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

Shakey this really does seem like your first election

(morbs, are you as much of an asshole IRL as you are here? if not, why not?)

(he is def. not, although i've not particularly provoked him, either)

So even George Will sees through Romney's foreign policy bluster

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-need-more-than-rhetoric-on-defense/2012/02/07/gIQA5SF1zQ_story.html?hpid=z2

am, let's wait and see if Bam landslides Mitt b4 we decide if I'm an asshole for thinking calling an election 9 months in advance is premature, mmmmkay?

and the answer is: Opinions differ.

lol morbs havent you been calling the primary for mitt for months

There's a big difference between being an asshole and being the asshole you want to see in the world.

j0e, that's different; that's fixed. The Corporatist World Series is not.

rightwing American Enterprise VP on Santorum's attempts to appeal to blue-collar factory workers, when many of those blue collar folks are now working as truck drivers or in a Wallmart

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/290450/two-decades-too-late-henry-olsen?pg=2

am, let's wait and see if Bam landslides Mitt b4 we decide if I'm an asshole for thinking calling an election 9 months in advance is premature, mmmmkay?

lol I called it over like a year and a half ago, do keep up

poor Mittens, he's so doomed

In other words, the party has become so partisan and irrational that, in order to win the primary, you have to lose the general. Sure, shit could happen in the intervening months, but if played well, if Greece doesn't sink Europe, if the adminsitration stays ahead of Bibi and Khamenei, they have a better chance of winning in November than anybody in the GOP does. This reminds me of CA.

They're chasing old white ppl, ppl too old to reproduce anymore and whose kids probably think they're dicks for hating women/gay/black/latino ppl.

if the adminsitration stays ahead of Bibi and Khamenei

For re-election purposes, a hot war in the middle east would not hurt Obama, unless he looked weak. Fortunately, no POTUS with an intact air force needs to look weak, and they all have learned that lesson.

^^^

The flap over the Komen organization really surprised me, in a good way.

And Bohener's going on about the contraception issue? I just don't get these guys.

They're chasing old white ppl...

This is a broad brush imo. I have several friends in their 30s who are conservatives for varying reasons, some social but more small business owners who buy into the whole "unfettered free market" angle.

In other words, ppl who haven't learned anything from the last several centuries. Imho, the regs that fcuk small businesses are less federal than local. I will gladly argue economic policy minutiae w/anyone but if you're the type to get off the couch and vote to 'protect marriage', you're a dying breed 'cause it's a dumb and (excuse me, Newt) fundamentally indefensible position to take in anything but a theocracy

For re-election purposes, a hot war in the middle east would not hurt Obama, unless he looked weak. Fortunately, no POTUS with an intact air force needs to look weak, and they all have learned that lesson.

the problem isn't that he'd look weak, the problem is that a hot war in the middle east might jeopardize our slowly recovering economy enough to elect romney

You always knew he'd be a kingmaker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1TT7gt5F0w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8L0H_w9kBx8

do we have a thread for the israel/iran shit? b/c man that freaks me out.

give Israel to World: "Suck It." a try

Santorum now leading national GOP polls.

crazy. linx?

Where did you get that from? Gallup still has Romney far in front nationally.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/02/rick-santorum-gallup-tracking-poll-mitt-romney-/1

https://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls/status/167775351718686720

v. interesting. were those gallup polls including lagging data?

Okay--I'm still working on Standard Internet Time. I have to get me one of those Twitter machines. (I believe the Gallup included one day of post-Missouri/Minnesota/Colorado polling.)

I'm not even sure santorum wouldn't be a stronger candidate for the gop at this point

PPP also said the lead is much bigger for Santorum if you remove Newt.

fivethirtyeight Nate Silver
Reverse engineering the Gallup tracking poll, looks like Wed.'s results were about Romney 32, Santorum 32, Gingrich 16.
39 seconds ago Favorite Retweet Reply

He's more personable than Romney, Gingrich too (though not as entertaining). But surely his rigidity on a whole bunch of social issues would lose half the country immediately.

oh yeah he's a pretty terrible candidate too, but at least republicans will vote for him.

shit just gets more incredible every day

dude took the worst beating *ever* by a sitting senator seeking reelection

he would like to outlaw *contraception*

i don't even know whether to cry or wind my watch

I hope the Minnesota debacle put to the rest the fantasy that Pawlenty should have hung around--he was out there campaigning in his own state for Romney.

dude took the worst beating *ever* by a sitting senator seeking reelection

i know he got creamed, but is this literally true? i would imagine there are some outliers in the 1870s-1880s as radical reconstruction collapsed.

idk being that literally every other candidate running had their moment in the sun, he prob woulda got one. at least then he could tell his grandkids "I was leading the nomination polls, that one week, pappy coulda been president" xp

and it's not like Gingrich or Santorum are better candidates, so who knows

my bad -- it was the worst ever by a sitting gop senator, tho

cmon iatee, Repubs are gonna vote for Mittens just like 'disappointed' Dems are gonna go for O.

Probably...although Huntsman didn't have one (unless third in NH counts), and Pawlenty struck me as Huntsman's equal in political ineptitude. That early debate moment where he tiptoed away from Romney was awful. (xposts)

at this point yeah it's not like alabama is gonna go blue, but it's getting harder and harder to imagine *any* real enthusiasm for romney's campaign. like, this is sub-john kerry.

Inept in terms of what this race requires--obviously they were successful at the state level. (And no, I haven't a clue anymore what "this race requires.")

I think santorum is pretty inept tbh, he is where he is because he stood around and was the least interesting person there. that's typically not a good strategy and only was on accident.

isn't the CW that this race is going to hinge more on the state of the economy than intangibles like voter enthusiasm and candidate likability (tho obviously the quality of the economy will impact both of those things)?

yeah but it's getting harder to see santorum or romney winning even if the economy slows a little

Like Don Corleone, I'm a superstitious man. Last election was initially supposed to hinge on Iraq, and it ended up being about the economy. This one has been assumed forever (with good reason) to be about the economy, but I look at something like Syria and wonder, what if in the midst of an improving economy it ends up hinging on some calamitous foreign-policy surprise?

well no election 'hinges' on one issue, but economic factors are the most consistent predictor. if we unemployment magically fell to 5% but there was a scandal cause obama molested a kid, he would still lose. but due to the economy, he would probably lose by less.

that 'we' can disappear

"Hinges" as in the one issue that dwarfs all others--surely there were elections where that was true. '68 was Vietnam, '92/'08 were the economy, '00 was about how Al Gore sighed too much during debates. The secondary issues were there, but these were the things preoccupying voters.