that post is totally the kind of thing I was alluding to - to secure the base, Romney is going to have to do a lot of unpalatable shit, including talking and acting like a moron
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:23 (twelve years ago) link
i didn't realize he'd already started doing that (and almost a month ago!)
chait, yeah.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:24 (twelve years ago) link
I think the whole key to this election rests here. This is the gateway that will, in time, reveal all.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:25 (twelve years ago) link
thought you were going to rickroll me there.
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:25 (twelve years ago) link
You've been 9-9-9'ed, my friend.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:26 (twelve years ago) link
Sam Stein @samsteinhp -- just in: Perry Files Federal Court Challenge to Virginia Ballot Access Rules
is it a pro-se filing, written in crayon?
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:27 (twelve years ago) link
to secure the base, Romney is going to have to do a lot of unpalatable shit, including talking and acting like a moron
What, you think he's been quoting Montesquieu for the last six months?
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:30 (twelve years ago) link
okay an even BIGGER moron
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:41 (twelve years ago) link
I'll repeat something I've said many times: I expect Romney will have lots of wiggle-room in a general because a) voters in the middle who he needs will cut him slack for appeasing a base they consider crazy, b) most of the GOP base will reluctantly vote for him anyway, and c) by then (if not already), Romney will be long past the point where outrage over him changing his mind on something or contradicting himself will barely even register.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:49 (twelve years ago) link
b) most of the GOP base will reluctantly vote for him anyway
the question is will they be driving their friends to the polls to vote for him (hint: the answer is no)
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:51 (twelve years ago) link
yes this is all true and why i think romney will win 47 -- 48 states and by a popular margin of 70% -- 30% it's all over a new conservative era is about to dawn
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:54 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.humorgazette.com/images/romney-robot1.jpg
by a popular margin of 70% -- 30%
hahaha waht
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:55 (twelve years ago) link
you think 80% -- 20%?
― Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:56 (twelve years ago) link
okay okay you've convinced me.
If Republicans dislike Romney enough, they have a chance to do away with him in the next two or three months--and when Gingrich was surging, I thought that's what they were indeed finally going to do. But if they nominate him, then I assume that means the majority of them, enthusiastically or otherwise, have decided they can abide by him as president.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:58 (twelve years ago) link
abide by /= vote for
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:07 (twelve years ago) link
Do you really believe those numbers, Daniel? If I were a wagering kind of guy, I would wager a large amount on the proposition that no candidate will exceed 55% of the vote (I'm tempted to make it 53) or 350 electoral votes.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:13 (twelve years ago) link
You're dividing the base into those who will reluctantly vote for Romney and those who'll need to be cajoled and driven to the polls. Maybe--I just think of it as one homogeneous base, and that most of them will vote for the Republican nominee.
One thing I do know: if Romney becomes president, I'm going to start hanging around NRO and have fun enjoying all the right-wing Morbiuses mercilessly pummeling Romney day in and day out in the comments section.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:15 (twelve years ago) link
As one who (I think) shares Daniel's absurdist sense of humour, I think he's just having fun there.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:17 (twelve years ago) link
personally I'm betting on the 80% - 20% Ron Paul landslide
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:18 (twelve years ago) link
I was kidding. I do think Romney will win, tho.
― Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 01:15 (twelve years ago) link
Of interest to wild gossipy political horserace fiends:
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/12/paul-maintains-his-lead.html
No uptick or backlash backlash for Newt. "But Paul's candidacy looks like it's going to attract an unusual number of younger voters to the caucus this year, and with those under 45 he has a 35-11 advantage on Romney." Paul's anti-war stand notwithstanding, I don't totally get this--wouldn't younger voters be the ones most bothered by the newsletters?
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:12 (twelve years ago) link
they like that he's the realest poster candidate that this board election has ever seen
― William (C), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:15 (twelve years ago) link
The newsletter thing just came up and maybe they therefore accept Paul's ridiculous defense on the subject
― Another Suburbanite, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:16 (twelve years ago) link
Once you're sufficiently starry-eyed about somebody, I guess you're willing to overlook anything. (Oh wait, that's my guy.)
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:22 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah. For instance, I still think Rick Perry is dreamy.
I just can't quit you, Rick Perry.
― Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:28 (twelve years ago) link
I feel somewhat the same about Buddy Roemer.
http://images.politico.com/global/news/110304_buddy_roemer_605_ap.jpg
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:33 (twelve years ago) link
maybe we need a separate thread for 'who are your GOP friends/family/acquaintances gonna vote for'
but the only dude my birther pal (who lives in san francisco!) mentioned a while ago was perry, with regret that he'd shit the bed. never any mention of mitt. curious what he thinks of newt, but i am still friends with him because this only comes up when we're hammered.
at any rate he's certain that any GOP candidate couldn't possibly "do more harm to america" than obama. i've no idea what that means and it would be too depressing to ask.
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:43 (twelve years ago) link
I can't even ask that question, without getting into a conversation that will make me cringe.
Yesterdays comment: "Obama is really stupid, as in not bright at all. He just let all those terrorists out of Guantanamo, and they can now plot against us. He is a stupid man."
― Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 05:48 (twelve years ago) link
(Say this in your best Admiral Stockdale voice): Gridlock!
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/polling-gridlock-in-iowa-could-produce-last-minute-momentum/#
So far all the talk that Romney's more or less past his problems--Gingrich is fading fast, it's just him and Paul now, and Paul can't survive much scrutiny--he still hasn't really solved that 20-25% problem, has he? I think it will go away eventually. I just continue to be surprised that it's so persistent.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 15:34 (twelve years ago) link
According to fivethirtyeight, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry are all "projected to receive between 11 and 14 percent of the vote in Iowa". Gobsmacking! The idea that Bachmann, Santorum and Perry are all above 10% just floors me.
Also, in other news from that link, Gingrich still holds commanding polling leads in SC and FL, which are far more important than Iowa in terms of the eventual nomination.
btw, if I were Perry, I'd retire to N********d and use my leftover campaign cash to start the Mary Kay franchise to end all Mary Kay franchises.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 16:40 (twelve years ago) link
- "b) most of the GOP base will reluctantly vote for him anyway"
Vote for him, yes. Prolly 85% of conservatives are sufficiently anti-Obama that they will VOTE for the Republican nominee no matter who he/she/it is. (The other 10% have crankish reasons why they won't accept this or that apostate.)
But will that 85% donate? Organize? Volunteer? Work the phones? Do get-out-the-vote stuff? My guess is that no, they mostly will not.
In 2008, conservatives were disappointed with McCain as the nominee. They held their noses and voted for him, but they weren't happy. Of course some were happy about Palin, and most knew that they definitely didn't want Obama, but that didn't extend to happiness about McCain. And he lost badly.
So now we see two possibilities: one, the mainstream GOP contrives to nominate Romney. Conservatives will vote for him, but not organize and volunteer for him. And their antipathy toward the mainstream and GOP leadership can only increase; they will (understandably) continue to feel that when they support the milquetoast mainstream, they just get hosed.
Possibility two: on the off-chance that a not-Romney is nominated, it will be someone acceptable to that wacky fringe. Which means unacceptable to the middle, and the dynamic is reversed: then it's the middle who will hold their noses and vote, but not bust their butts to pull (say) Gingrich across the finish line.
As for the Not-Romneys, the Gingrich surge is the Cain surge is the Perry surge is the Bachmann surge. It's all the same people casting about for an acceptable not-Romney. Again, 85% of that crowd will coalesce around the eventual nominee - as far as voting is concerned.
So you have a lose-lose situation for the GOP, and that recipe continues to look delicious for Democrats.
― Ye Mad Puffin, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 18:39 (twelve years ago) link
(I think I meant the other 15% - math r not me)
― Ye Mad Puffin, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 18:40 (twelve years ago) link
Puffin, in spite of what I believe to be your essentially correct analysis of the republican side of the pending prez election, I think it will still be a very close race, because enthusiasm for Obama among liberals is rather tepid also, and the electoral college slants the prez race heavily toward small-population states, which tend to be more rural and republican. We're still gioing to see this race pivot on Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, with a few small states like NH tossed in for spice, if it gets razor thin.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 18:46 (twelve years ago) link
imo the states that're gonna matter most in '12 are gonna be the historically red ones that Obama "flipped" by inspiring the indifferent, who won't be as inspired this time
― undervalued aerosmith tchotchkes sold in bulk, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:05 (twelve years ago) link
nah that's generally not how it works. those were the cherry on top but it's very unlikely that obama would win them if a race where he doesn't win ohio and pennsylvania - and if he wins ohio he's probably already won. unless dynamics have seriously shifted over the last 4 years.
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:09 (twelve years ago) link
2012 isn't 2008; romney isn't mccain.
― Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:11 (twelve years ago) link
xp to myself
that said he won virginia w/ a bigger margin than ohio or florida and that might be 'safer' than either of those at this point. dunno, I'm not optimistic about florida.
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:14 (twelve years ago) link
obama's campaign manager sounds confident. about florida, he says the best way to view florida is not to have to win it (then if you do, "great!"). we'll see.
polls say romney/rubio beats obama/biden in florida. but that advantage evaporates if it's obama/HRC.
― Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:17 (twelve years ago) link
chances of obama/hrc ticket are almost nil, unless biden fronts an ultra-credible excuse for not rejoining the ticket - like liver cancer, for example.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:25 (twelve years ago) link
I dunno, if it polls well and they're struggling, why not? it's a gimmick but what isn't?
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:27 (twelve years ago) link
heard someone say it's a strategy under consideration, depending on how things are unfolding next year.
the easy move would be for HRC and biden to trade jobs. no loss of respect/credibility there.
― Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:29 (twelve years ago) link
"someone" being richard nixon, who spoke to me in a dream.
i think joe biden would make a pretty bad secretary of state
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:38 (twelve years ago) link
yes
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:52 (twelve years ago) link
appalling actually
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:01 (twelve years ago) link
You can get away with his interjections when your office is the constitutionally useless vice presidency, not as SOS.
basically if the gop has an embarrassing primary season, romney wins but struggles and comes out looking pretty weak - why take any risk? even if this polls well, it'd be a risk on some level.
but if romney has (more or less) a clean victory / a GOP mandate, comes out w/ a lot of momentum, obama's a few points behind...why not pull the type of stunt that the media totally eats up? clinton makes it 'obama 2.0' and gives the campaign a fresh media narrative. gives a lot of people a reason to start paying attention again. would kill in the debates and could go full force attack dog.
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:07 (twelve years ago) link
(i really don't like this kind of fantasy-team speculation but) that kind of personnel move look like a huge admission of weakness, esp if there is no immediate health- or scandal-related reason to get rid of biden. plus i wonder if obama and hrc still personally don't like each other at all. if it is true that obama is not close to many people and trusts very few it seems unlikely that a relationship like that would be sacrificed.
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:10 (twelve years ago) link