blank
U.S. Presidential Race
Tue, 2012-01-03 15:49
#1
U.S. Presidential Race
Tue, 2012-01-03 15:53
#2
So, the big vote in Iowa takes place today.
Anyone want to offer predictions?
I think Rick Santorum may pull off a shocking upset tonight and actually win it. I think he's certain to come at least second place.
I also think tonight will spell the end of the Bachmann and Perry campaigns. Bachmann's support will likely shift to Santorum and Perry's support will likely split. Santorum will become the right wing / tea party alternative to Romney.
I still think Romney wins big in New Hampshire. After New Hampshire, I imagine that Huntsman and Gingrich both drop out. Ron Paul stays in but the race basically becomes a Santorum vs. Romney showdown heading into South Carolina.
Then, come November Obama will win in a squeaker.
What do the rest of y'all think?
Tue, 2012-01-03 15:57
#3
M. Spector
![http://i40.tinypic.com/2zsmpli.jpg[/IMG]](http://i40.tinypic.com/2zsmpli.jpg[/IMG]){kind=link}
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:01
#4
Because you wanted to enter...
..and by golly you did.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:04
#5
Where is Iowa?
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:07
#6
I dont get the hostility to the OP - I really don't.
I watched Santorum on Meet the Press this weekend. He makes my skin crawl.
In the wake of the Citizens United decision the emergence of the so-called "Super PACS" with their media blitzes apparently has really been felt in Iowa. So far, the special interests have been focussed on Gingrich, but speculation is that they will go after Santorum next.
I think Romney still faces an uphill battle getting many Conservatives to vote for him.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:11
#7
I dont get the hostility to the OP - I really don't.
What was hostile pookie? I really don't see where I was being hostile at all. Just a political junkie offering my predictions.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:13
#8
Mr.Tea, I think he meant why were we being hostile to you, and I think he misinterpreted our teasing as hostility. Like the U.S. elections, a comedy of errors.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:23
#9
I've been following US politics since Eisenhower, and, if you'll exuse my use of the vulgate, it gets more fucking nuts every year. Exponentially so I might add. Like really, it's gone from Dr. Strangelove to a bad Coen brothers movie way past anything The Onion could imagine as satire, right into the realm of methyl alchohol induced nightmares.
They should replace bloody Washington on their money with Edvard Munch's 'the Scream'!
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:27
#10
Ok, oldgoat, I've [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/babble-banter/babble-hall-fame-version-x21#comme... you[/url]!!
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:28
#11
Boom Boom
They should replace bloody Washington on their money with Edvard Munch's 'the Scream'!
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:28
#12
I think Romney still faces an uphill battle getting many Conservatives to vote for him.
His perceived liberalism may be an issue, but it is not the real issue, IMO.
This is a rare occasion when I am actually thankful for the biases of fundamentalist Christians. If they didn't see him as a devil worshipper I am sure they'd be all over him. As it is, I am sure there are many of them who will stay home for that reason.
This would be the bible-thumping republican chickens coming home to roost.
(edit)
Come to think of it, the last time I remember this being an issue was over Kennedy's Catholicism.
I know no one was concerned about Richard Nixon's Quaker faith getting in the way of the war effort.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:40
#13
I predict (for Iowa):
1. Ron Paul
2. Mitt Romney
3. Rick Santorum
I don't think Paul has a chance to win the nomination but I think he could also do well in New Hampshire and stay in the campaign a while. I find many of his views repugnant, but I hope he can stay in the race quite a while. I think his campaign is decreasing what credibility the MSM still has, and I think he is promoting some very important ideas. I would love to see Obama vs. Paul but can't imagine it could happen. I hope he goes for an independent run to stay in the spotlight.
I think Mitt Romney will be the nominee and I think Obama will win.
I doubt Rick Santorum has much chance of doing well beyond Iowa, even though he could get more of the evangelical vote, and stay in the race as their voice.
I think whoever does better between Gingrich and Perry will stay in the race as the primary Not-Romney. I don't think either are credible candidates, but they are not Romney.
I don't see how the Republicans can fully unite around a candidate.
I think the only potential early primary results that could be viewed as "good for Republicans" would be if Ron Paul does poorly and quietly goes away.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:40
#14
Boom Boom
I would love to see Obama vs. Paul but can't imagine it could happen. I hope he goes for an independent run to stay in the spotlight.
I was watching someone on CNN suggest Ron Paul will split the Repug vote badly if he stays in as an Independent.
Tue, 2012-01-03 16:59
#15
I've been following US politics since Eisenhower, and, if you'll exuse my use of the vulgate, it gets more fucking nuts every year.
Someone described it as like a bad sitcom but without any main characters, just composed entirely of the wacky comic relief neighbours
Tue, 2012-01-03 17:25
#16
I think Romney still faces an uphill battle getting many Conservatives to vote for him.
His perceived liberalism may be an issue, but it is not the real issue, IMO.
This is a rare occasion when I am actually thankful for the biases of fundamentalist Christians. If they didn't see him as a devil worshipper I am sure they'd be all over him. As it is, I am sure there are many of them who will stay home for that reason.
This would be the bible-thumping republican chickens coming home to roost.
(edit)
Come to think of it, the last time I remember this being an issue was over Kennedy's Catholicism.
I know no one was concerned about Richard Nixon's Quaker faith getting in the way of the war effort.
Oh I definitely think the Mormonism is a problem for him. But his more liberal past is an equally serious obstacle among primary voters, and the punditocracy.
Tue, 2012-01-03 17:58
#17
And Romney being Mr. 1% is an obstacle among some tea party voters, also part of the unravelling Repug coalition.
Tue, 2012-01-03 19:34
#18
Iowa: The Meaningless Sideshow Begins - by Matt Taibbi
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/9252-focus-iowa-the-meani...
"The 2012 presidential race officially begins Tuesday with the caucuses in Iowa, and we all know what that means
....Nothing."
Season of the Fascist: Watching the Ron Paul Campaign Humanise the Face of White Supremacist Politics
http://indigenist.blogspot.com/2012/01/election-2012-season-of-fascist.html
"...Wake up and smell the coffee before it quietly morphs into the stench of roasting skin..."
Tue, 2012-01-03 22:49
#19
I'm watching the coverage on CNN and suppressing giggles every time I hear the phrase "Santorum surges". If you don't get it, look up what dan Savage did to the name "Santorum"...
Wed, 2012-01-04 00:28
#20
Boom Boom
David Letterman really doesn't like Gingrich, and really mocked him tonight, calling him a "whiny ass___" live on air. Earlier, I watched a bit of Gincrich's closing speech on CNN, and he was pretty pissed off at Romney, and he's taking out attack ads against Romney tomorrow in New Hampshire. The Grinch has a short fuse. All of the Repub candidates make my skin crawl except Huntsman, and he got just 1% tonight.
Wed, 2012-01-04 00:30
#21
Huntsman didn't campaign in Iowa at all, focused all his energy on New Hampshire. He'll do better there but it won't be enough. He's too smart and sane for the Republican base..
Wed, 2012-01-04 10:31
#22
Boom Boom
I watched Huntsman on one of the late night talk shows, he impressed me with his lucidity, and humbleness. He apparently speaks fluid Mandarin, from his days as Ambassador to China - during the Reagan years?
Wed, 2012-01-04 11:25
#23
M. Spector
![http://i43.tinypic.com/255kivq.jpg[/IMG]](http://i43.tinypic.com/255kivq.jpg[/IMG]){kind=link}
Wed, 2012-01-04 11:30
#24
LOL Spector!
Shows that Darrow backed the wrong side in the Scopes case as well. The photo proves that the governing force in evolution is unnatural selection.
Wed, 2012-01-04 11:45
#25
Romney will be the nominee. If for no other reason than there's no one else. Bachman is dropping out today. Perry may soon follow. Santorum is a joke. Paul will never get the nomination. There's only room for one Mormon in the race, so Hunstman is out. Gingrich is the only other possibility, but he has so much baggage, tends to make outrageous statements, and is totally unlikeable.
Wed, 2012-01-04 12:02
#26
It seems like they'll take the least batshit sounding stooge with even half a shot...even if he is a Mormon...on the premise that Republican/Tea Party/evangelical voters will, when the chips are down, vote for someone like Romney with all of his faults rather than....you know...that guy in the White House.
Wed, 2012-01-04 12:13
#27
Maysie
Wed, 2012-01-04 12:15
#28
Maysie
And I'm sorry, but I can't read Rick Santorum's name without thinking of this. (NSFW)
Euwwwwwww.
Wed, 2012-01-04 12:32
#29
@ SJ #25
Some will, I am sure.
But I am also sure there are plenty in the rapture and mark of the beast crowd who will simply refuse to vote for him.
Of course, this was not an issue for George Romney back in 1972, but those were different times.
For that matter (considering issues that have dogged Barack Obama), the fact that Romney was born in Mexico was not an issue either.
Wed, 2012-01-04 12:50
#30
Well, here's to learning something new every day. Mitt Romney...the son of Mexican immigrants.
Wed, 2012-01-04 13:02
#31
I watched Huntsman on one of the late night talk shows, he impressed me with his lucidity, and humbleness. He apparently speaks fluid Mandarin, from his days as Ambassador to China - during the Reagan years?
No, he was actually Barack Obama's ambassador to China. That's partially what hurt him, the sense that he was "too close" to Obama. I actually think it's rather noble that he would put aside partisanship in order to serve the president in an important role but, then again, I'm not some nutty tea partier who thinks that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim socialist out to destroy America.
He learned Mandarin cause he grew up Mormon (but no longer really practices) and did some missionary work there before going to university.
Huntsman strikes me as likely the most intelligent and qualified of the candidates. But because he doesn't foam at the mouth about Obama, believes in evolution, dares to acknowledge climate change and brought in gay civil unions as governor and doesn't run away from his record like Romney does, he has little chance. The Romney from 10 or 15 years ago was actually pretty decent as far as Republicans go. Pro-choice, pro-gay rights, brought in healthcare, etc. But he ran from his track record faster than Usain Bolt...
Wed, 2012-01-04 15:08
#32
Wed, 2012-01-04 15:14
#33
knownothing
An actual revolution going on under your noses and you are all too blind by your bias to see it. Activists? Gimme a break!
Wed, 2012-01-04 15:36
#34
not to be repetitive, but what the hey:
Obama will be re-elected
Wed, 2012-01-04 16:08
#35
Bec.De.Corbin
An actual revolution going on under your noses and you are all too blind by your bias to see it. Activists? Gimme a break!
Actually, by army regulation, he shouldn't be in uniform for that interview... he could get in trouble for that.
Wed, 2012-01-04 20:04
#36
knownothing
Good for him!
Wed, 2012-01-04 21:15
#37
The GOP Savages Itself, While Wall Street Backs the Black Guy, Again - by Glen Ford
http://blackagendareport.com/content/gop-savages-itself-while-wall-stree...
"The Republican presidential campaign has been relegated to a sideshow in the American powergame. The white nationalist masses recoil at the scent of Wall Street denizens like Mitt Romney. A deeper atavism is at play in Republican ranks, a far less malleable strain of reaction that is no respecter of the GOP establishment's brand of bling.
Wall Street money is once again betting on Obama, the man that delivered them resurrection from the 2008 meltdown and a pipeline in perpetuity to the financial innards of the US treasury..."
Wed, 2012-01-04 21:37
#38
Bec.De.Corbin
Good for him!
What, getting in trouble or voting for Ron Paul?
Wed, 2012-01-04 21:38
#39
Boom Boom
CNN reported that Perry had stepped down, but then he got a call from a Super PAC, and he's back in.
Thu, 2012-01-05 20:49
#40
"...The lack of skin in the game may explain why Willard Mitt Romney is so coy about releasing his income tax returns. It would also make sense for someone with $264 million in net worth to joke that he is 'unemployed', as if he were some jobless sheet metal worker in Youngstown, when he is really saying in code that his income stream is not a salary subject to payroll deduction. The chances are good that his effective rate for both federal income and payroll taxes is lower than that of many a wage slave.
The real joke is on the rest of us. After the biggest financial meltdown in 80 years - a meltdown caused by the type of rogue financial manipulation that Romney embodies - and a consequent long, steep drop in the American standard of living, who is the putative front-runner for one of the only two parties allowed to be competitive in American politics? None other than Mitt Romney, the man who says corporations are people.
Opposing him, or someone like him, will be the incumbent president Barack Obama, who will raise up to a billion dollars to compete in the campaign. Much of that loot will come from the same corporations, hedge fund managers, merger and acquisition specialists and leveraged buyout artists the president will denounce in pro-forma fashion during the campaign..."
Have the Super Rich Seceded From the United States? by Mike Lofgren
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/01/05/have-the-super-rich-seceded-from-...
Thu, 2012-01-05 22:09
#41
Boom Boom
Santorum and the Grinch are both under fire on CNN right now for denigrating African Americans.
Thu, 2012-01-05 22:50
#42
That Matt Taibbi article from post #17 sums up my feelings perfectly. The presidential race could not be less relevant to what's really happening in the world. That said, it would be very entertaining if it were possible for Ron Paul to win the nomination. Can you imagine Obama forced to campaign as the pro-war candidate?
Fri, 2012-01-06 05:28
#43
I love the comment by one political commentator after the results on Tuesday.
'From Bachmann to Santoram....Republican B.S.
'nuff said!
Fri, 2012-01-06 07:20
#44
Based on their voting records, we can already classify them as accessories to mass murder.
Fri, 2012-01-06 13:41
#45
in more serious news, support for my view that 2012 could potentially be an Obama landslide:
It was the sixth consecutive month that the economy showed a net gain of more than 100,000 jobs - not enough to restore employment to prerecession levels but enough, perhaps, to cheer President Obama as he enters the election year.
The sustained run of positives had economists like Markus Schomer, of PineBridge Investments, feeling much more optimistic than they did back in August, after a spring and summer of lost economic ground and a demoralizing debate over the debt ceiling.
At that time, Mr. Schomer thought, as many did, that government dysfunction was paralyzing the economy. Now, he is ratcheting up his growth forecast for 2012.
"The improving trend in the U.S. labor markets is not just a temporary blip, but seems to be something quite sustainable," he said, adding that the improvement had come despite continued Washington gridlock.
Among the pieces of good news in Friday's report: the drop in the jobless rate came largely from real gains, not from discouraged workers giving up the job hunt. The new jobs were spread broadly across industries, with transportation and warehousing, retail, manufacturing and restaurants all hiring.
Sun, 2012-01-08 02:06
#46
Ron Paul's Useful Idiots on the Left
http://www.readersupportednews.org/opinion/277-75/9309-ron-pauls-useful-...
"If you told a liberal in 2008 that progressives ought to give Republican Texas Congressman Ron Paul a chance because he was the most anti-war candidate on the ballot, you would have been laughed out of the room - or, more likely the bar.
But in 2012, some prominent (and white male) progressives are arguing exactly that. What's changed? Not Ron Paul, that's for certain."
Sun, 2012-01-08 02:47
#47
Ron Paul's Useful Idiots on the Left
http://www.readersupportednews.org/opinion/277-75/9309-ron-pauls-useful-...
"If you told a liberal in 2008 that progressives ought to give Republican Texas Congressman Ron Paul a chance because he was the most anti-war candidate on the ballot, you would have been laughed out of the room - or, more likely the bar.
But in 2012, some prominent (and white male) progressives are arguing exactly that. What's changed? Not Ron Paul, that's for certain."
What's changed? Obama.
Sun, 2012-01-08 15:12
#48
M. Spector
If you told a liberal in 2008 that progressives ought to give Republican Texas Congressman Ron Paul a chance because he was the most anti-war candidate on the ballot, you would have been laughed out of the room - or, more likely the bar.
I don't believe that's true. There were many U.S. and Canadian "liberals" - some posting right here on babble back in 2008 and earlier - who thought Ron Paul was their hero.
Sun, 2012-01-08 15:14
#49
M. Spector
I love the comment by one political commentator after the results on Tuesday.
'From Bachmann to Santoram....Republican B.S.
Ooh! I just got it! B for Bachmann and S for Santorum! Ha!
Sun, 2012-01-08 15:56
#50
knownothing
"Most Passionate Arguments of 2011" Alex Jones, Dylan Ratigan and Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeesqxEYC14
Tue, 2012-01-10 22:33
#51
Well, it looks like Mr. Frothy Mixture of Lube and Fecal Matter didn't do so well this time around...