2012 US Presidential Race Catch All

Romney is getting screwed because he's a Republican governor in a deeply Blue state (must be a librul at heart) and because he dared to implement much of the Republican universal health care plan in MA. And it's working. That's *deeply* frightening to a Party that dreads the stench of anything like a social safety net (Socialism... Communism! Here we have a Party that is so lost that it has to revive a dead opponent to scare it's base enough to oppose economically sensible policies.)

Jayhawker wrote:
Why did Romney perform so poorly. He was even beaten my Perry, who was not on the ballot. Had he just written this off, and the straw poll means nothing. Becasue Pawlenty bailed with 14% of the vote. Romney had 3% to Perry's 4%.

So far, I think Romney is the only guy that scares Obama in a campaign.

That's because Romney's the only even vaguely candidate that can appeal to the middle at all; anyone not on the radical right will flee Bachmann screaming, and everybody knows that. Romney would hit it up the middle and appeal to a lot of people, but he won't appeal to tea party or evangelicals, and they're driving the GOP bus.

Of course, I think the one GOP candidate who looks really impressive is Gary Johnson, because he's (A) sane, (B) sane, (C) sane, and (D) sane. He's a fiscal conservative, believes the government should not legislate morality, and calls for a war on drug abuse, not "drugs". He seems intelligent, well-spoken, and I'm pretty sure I'd at least think strongly about voting for the guy because he openly states what he believes needs to be done without sugar-coating it in any way. Of course, this means he has absolutely no chance whatsoever for being nominated, but I don't think there's a doubt he'd stomp Obama if he somehow got the nomination.

Huntsman and Romney can both give the President a good campaign but they aren't going to win. Perry is going to win and that makes me sad.

Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

Ulairi wrote:
Huntsman and Romney can both give the President a good campaign but they aren't going to win. Perry is going to win and that makes me sad.
Friend from Texas: I don't like Rick Perry as a governor, no way I'm voting him president.

Robear wrote:
I still find it hard to believe that the Republicans are holding straw polls

It's a fundraiser for the Iowa GOP. Candidates pay to take part, and you have to pay $30/head to get in to the candidate's dinner and vote in the poll. (Wikipedia)

boogle wrote:
Ulairi wrote:
Huntsman and Romney can both give the President a good campaign but they aren't going to win. Perry is going to win and that makes me sad.
Friend from Texas: I don't like Rick Perry as a governor, no way I'm voting him president.

When has a governor from TX ever made a bad President?

Romney didn't want to compete in this poll. It's custom built to appeal to the radical fringes of the party. Michelle Bachman won with around 4,800 votes. Candidates go in there, suck up to several thousand voters for months at a time, spending money and making promises far beyond the scale of what they should be doing in the name of momentum.

By the way, the winner of the poll has never made it to the white house.

Hell, it's why Gov Perry just announced that he was running as opposed to announcing before so that he would be eligible for the straw poll

edit: oops, my bad, G.W. Bush won it in 1999. From USAToday

iaintgotnopants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

And perhaps his friends are reading articles like this one. Note how the writer carefully works around the fact that Paul was a close second to Bachmann, not even mentioning his name until the twelfth paragraph and never mentioning that he took second place by less than 1%.

Aetius wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

And perhaps his friends are reading articles like this one. Note how the writer carefully works around the fact that Paul was a close second to Bachmann, not even mentioning his name until the twelfth paragraph and never mentioning that he took second place by less than 1%.

I was expecting Paul to win. His band of loons are very foreceful and active.

Ulairi wrote:
Aetius wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

And perhaps his friends are reading articles like this one. Note how the writer carefully works around the fact that Paul was a close second to Bachmann, not even mentioning his name until the twelfth paragraph and never mentioning that he took second place by less than 1%.

I was expecting Paul to win. His band of loons are very foreceful and active.

Religious crazy trumps gold standard crazy.

If Palin gets into the race, between her, bachman, romney and the neo-confederate scum bag from texas, it's making me think we could actually have a sane republican split in between the two.

Aetius wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

And perhaps his friends are reading articles like this one. Note how the writer carefully works around the fact that Paul was a close second to Bachmann, not even mentioning his name until the twelfth paragraph and never mentioning that he took second place by less than 1%.

Wow, that level of literary gymnastics is impressive, and in my opinion hides some very serious bias.

Yonder wrote:
Aetius wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

And perhaps his friends are reading articles like this one. Note how the writer carefully works around the fact that Paul was a close second to Bachmann, not even mentioning his name until the twelfth paragraph and never mentioning that he took second place by less than 1%.

Wow, that level of literary gymnastics is impressive, and in my opinion hides some very serious bias.

I think the issue comes from the fact that no one else is pretending Ron Paul has an actual shot to finish a close second in the Iowa Caucus. It mostly shows how pointless the the straw poll is.

Ulairi wrote:
If Palin gets into the race, between her, bachman, romney and the neo-confederate scum bag from texas, it's making me think we could actually have a sane republican split in between the two.

Obama is your sane republican candidate.

Paleocon wrote:
Ulairi wrote:
If Palin gets into the race, between her, bachman, romney and the neo-confederate scum bag from texas, it's making me think we could actually have a sane republican split in between the two.

Obama is your sane republican candidate.

I like Huntsman quite a bit but he doesn't have a chance in hell due to his support of civil unions and his lack of desire to call the President a secret mooslim commie.

Jayhawker wrote:
Yonder wrote:
Aetius wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:
Haven't heard much about Ron Paul lately. Has he been quiet or does the media have better things to do?

You don't have the same facebook friends as I do.

And perhaps his friends are reading articles like this one. Note how the writer carefully works around the fact that Paul was a close second to Bachmann, not even mentioning his name until the twelfth paragraph and never mentioning that he took second place by less than 1%.

Wow, that level of literary gymnastics is impressive, and in my opinion hides some very serious bias.

I think the issue comes from the fact that no one else is pretending Ron Paul has an actual shot to finish a close second in the Iowa Caucus. It mostly shows how pointless the the straw poll is.

Iowa can pick nutters and they have done so in the past. I wouldn't count Paul out from Iowa.

You know, that's right. Obama IS the mainstream Republican candidate, but apparently the Republicans are too dumb to see it.

Calling that man a leftist is only possible from the standpoint of Attilla the Hun.

I would be curious to see a true leftist floated through some of the caucuses. If the media had to compare Obama to someone more in line with Chavez than Reagan, I wonder how that would change the debate.

Isn't there an actual member of the Socialist party currently in the senate?

...

I was thinking of this guy, but I appear to be mistaken.

Seth wrote:
I would be curious to see a true leftist floated through some of the caucuses. If the media had to compare Obama to someone more in line with Chavez than Reagan, I wonder how that would change the debate.

Isn't there an actual member of the Socialist party currently in the senate?

...

I was thinking of this guy, but I appear to be mistaken.

Is Kucinich running again? He seems to fill the role of "token really-left Democrat".

Seth wrote:
I would be curious to see a true leftist floated through some of the caucuses. If the media had to compare Obama to someone more in line with Chavez than Reagan, I wonder how that would change the debate.

Isn't there an actual member of the Socialist party currently in the senate?

...

I was thinking of this guy, but I appear to be mistaken.

Bernie Sanders self-identifies as a Socialist, but isn't a member of an official party.

via aphesian on G+

Gah. So very very broken.

An excellent article covering the response to Paul's close second.

And, no, media attention is not based solely on polls. The most recent polls, taken before Ames, showed Bachmann with 10.2 percent of the vote and Paul with 9.0 percent. That’s not a huge difference. Though those polls will no doubt change with all the publicity Bachmann is now getting because of her “stunning” victory at Ames.

There was a deliciously intriguing line in The Washington Post’s fine recap of Ames on Sunday. It said had Paul edged out Bachmann, “it would have hurt the credibility and future of the straw poll, a number of Republicans said.”

So don’t blame the media. Here are Republicans, presumably Republican operatives, who said if one candidate wins, the contest is significant, but if another wins the contest is not credible.

Amazing. And disturbing.

What on earth is the GOP's issue with Paul? I don't like him for various reasons but I still think Bachmann makes him look sane.

Seth wrote:
What on earth is the GOP's issue with Paul? I don't like him for various reasons but I still think Bachmann makes him look sane.

He's libertarian, which means he thinks social conservatives need to go away. Likewise, they want him to go away. That would be the big issue for a chunk of the GOP at this point.

Seth wrote:
What on earth is the GOP's issue with Paul? I don't like him for various reasons but I still think Bachmann makes him look sane.


That's your problem, right there!

Bachmann still seems to be ranting about twirly lightbulbs and 'freedom of lightbulb choice' for Americans

Well, it's in the constitution! Right next to that bit about bears with arms, or something.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
Seth wrote:
What on earth is the GOP's issue with Paul? I don't like him for various reasons but I still think Bachmann makes him look sane.

He's libertarian, which means he thinks social conservatives need to go away. Likewise, they want him to go away. That would be the big issue for a chunk of the GOP at this point.

I think more importantly he wants to reduce Republican power (along with Democratic power, but that goes without saying as a Republican). He's actually pretty socially conservative, and would be decently palatable if he weren't dedicated to dismantling the system of campaign funding and political favors that the Republicans depend on.

If this is too much of a derail feel free to spinoff.

Paul consistently insists that if he ever gets in one of the first things he would do is audit the federal reserve, which I guess has not been done in a very long time if ever. I'm not sure what the consequences of that would be but auditing the organization that prints your money certainly seems like a good idea. He is the only politician I am aware of who is pushing for this however.