ricky 'the body' santorum
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 06:40 (twelve years ago) link
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/3140/30121529301225611cerebu.jpg
― carson dial, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 06:48 (twelve years ago) link
shame that this isn't a contest that matters
― anorange (abanana), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 07:19 (twelve years ago) link
Romney wins by 8.
― Clay, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 07:38 (twelve years ago) link
damn
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 08:21 (twelve years ago) link
was it good for all of you/
would looooove for 8 votes to decide the Obamney election in Nov.
― Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 12:36 (twelve years ago) link
For this I got up? The only good thing that may come out of this is that the salt has been rubbed into the wound a little deeper.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/04/politics/gop-iowa-gingrich/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
"Lying in wait"--sounds good to me.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 12:43 (twelve years ago) link
you really need baseball to start soon. you know, something significant.
― Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 12:51 (twelve years ago) link
Go Newt! I mean, go Jays!
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 12:53 (twelve years ago) link
On the one hand this is pretty easy to spin for Romney, he can just point out that it's a marathon not a sprint. For him. For Santorum, it's a sprint.
On the other hand, nearly exactly 30,000 out of 120,000* does look like there are actual occult forces pinning him to 25%.
*Yeah, I know, 120,000 is not the exact figure, just the one being thrown around.
― Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 13:02 (twelve years ago) link
romney down to 40 on in trade! I know I'm the only one who cares about intrade but 97.5 to 40 in like 10 mins is pretty lol
i think this says everything you need to know about how much attention to pay to intrade
― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 13:44 (twelve years ago) link
he won by 5 votes!
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 14:18 (twelve years ago) link
intrade is a pretty useful marker of public expectations, but yeah, bad at predicting elections w/ an 8 vote margin
― iatee, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 14:25 (twelve years ago) link
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/01/03/us/politics/20110104_IOWA-slide-C37Z/20110104_IOWA-slide-C37Z-hpLarge-v2.jpgguuys
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 14:57 (twelve years ago) link
the one on the far right (heh) is cute
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:06 (twelve years ago) link
waht abt the one in the middle HUBBA HUBBA
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:16 (twelve years ago) link
iatee i'd say it's worse than that - with romney at 97.5 intrade wasn't even remotely accurate as to how tight the outcome would be
― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:17 (twelve years ago) link
both those numbers were reactions to nearly finished vote counting totals no
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:19 (twelve years ago) link
if you want to evaluate its predictive powers its prob better to look before the voting started
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:20 (twelve years ago) link
before the caucuses intrade had them romney->santorum->paul
when the votes were being counted it was just people trying to be the first ones to play on public information. it's not really a prediction market in the same sense during moments like those.
xp right
― iatee, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:22 (twelve years ago) link
Sincere question: between now and New Hampshire, will there be people from this whispered-about Republican Establishment contacting Gingrich--either directly or through intermediaries--and asking him to back off for the sake of getting Romney elected, and also to secure whatever future he has as a party eminence?
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:23 (twelve years ago) link
man i'm so glad this whole thing is over!
― goole, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:24 (twelve years ago) link
no xp
― iatee, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:24 (twelve years ago) link
assume thats been going on the whole time, the gop establishment has been in a frothy panic for the last month that gingrich might win, the other anti romneys they dont really take serious
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:26 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/01/republican-nomination
in this and other stories like it i'm always a little struck that the people they talk to (esp those who are explaining why they are voting for romney) seem a lot less crazy than the aggregate shitshow. maybe it's an iowa thing...
― goole, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:27 (twelve years ago) link
lol i can only pray http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/01/newt-gingrich-romney-gop-destroyer
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:28 (twelve years ago) link
what do they have to offer him? what does he have to lose? if he doesn't want to play the GOP spoiler it'll be because he doesn't want to play the GOP spoiler.
xp
― iatee, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:28 (twelve years ago) link
It's definitely been going on in full public view--in editorials, on Sunday morning shows, etc.--I'm just curious as to how much (or whether) it goes on in earnest out of public view.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:29 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/01/04/rickrolled_three_lessons_from_iowa.html
dave weigel thinks that the numbers say enthusiasm is way down but idk if his interp is right
― goole, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:29 (twelve years ago) link
thats prob m/l true, but it doesnt mean they arent trying, and of course theyve done everything else they can to marginalize him xp iatee
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:30 (twelve years ago) link
im sure its been going on behind closed doors too, i mean its polotics, we only see the tip of the iceberg, and there are no doubt things they can offer him, all sorts lucrative think tank jobs tv appearances publishing deals etc, its just whether its worth it to him to give up his last few moments in the spotlight
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:33 (twelve years ago) link
They don't have cabinet appointments to offer him, I'm sure, but they'd be hitting him up on whatever traces of party loyalty are left, and, more important, reminding him that it's better to be inside the fold than out if you want to continue giving lucrative speeches.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:33 (twelve years ago) link
lol newt you h8 everyone so bad just say fuck it go newtclear you know you want to come on you invented that shit
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:37 (twelve years ago) link
http://mjcdn.motherjones.com/preset_12/newt_1-4.jpgDESTROY ROMNEY DESTROY ROMNEY BLIP BLOOP BEEP
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:38 (twelve years ago) link
they dont respect you theyve never respected you after all youve done for them after all these years show them show them what you can do
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:39 (twelve years ago) link
I was just about to post how much I loved the photo in that Mother Jones link!
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:40 (twelve years ago) link
ha it really captures something
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:41 (twelve years ago) link
U Got the Look, Newt.
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Nixon.jpg
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:42 (twelve years ago) link
god damn newt's got a big head
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:43 (twelve years ago) link
Erick Erickson vents, his commenters are somewhat vexed.
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:46 (twelve years ago) link
Wait just one cotton-pickin' minute!vangoghssister Wednesday, January 4th at 10:12AM EST I’ll be darned if I’m going to let 123,000 people, in Iowa of all places (or anywhere else for that matter) tell me who I am allowed to vote for in this Presidential election. I am a Perry supporter and pray for him to stay in the race. I watched the first debate. I heard the in-state tuition argument from whoever brought it up (don’t remember now). No one and I mean NO ONE, not moderators, not talking heads on television or radio ever mentioned what he actually said, standing right there on the stage, outlining briefly the process for being allowed to pay in-state tuition. From there, the falsehoods took hold about that and the stupid Gardisil thing, etc. And YOU, Mr. Erick Erickson (God bless you for all the good work you do), have only made me angry one time in all the months I’ve been lurking around here. When you interviewed Gov. Perry in California and brought the tuition issue up, you called it SCHOLARSHIPS. You see, the words we use do matter when trying to convey the truth, even if it is an accidental GAFFE. If that interview had been broadcast on the MSM or even on Fox, once the masses heard that word ‘scholarships’, they would have tuned out and turned off right then, never listening to Gov. Perry patiently explain how it really works. His team should have done more to get the truth out there and I can’t fathom why they did not. There must be a way to get the stellar accomplishments of this fine Governor out where the most people will see them, especially those who do not take the time to research a candidates platform and past performance in office.Rats! Now I have to go to work. Keep the faith Perry Posse.
vangoghssister Wednesday, January 4th at 10:12AM EST
I’ll be darned if I’m going to let 123,000 people, in Iowa of all places (or anywhere else for that matter) tell me who I am allowed to vote for in this Presidential election. I am a Perry supporter and pray for him to stay in the race. I watched the first debate. I heard the in-state tuition argument from whoever brought it up (don’t remember now). No one and I mean NO ONE, not moderators, not talking heads on television or radio ever mentioned what he actually said, standing right there on the stage, outlining briefly the process for being allowed to pay in-state tuition. From there, the falsehoods took hold about that and the stupid Gardisil thing, etc. And YOU, Mr. Erick Erickson (God bless you for all the good work you do), have only made me angry one time in all the months I’ve been lurking around here. When you interviewed Gov. Perry in California and brought the tuition issue up, you called it SCHOLARSHIPS. You see, the words we use do matter when trying to convey the truth, even if it is an accidental GAFFE. If that interview had been broadcast on the MSM or even on Fox, once the masses heard that word ‘scholarships’, they would have tuned out and turned off right then, never listening to Gov. Perry patiently explain how it really works. His team should have done more to get the truth out there and I can’t fathom why they did not. There must be a way to get the stellar accomplishments of this fine Governor out where the most people will see them, especially those who do not take the time to research a candidates platform and past performance in office.
Rats! Now I have to go to work. Keep the faith Perry Posse.
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:47 (twelve years ago) link
Keep the faith Perry Posse.
I want to sign all of my emails with this
― Much Ado About Nuttin (DJP), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:50 (twelve years ago) link
"in Iowa of all places"
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:52 (twelve years ago) link
I like how indignant he is over the tuition issue, yet somehow he never actually says anything about what Perry actually said
― Much Ado About Nuttin (DJP), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:53 (twelve years ago) link
Kelsey Grammer Newt Gingrich looks like a motherfucker with some dark secrets.
― Dan Peterson, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:54 (twelve years ago) link
Romney got less votes in 2012 than he got in 2008
"it was the same number of votes, but each individual vote was smaller"
― Much Ado About Nuttin (DJP), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:55 (twelve years ago) link
the gop establishment has been in a frothy panic
thakig u
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:57 (twelve years ago) link
For starters, the media would have you believe that the 123,000 people who turned out for the Hawkeye Caucii was a record. This is simply not true except superficially. If you take out the non-Republicans who came into the caucuses last night for Ron Paul, the Republican turn out was less than 2008 — even considering the ratio of independents to Republicans who turned out in 2008.
oh jesus
― Much Ado About Nuttin (DJP), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:57 (twelve years ago) link
This is simply not true except superficially
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:58 (twelve years ago) link
Bachmann's qui--"suspending." Supposedly she'll endorse craziness.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:59 (twelve years ago) link