2012 republican presidential nominee III: can romney get santorum out of his hair?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (4660 of them)

haha

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 18:03 (fourteen years ago)

lol

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 18:06 (fourteen years ago)

If Obama is 'Bam' can I start calling him Dr. Orby for his amazing perceptive powers?

mh, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:19 (fourteen years ago)

Orbitz

Nicole, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:22 (fourteen years ago)

Let's stay focussed here.

New Hampshire primary is TONIGHT and we're all just standing around with our finger in, while there are burning questions to be asked. Will Congressman Paul make a secondary, tertiary, or quarternary primary splash? Will Newt's attack ads on Willard depress NH voters into staying in bed all day? I want prognostications and I want them NOW, people! Let's show some HUSTLE!

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:31 (fourteen years ago)

90% of you are clearly rooting against Romney, whereas anyone against the oligarchy should be rooting hard for Maximum Obamney.

Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:36 (fourteen years ago)

The devil we already know is the right man for the job. We boo and hiss the devil we don't know.

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:45 (fourteen years ago)

lols @ maobama

bob loblaw people (dayo), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:47 (fourteen years ago)

maobama looks v cheerful

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 19:48 (fourteen years ago)

can't believe ILXers aren't more excited about the Huntsman Hustle, dude is SURGING

locally sourced stabbage (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:01 (fourteen years ago)

eww

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:02 (fourteen years ago)

Huntsman appears saner than any of his competitors, but he'd still be a total disaster in the White House, bcz politics, bro.

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:06 (fourteen years ago)

Huntsman entertaining a campaign stop with an impromptu version of China Pighttp://images.politico.com/global/blogs/832011_Huntsmanpiano_AP.jpg

locally sourced stabbage (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:06 (fourteen years ago)

Santorum, yesterday (got it from The New Republic):

"Look at the guys that we voted on when it was their turn. Jerry Ford, it was his turn...let's put up Bob Dole, because it's his turn...let's put up John McCain, because it's his turn. Those moderates who can win. Those moderates who can win -- according to who? According to the national media and according to the experts who don't want a conservative and don't want a Republican. Ladies and gentlemen, we win elections when our people are excited about who to vote for...I remind you, in 1980, when we had another critical election, when we had another Democratic president running the country into the ground...we had a choice in the Republican primary. We had the establishment who the money was behind and the mainstream was behind in the Republican Party and that was George H.W. Bush and he won Iowa. But when New Hampshire people, moderate New Hampshire, moderate to liberal New Hampshire, when they voted, the people here in New Hampshire said, we're going to vote for what America needs, not what we're being told to do by people with money and power in the Republican Party...and you voted for Ronald Reagan. And if it wasn't for New Hampshire, Ronald Reagan would never have been president. Think about what you're doing and the vote that you cast and the message you send out of New Hampshire."

Stepping back and speaking objectively, I've gotta say that's pretty good. If I were voting for Romney today, that would definitely give me pause.

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:08 (fourteen years ago)

ya but you can't assume people voting for romney are rational actors on any level

iatee, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:09 (fourteen years ago)

He overstates Reagan's peril in 1980 and Bush's popularity with the mainstream GOP.

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:11 (fourteen years ago)

Time for someone to hit back with an "I knew Ronald Reagan, and you are no Ronald Reagan."

i couldn't adjust the food knobs (Phil D.), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:11 (fourteen years ago)

Followed by the Spartacus-like "*I* am Ronald Reagan!" montage.

i couldn't adjust the food knobs (Phil D.), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:12 (fourteen years ago)

(xxpost) Probably, but wouldn't Reagan have been in serious trouble if he had lost NH? (Don't know, just asking.)

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:12 (fourteen years ago)

nothing santorum has ever said tracks with what is real in any way, so i highly doubt his analysis. exactly what went into reagan's win in NH in 1980 i have no idea, but who knows.

acc to him, base excitement exists antagonistically with appeal to 'moderates' and leaning independents, which is kind of a funny admission if you think about it.

hah xp to alfred

goole, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:13 (fourteen years ago)

Reagan nearly derailed Ford in '76, no small feat against a sitting president. He certainly wasn't the underdog to GHWB in '80.

pplains, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:14 (fourteen years ago)

The lesson I drew from Santorum's little bit of froth quoted above was: winning Iowa is rather meaningless.

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:18 (fourteen years ago)

I know Reagan was the presumptive favourite, but I think there was some big campaign shake-up after Iowa, and I'm guessing the combination of that and two consecutive losees would have been a problem. (Checking, though, Iowa was close enough to be meaningless--32% to 30% for Bush--so maybe it was something of a non-issue.)

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:19 (fourteen years ago)

GHWB was the underdog in that scenario. Reagan had been building an organization to run for prez since the 60s.

locally sourced stabbage (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:21 (fourteen years ago)

the facts are both GHWB and Reagan were establishment candidates

locally sourced stabbage (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:22 (fourteen years ago)

no way GHWB would ever have been the nominee in '80 even knowing how history unfolded.

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:23 (fourteen years ago)

Reagan had more money and (obv) lots more name recognition, iirc.

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:25 (fourteen years ago)

He definitely crushed Bush in NH (50-23) and SC (55-15). But from Santorum's point of view, I think "And if it wasn't for New Hampshire, Ronald Reagan would never have been president" is a good way to plant doubts in NH voters.

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:25 (fourteen years ago)

Ladies and gentlemen, we win elections when our people are excited about who to vote for...

Find this pretty funny considering I don't think many Republicans are excited about Santorum. Self-identified conservatives (R & I) I've heard on CSPAN are way more excited by Paul, and the freeper fringe are salivating over unleashing the Newtron bomb on Obama.

Oops, just a little Santorum surge... (Dan Peterson), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:26 (fourteen years ago)

(As Hail Marys go, I mean.)

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:27 (fourteen years ago)

Yeah--Santorum's calculus would be a lot more convincing if he had an ounce of charisma.

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:28 (fourteen years ago)

unleashing the Newtron bomb on Obama.

too easy to make Goldwater/daisy connection.

Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:29 (fourteen years ago)

Apparently Stephen Colbert is polling better than Jon Huntsman in South Carolina.

Bon Ivoj (jaymc), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:30 (fourteen years ago)

ha

Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:30 (fourteen years ago)

"The new Public Policing Polling survey also found that 67 percent of the GOP debate's likely voters think that 'only people are people.'"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW-ftxIrhBc

clemenza, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:33 (fourteen years ago)

The South Carolina primary will be the first truly meaningful moment in this phase of things. If Romney is soundly rejected by the first pack of southern republicans to cast votes, he'll def be wounded. I say chances are good that things will be genuinely chaotic heading into Super Tuesday.

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:33 (fourteen years ago)

*sigh*

u trying so hard to bleeve in Tinkerbell

Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:38 (fourteen years ago)

The South Carolina primary will be the first truly meaningful moment in this phase of things.

lol come now, Aimless

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:41 (fourteen years ago)

romney is polling just fine in SC. republicans are coalescing nicely around the frontrunner and this thing is going to be over cleanly. sorry everyone!

goole, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:44 (fourteen years ago)

This is going to be a boring election, gentlemen: Wonder Boy versus Flim-Flam Man.

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:46 (fourteen years ago)

oh i don't agree with that at all, it's going to be wisconsin nationwide, candidates notwithstanding.

goole, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:47 (fourteen years ago)

Obama isn't leading the national equivalent of the anti-Walker forces, I'm afraid.

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:50 (fourteen years ago)

when's the last time two guys w/ such spotless bios faced off?

iatee, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:50 (fourteen years ago)

that reminds me, I saw eliot spitzer on the street today

iatee, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:50 (fourteen years ago)

If Romney does no worse than a very close second in both SC and Florida, then I agree that we can put 'paid' to the republican nomination. If he's blown out in SC or in Florida, or is pushed down to third place, even by a small amount, then we have a race to giggle about for a while longer.

Aimless, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:51 (fourteen years ago)

mitt romney isn't walker, either! i don't think it matters.

goole, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:51 (fourteen years ago)

nah it's over xp

iatee, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:52 (fourteen years ago)

But goole just pointed out that he's doing quite well in SC.

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:52 (fourteen years ago)

From a few days ago but you get the idea:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57354122-503544/romney-surges-in-south-carolina-poll-has-nearly-double-the-support-of-runner-up-santorum/

lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 20:54 (fourteen years ago)

but you see, if Romney BARELY manages to get second place he may have a shot in the imaginary tea party I am holding in my mind

Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 21:00 (fourteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.