Mitt has run such a dirty campaign, and his flip flops on things like abortion are signs he has no personal character. So how would Mitt ‘Arlen Spector’ Romney handle power? What is expected from Mitt in exchange for all the support he’s received? What will happen to entitlement reform?

Every Obama promise has an expiration date, but the man is a true liberal and he’s only barely pretended not to be. His contradictions are more naive (I can cut taxes and increase programs and the deficit will go down because of a caricature of Keynesian economics). Mitt’s are true contradictions, from ‘I believe in strong gun control’ to ‘I’m a varmint hunter since I was 15 and support the second amendment’ or “Roe v Wade is good” to ‘Roe v Wade must be overturned’.

While only a fool trusts Mitt Romney, the fact is that Obama has crossed the line on a number of grounds, particularly constitutional but also in forcing through Obamacare when it was unwanted by the public. For that, we have to vote him out of office to teach politicians a lesson.

It’s that simple. Even if it were Barack Obama vs a clone of Barack Obama with all the same opinions, the next election must reject the current president because he has abused his power.

If we do not, the long term implications are very serious. There really isn’t any check on the President other than this. Impeachment obviously won’t work.

That argument is so powerful even Mitt Romney deserves your vote in November, if we’re foolish enough to nominate him.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:33 am

Anyone who would use a bitter divorce to damage his opponent — and make no mistake, the timing of this was queued up by Romney — is someone I don’t want in the White House. This is so very dirty that I hope like hell it backfires on him, because I really don’t want to have to decide between two total pond scum.

And no, I have no “proof”, but then I don’t need any.

Comment by Kevin M

I agree 100%. And a lot of supposed conservatives are pushing this attack. They are fighting off every real conservative in the nastiest ways, and I wonder: what is it they want? We saw in 2008 that the ‘electable’ guy is often (perhaps always) inferior, so it’s not just ‘we’re going to eat our allies so that we have a slightly better candidate’. They have an ideological reason to prefer Romney to Perry, Daniels, Pawlenty, Palin, Gingrich.

I think some of these bozos realize that the 20 years of pulling out of the mess the beltway (including Republicans) put American into would shut off a lot of gravy trains.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:39 am

223. “That argument is so powerful even Mitt Romney deserves your vote in November, if we’re foolish enough to nominate him.”

Much to premature even should Romney wrap this up June 6th or before. The GOP has done not a damn thing to demonstrate they have the interests of Amerikkka at heart, or the competence or will to fight had they a care.

Just as swings in sentiment have a window of two weeks today, that volatility will prevail thru October. Half of the Right isn’t just hoping for change, they are demanding one.

gary gulrud (1de2db) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:49 am

Does it really matter, whether the baggage is real, or invented, ie; Iseman and the Times,

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:52 am

Well said, Gary. It is just plain premature to worry about unity at this time.

Narciso, I keep thinking back to how the voters didn’t really reject Clinton after his baggage (and abuse of office). Are they going to hate Newt for something that wasn’t abuse of office? I don’t even know what the truth of the matter is, but Newt’s daughter stood up for him… I assume there’s more to it than is being discussed publicly.

Newt can’t very well attack her back. We’ve seen how the ‘right’ treats Newt when he responds to attacks in kind (they skewer him).

I think what matters most is the tenth amendment and spending reform, and if someone is going to reject those platforms because of an ex wife’s story, well, there was never anything we could do to persuade them. They are idiots.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 9:07 am

Go and ask Bob Packwood that question, and when you’re finished there, ask Ken Starr, who they chose
to vet his diary,

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 9:09 am

“…I really don’t want to have to decide between two total pond scum.”

That’s not a fair criticism of the GOP. They’ve offered several flavors of pond scum, not just two.

Dave Surls (46b08c) — 1/19/2012 @ 10:30 am

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2012/01/19/washington-post-slams-obamas-nixing-keystone-pipeline-then-calls-highe

narciso (87e966) — 1/19/2012 @ 10:45 am

Perry was the 1%.

The Democrats were going to bring up Newt’s adultery baggage anyway so isn’t it good for it to come up now to see how he handles it? Isn’t that the standard argument?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2012 @ 10:47 am

Newt Campaigning as a Family Values Speaker of the House while married to wife No. 2, who he married after conducting an affair with after divorcing wife No. 1, then divorced wife No. 2 after conducting a six year affair with one of his Congressional staffers whom he later married.

Nothing to see here. Says nothing about Newt’s character.

Move on.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2012 @ 10:54 am

This sucks.

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:12 am

It would appear the second marriage, spanning 18 years, was not bliss:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/when-marianne-cleaned-out-the-house/

The 6-year separation began with Marianne cleaning out the house.

Those might be worry lines checking her face but I suspect Jack Daniels.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:19 am

I think some of these bozos realize that the 20 years of pulling out of the mess the beltway (including Republicans) put American into would shut off a lot of gravy trains.

In Illinois the call it “the Combine.” All partisan out front, but pretty cozy on the money end.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:23 am

Gary, there’s usually another side to the story. But Marianne is not a political player and probably isn’t equipped to deal with the situation.

I feel sorry for her. Any time a marriage ends, folks are going to have scar tissue. Whoever put her up to this (and yeah, someone did and they wanted it to happen now) is scum.

And don’t give me this ‘Obama’s campaign did it’ crap. They would have waited for him to be nominated before even attempting to put this together. Try September or October to see their dirty tricks.

This is either completely unaimed rage, or it’s targeting Newt’s resurgence.

That said, this dirtiness is vetting. Can Newt deal with it? It coming out as early as possible is in his long term best interests.

Also vetting would be to figure out who worked with Marianne to put her in this position.

Vetting is a two way street. For example, one the one hand, Newt should have somehow negotiated the new VA rules without adequate funding (this is probably not possible, but still…). And it’s also vetting to look at Romney’s campaign claiming it’s “unfair to Mitt” if VA’s voters can vote for Newt (who was leading that state and was excluded over an unconstitutional rule).

So there are a lot of two way streets.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:27 am

The Democrats were going to bring up Newt’s adultery baggage anyway so isn’t it good for it to come up now to see how he handles it? Isn’t that the standard argument?

Yes, agreed. But when it just happens to come out 2 days before a critical make-or-break vote it can easily be confused with a smear.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:29 am

Wikipedia definition of a smear:

A smear campaign is an intentional, premeditated effort to undermine an individual’s or group’s reputation, credibility, and character. “Mud slinging”, like negative campaigning, most often targets government officials, politicians, political candidates, and other public figures. However, private persons or groups may also become targets of smear campaigns perpetrated in schools, companies, institutions, families, and other social groups.

Smear tactics differ from normal discourse or debate in that they do not bear upon the issues or arguments in question. A smear is a simple attempt to malign a group or an individual and to attempt to undermine their credibility.

Smears often consist of ad hominem attacks in the form of unverifiable rumors and are often distortions, half-truths, or even outright lies; smear campaigns are often propagated by gossip spreading. Even when the facts behind a smear are shown to lack proper foundation, the tactic is often effective because the target’s reputation is tarnished before the truth is known.

Smears are also effective in diverting attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group. The target of the smear is typically forced to defend his reputation rather than focus on the previous issue.

Smear tactics are considered by many to be a low, disingenuous form of discourse; they are nevertheless very common.

Pretty much what this is, and with exquisite timing. See also the George Bush DUI smear that just happened to come out 3 days before the 2000 election and turned a 4-point win into a tie, with toxic hatred for the eventual winner guaranteed.

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:35 am

236. The Esquire article gave me the impression she was politically invested. Perhaps it was a spouse recoiling at his lack of fight, but having displaced the execrable Wright, he wouldn’t serve with “cannibals”.

SC, GA and districts contiguous certainly remember that without Gingrich, they’d mostly be disenfranchised Democrats.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:38 am

The reason for this? Rasmussen this morning posts their new SC poll: Gingrich 33%, Romney 31%, Paul 15%,m Santorum 11%, Perry 2% (and Perry is endorsing Gingrich today).

Kevin M (563f77) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:39 am

Does that take two hands, Milhouse?

Racist.

Milhouse (d7842d) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:39 am

Rush is observing Perry as the bigger story today. Tonights debate will be over before Marianne gets her face time. Remaining media, Rushbo believes, are not giving this a lot of play yet and have it redound to the competitor.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:42 am

Yes, agreed. But when it just happens to come out 2 days before a critical make-or-break vote it can easily be confused with a smear.

Comment by Kevin M

Oh it’s definitely a smear. Anyone saying otherwise is probably a Romney fanboy giggling that this is how politics ought to work.

The timing is damn obvious.

And it’s no smear to say that whatever political campaign operates this way is disgusting and its candidate unworthy.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:44 am

Of course, if it’s really Obama’s team behind this, then they are telling us that they think Newt is more electable than Romney (which is true).

They show you who they fear. Someone out there is afraid of Newt.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:48 am

Gingrich’s daughters were on Laura today and said they all knew this was coming from the beginning.

They consider it a distraction, old news, and typical of contentious divorce.

Rush said 18 years is a lifetime commitment on the part of Leftards. It will be interesting tonight what Neut says about the “open marriage” charge.

Unlike BJ, at least he asked permission.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:51 am

244. Good point, why else would ABC hit Bain and the Caymans this week and save Marianne for Monday?

Romany was polling over 40 a few days ago.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:53 am

Apparently Romney did not win Iowa?!

JD (7f6bca) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:54 am

.

Rush said 18 years is a lifetime commitment on the part of Leftards. It will be interesting tonight what Neut says about the “open marriage” charge.

It’s interesting that it came out … just now. After all these years.

My guess is it’s the ex’s way of describing a separation / he’s with another woman. It’s not even that unreasonable. But there is another side to this story. If Newt were to tell his, I suspect a familiar chorus would call that a ‘dramatic misstep’.

It’ll be interesting to see if Santorum gives Newt a really hard time over it. Thankfully, the crowd has thinned very quickly, and Newt continues to win every single debate, and he continues to bring one of the best agendas.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:55 am

Apparently Romney did not win Iowa?!

Comment by JD

That’s what they are saying. You’d think, with all the importance Iowa grants its contest, they would at least know who won.

Congratulations Rick Santorum for beating Mitt Romney despite a 75:1 money disadvantage. Wow.

Dustin (7362cd) — 1/19/2012 @ 11:56 am

248. Indeed, Rush’s first caller(they’re screened of course and no doubt choreographed) took him to task for any good words about Neut, when she was a Santorum supporter, willing to write him in when he fails to get the nod.

Santorum has fallen back from say 16-17 average, to 11.

His lets tweak government around the margins isn’t selling.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 12:03 pm

New Perry/Gingrich thread up.

Karl (f07e38) — 1/19/2012 @ 12:06 pm

247, 249. We knew the night of, when they held up two counties, the thumb was on the scales.

The old Ministry of Truth in action. Grab the headline, a week or two later, no one cares.

Romany is happy to call it a tie in the history books after faceplanting agin Huckster.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 1/19/2012 @ 12:13 pm

Keep on mocking Newt Gingrich’s looks you can’t mock him on his policies[Which are not always conservative.]

Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 1/19/2012 @ 8:44 pm

1/17/2012

Quickie PPP poll analysis

253 Responses to “Quickie PPP poll analysis”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out