Iowa Caucus
- Thread starter Dreamer
- Start date
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Two tweets from PPP:
Mitt losing over 40% of his 2008 supporters does show a lack of passion for him that may or may not be a problem in the general
Our last IA poll found 41% of Mitt's 2008 supporters planning to vote for someone else this time, big part of why he's not doing that great
Mitt losing over 40% of his 2008 supporters does show a lack of passion for him that may or may not be a problem in the general
Our last IA poll found 41% of Mitt's 2008 supporters planning to vote for someone else this time, big part of why he's not doing that great
If things remain as they are right now there will be no clear winner and the biggest surprise would be the showing of Rick Santorum.
Obama benefits with no clear winner, although it is only the first contest and only a caucus.
Obama benefits with no clear winner, although it is only the first contest and only a caucus.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Yes and no .... it is surprising in that he essentially came out of nowhere within the last week or so ....
It is unsurprising in that the "social conservative" / evangelical vote was split between a handful of candidates, who each, in turn, failed to stand up to scrutiny - one being just too stupid generally, the second being too hysterical and too much profligate liar, and the third having more ethical/moral/corruption baggage than Samsonite has luggage (which perhaps is in itself, an interesting commentary on those who would support them)
So it's no surprise that these folks would rally to last one left - despite the fact that he has been unvetted by the media and his competitors ... that will change very shortly.
Given that, I think Santorum will have a fairly short shelf life - same as the others did (just wait until you see what comes out on him)
There's enough real, documented stuff that he'll be left pretty bloody by the time it's all over.
Besides that, he's unelectable in the general
Well, I'm afraid that's a little too short-term/too tactical (rather than strategic) thinking for me
Besides, it based on the incorrect premise (wrong question) IMHO ....
I'm less concerned about Obama - because that is not the fight I'm fighting ...
Although, certainly some are .... misguided as they may be ....
Last edited:
"Besides that, he's unelectable in the general"
So is Ron Paul. He has trouble winning national elections.
It is only one vote, and a small one at that. Many more to come. Nothing is settled.
So is Ron Paul. He has trouble winning national elections.
It is only one vote, and a small one at that. Many more to come. Nothing is settled.
I'm not sure how a state Republican primary, which has nothing to do with the Democrats, benefits Democrats, or Obama, in any way.
As for it being "just" a Caucus, you realize that a Primary and a Caucus both accomplishes the same things, right? Both select delegates for the Convention. The only difference is the methods in which the delegates are selected.
As for it being "just" a Caucus, you realize that a Primary and a Caucus both accomplishes the same things, right? Both select delegates for the Convention. The only difference is the methods in which the delegates are selected.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
ROTFLMAO ..... so does Mittens ....
You should really know better (and probably do ... although maybe not
):..... past performance is never a guarantee of future results ....
That can be clearly seen from Paul's performance tonight - he's doubled his support over 2008 (percentage-wise) - and even without the votes all counted, he's more than doubled his support in terms of actual votes cast.
How much better did Romney do ?
No better - his support is essentially flat from 2008 - so he's a flatliner - in fact, at this point Mittens has garnered less actual votes than he did in 2008.
BTW, there are very specific reasons as to why Santorum is unelectable - which have to do with, among other things, his ability to appeal across the political divide.
That's not deficiency that Dr. Paul suffers from.
Absolutely true ..... it's going to be a long race .....
Dunno about you, but I was, and am, a marathoner .....
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
BTW, you should know, that in terms of personal credibility, carelessly speaking out on things - perhaps motivated by emotions, rather than actual knowledge - is probably not the best way to enhance one's credibility.
Dr. Paul has run in three national elections:
The 1988 nominating contest for Libertarian Party - which he won (in a landslide)
The 1988 Presidential election which he lost (as a 3rd, minor party candidate - which shouldn't come as a great surprise, given how the 2 party system is rigged)
The 2008 Republican party primary for President which he lost (but also won .... if one is capable of discernment and understanding
)Additionally, he ran in the 1996 race for his current congressional seat - where he ran against the Republican Party incumbent candidate, (former Democrat, turned Republican) Greg Laughlin - who was backed and endorsed by the Republican establishment, including then-Governor George W. Bush, Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and other members of the party from outside the district and the state.
Dr. Paul beat Laughlin - and has retained his seat ever since
Last edited:
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Great. Now they're losing votes from districts.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Yeah
.... as commented on, on another website:..... Grand Theft Iowa .....
S'ok ...... blackboxvoting.com and watchthevote.com had the folks out there reporting on the shenanigans as an independent verification ..... after gaming Pat B. to put the Dole driver's seat more and more people are waking up to what the Party machine engages in ....
It's the reason why the parties are committing slow, but certain suicide .... why more and more are leaving .... and why many of those who remain have managed to get our priorities straight and understand that loyalty to party is very low on the list of motivations ....
Look for more to come out in the coming weeks .....
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
A few closing thoughts on the state of the field after the Iowa causcus:
Bachmann - not likely to go much of anywhere, given how prone she is to hysteria and fear-mongering .... and outright misrepresentation of facts. Candidates who obviously outright lie usually have a fairly short political shelf-life, and given her poor performance in Iowa she will likely have a hard time continuing - due to being unable to raise funds. She may well be entirely delusional enough to actually believe that she's somehow "divinely ordained" (similar to Herman) to be America's "Margaret Thatcher" that she'll try and borrow to continue on. After having looked at her financial situation that looks to be a fairly limited path. Hang in as long as you can Michelle, your ego is our friend.
Perry - may stay in the race for awhile longer after "reassessing" his campaign (although he has at this point apparently cancelled all campaign appearances for the next week in SC) He's got the money to do so (no matter how carelessly he's spent it thus far) - and can probably get the financial backing .... provided he doesn't continue go stupid on a daily - which given his history thus doesn't appear likely. He just doesn't appear to have the smarts - and it's not clear whether he can get up to the point where he's overcome that (or more accurately, hide it) He's looking at this point to be even stupider than "W" was .... who woulda thought it ?
Huntsman - he was off the radar in Iowa, so I'll reserve comment for now, other than to say he appears to be working hard in NH and having some success.
Romney - looking more like the "establishment" candidate all the time ..... having been anointed with a "victory" in Iowa. He's the next one in line. And he managed to get 6 less votes than he did in 2008, even with a slightly higher turnout. Impressive.
For those that mistakenly (IMO) let the 2012 elections be about "getting Obama" (as opposed to what is best for your country) ... Mittens might just end up being "your guy" .... hold your nose and try not to vomit as you pull the lever .....
Santorum - he's managed to pull off a "dramatic surge: - but was it really because he did anything to actually earn it ? ..... or was it just because he happened to the last one who appeared to still be standing after Newt, Bachmann, and Perry were seen for who they actually are ? Here's a picture at a campaign stop from 3 days ago, as "Rooster" Ricky walks in:
Who knew that he was capable of turning them out like that ?
Santorum has no national organization or money to speak of (although expect both to change to some degree), and he will be very thoroughly "vetted" in the media - which will not be at all pleasant - because of what is there. (The start of this happened the other night on Fox with Alan Colmes, where resident neocon mouthpiece Rich Lowry made a complete *** of himself) My guess is that Santorum probably has a shelf life of a couple months at best.
Gingrich - Newt at this point has been bloodied rather badly - and deservedly so, considering his record. Expect it to continue (mainly because Romney understands the threat he poses in the long-term) Newt will fight back with ads - against Romney ..... and probably with rhetoric against Dr. Paul. Newt is extremely bitter at this point - due his poor showing in Iowa (and most particularly because he got his butt whooped by the good Doctor) Did these Iowa people just not get the word ? He is going to be the nominee. Don't they know ?
This state of mind doesn't bode well for Newt - because it throws him off his game, making him respond emotionally, rather than intellectually ..... he will only be able to contain himself for so long ...
Further, in addressing his supporters, Newt has taken a position that saying he reserves the right to "tell the truth" (seriously, I'm not making it up) .... and calling for a "great debate within the party" ...... and wants to elevate Ron Paul's dangerous foreign policy as part of that debate.
Thank you Newt - for you are truly a bigger fool than I had ever realized. While it is a debate that Newt may want to have, it ain't really a debate that the neocons want. Fear-mongering, when taken to near hysterical levels, has it's own liabilities. Dr. Paul will be happy to oblige, I'm quite sure.
Ron Paul - Dr. Ron Paul comes out of this looking very good. While it's certainly true that an outright win or 2nd place would have been fantastic, nevertheless, a showing of a strong 3rd place finish is very definitely a win for Team Paul - particularly given that he has more than doubled his support from 2008, was within a few percentage points of both 1st and 2nd place, and given the fact that he was able to secure significant support (including independents and Democrats) from a variety of quarters, it shows that he is a viable candidate for the nomination. Apparently, the "ceiling" is movable.
Sarah Palin, had some very wise words, for the remainder of the GOP:
.... yeah ...... what she said ......
Bachmann - not likely to go much of anywhere, given how prone she is to hysteria and fear-mongering .... and outright misrepresentation of facts. Candidates who obviously outright lie usually have a fairly short political shelf-life, and given her poor performance in Iowa she will likely have a hard time continuing - due to being unable to raise funds. She may well be entirely delusional enough to actually believe that she's somehow "divinely ordained" (similar to Herman) to be America's "Margaret Thatcher" that she'll try and borrow to continue on. After having looked at her financial situation that looks to be a fairly limited path. Hang in as long as you can Michelle, your ego is our friend.
Perry - may stay in the race for awhile longer after "reassessing" his campaign (although he has at this point apparently cancelled all campaign appearances for the next week in SC) He's got the money to do so (no matter how carelessly he's spent it thus far) - and can probably get the financial backing .... provided he doesn't continue go stupid on a daily - which given his history thus doesn't appear likely. He just doesn't appear to have the smarts - and it's not clear whether he can get up to the point where he's overcome that (or more accurately, hide it) He's looking at this point to be even stupider than "W" was .... who woulda thought it ?
Huntsman - he was off the radar in Iowa, so I'll reserve comment for now, other than to say he appears to be working hard in NH and having some success.
Romney - looking more like the "establishment" candidate all the time ..... having been anointed with a "victory" in Iowa. He's the next one in line. And he managed to get 6 less votes than he did in 2008, even with a slightly higher turnout. Impressive.
For those that mistakenly (IMO) let the 2012 elections be about "getting Obama" (as opposed to what is best for your country) ... Mittens might just end up being "your guy" .... hold your nose and try not to vomit as you pull the lever .....
Santorum - he's managed to pull off a "dramatic surge: - but was it really because he did anything to actually earn it ? ..... or was it just because he happened to the last one who appeared to still be standing after Newt, Bachmann, and Perry were seen for who they actually are ? Here's a picture at a campaign stop from 3 days ago, as "Rooster" Ricky walks in:
Who knew that he was capable of turning them out like that ?
Santorum has no national organization or money to speak of (although expect both to change to some degree), and he will be very thoroughly "vetted" in the media - which will not be at all pleasant - because of what is there. (The start of this happened the other night on Fox with Alan Colmes, where resident neocon mouthpiece Rich Lowry made a complete *** of himself) My guess is that Santorum probably has a shelf life of a couple months at best.
Gingrich - Newt at this point has been bloodied rather badly - and deservedly so, considering his record. Expect it to continue (mainly because Romney understands the threat he poses in the long-term) Newt will fight back with ads - against Romney ..... and probably with rhetoric against Dr. Paul. Newt is extremely bitter at this point - due his poor showing in Iowa (and most particularly because he got his butt whooped by the good Doctor) Did these Iowa people just not get the word ? He is going to be the nominee. Don't they know ?
This state of mind doesn't bode well for Newt - because it throws him off his game, making him respond emotionally, rather than intellectually ..... he will only be able to contain himself for so long ...
Further, in addressing his supporters, Newt has taken a position that saying he reserves the right to "tell the truth" (seriously, I'm not making it up) .... and calling for a "great debate within the party" ...... and wants to elevate Ron Paul's dangerous foreign policy as part of that debate.
Thank you Newt - for you are truly a bigger fool than I had ever realized. While it is a debate that Newt may want to have, it ain't really a debate that the neocons want. Fear-mongering, when taken to near hysterical levels, has it's own liabilities. Dr. Paul will be happy to oblige, I'm quite sure.
Ron Paul - Dr. Ron Paul comes out of this looking very good. While it's certainly true that an outright win or 2nd place would have been fantastic, nevertheless, a showing of a strong 3rd place finish is very definitely a win for Team Paul - particularly given that he has more than doubled his support from 2008, was within a few percentage points of both 1st and 2nd place, and given the fact that he was able to secure significant support (including independents and Democrats) from a variety of quarters, it shows that he is a viable candidate for the nomination. Apparently, the "ceiling" is movable.
Sarah Palin, had some very wise words, for the remainder of the GOP:
"The GOP had better not marginalize Ron Paul and his supporters after this, because Ron Paul and his supporters understand that a lot of Americans are war weary and we are broke."
.... yeah ...... what she said ......
Last edited:
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
BBC News - Michele Bachmann halts presidential campaign
Michele Bachman halts Presidential Campaign
Hmmm ..... some Iron Lady she turned out to be
Michele Bachman halts Presidential Campaign
Hmmm ..... some Iron Lady she turned out to be
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
It's smart move for her (live to fight another day) - another smart move would been to have cut her withdrawal speech short by 2/3rds.BBC News - Michele Bachmann halts presidential campaign
Michele Bachman halts Presidential Campaign
Hmmm ..... some Iron Lady she turned out to be
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
LOL that would be a first .... a politician that is a verbal minimalist ...... direct & to the point
What we need is everyone with less than 51% of the vote to drop out! THEN we would win! Even better, during the general election, require 60% of all registered voters to be elected president! THAT would get rid of the "big money" in politics.