Page 2 of 55 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 1098
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Fun for us political junkies.
    Ever listen to NPR's "The Political Junkie", Ken Rudin? The amount of political trivia he has crammed in his head is unfathomable.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love except when it's cold.
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Beacuse it is a caucus and not a primary, the Iowa results can be skewed by organization and passion.

    In other words, the outcome can be misleading.

    Since 1976, the eventual Republican nominee has won six of the nine Iowa caucuses -- George H. Bush beat Reagan 32-30 percent in 1980' Bob Dole led the pack with 37 percent in 1988 ... folowed by Pat Roberson at 25 percent and George H. Bush (the eventual nominee) at 19 percent. Four years ago, Mike Huckabee won the caucus with 34 percent of the vote. Mitt Romney was second at 25 percent and Fred Thompson third. He barely edged out eventual nominee John McCain, who got just 13 percent of the vote.

    To me (as a Democrat) it's interesting to watch, but I won't get too carried away by the outcome.
    I believe it's 5 out of 9 and if you eliminate the years when the incumbent republican was running unopposed, 1984, 1992, 2004, it's even less predictive. Your main point is right.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    Ever listen to NPR's "The Political Junkie", Ken Rudin? The amount of political trivia he has crammed in his head is unfathomable.
    Have not, but appreciate the head's-up. Does he have a specific show, or just appear at random times?


    Re: Iowa -- comment above is correct that ground organization is key. It is also one of the most socially conservative republican primary/caucus states of the entire slate of states. Organization bodes well for Paul, whereas my understanding is that Newt is conducting a guerrilla campaign and Romney did not really jump into Iowa until recently.

    Mitt's real issue is NH. If Newt comes out of Iowa with a head of steam and clips Mitt in NH, he has a clear roll through SC and then an intersting battle in FL. (If I understand the calendar correctly).

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Interesting that since I started this thread there have been a flurry of polls showing Gingrich's support sagging a bit. The polls have not shown a big move toward Romney though, it is just more voters going back into the undecided column. Romney has unleashed some really stridently anti-Newt ads in Iowa over the past few days and they appear to be working. Then again, as far as I can tell the ads do not lie and Romney probably thinks it is worth reminding voters that Newt had some nasty ethics violations while in congress.

    The reason I am skeptical about Romney's chances is that he seems to be stuck in the low-mid-20s in all the polls and that is where he has been for a loooong time. You almost never see him pop into the upper-20s or 30s the way Newt, Cain, and Perry did. Romney has been the front-runner forever but he cannot get more than about 1-in-4 GOP voters to support him. I think he may have a hard time ever getting more than mid-30s. Once the race is down to just 1 or 2 other realistic contenders, mid-30s ain't gonna cut it.

    By the way, something to look out for is Huntsman's surge in New Hampshire. I think Huntsman knows his moderate politics give him no chance in conservative Iowa but he may play well in independent-minded New Hamp. I've seen several polls that put him in the mid-teens there, which is three or four times the support he has nationally and in Iowa. If Romney suffers an embarrassing 3rd or 4th in Iowa and his moderate supporters think he is in trouble, Huntsman could get a real boost and become a player in all this.

    -Jason "congrats to everyone for keeping this non-partisan so far... the first person who crosses the line is getting a major slap from me!" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love except when it's cold.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Have not, but appreciate the head's-up. Does he have a specific show, or just appear at random times?


    Re: Iowa -- comment above is correct that ground organization is key. It is also one of the most socially conservative republican primary/caucus states of the entire slate of states. Organization bodes well for Paul, whereas my understanding is that Newt is conducting a guerrilla campaign and Romney did not really jump into Iowa until recently.

    Mitt's real issue is NH. If Newt comes out of Iowa with a head of steam and clips Mitt in NH, he has a clear roll through SC and then an intersting battle in FL. (If I understand the calendar correctly).
    Mitt picked up a big endorsement today from SC governor and tea party favorite Nickky Haley.(As opposed to the one from erstwhile Delaware senate candidate Christine "I am not a witch" O'donnell.)

    I'm surprised that Newt's intrade probability is up 2% from yesterday. The gap with Romney is about the same so others lost some ground. I thought the competition was effective attacking Newt last night, and his explanations of the Freddie Mac relationship and prior support of the individual mandate should not be credible with the voters. Couple these with the SEC suit announced today against former Freddie and Fannie executives that should only tar Newt further.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    By the way, something to look out for is Huntsman's surge in New Hampshire. I think Huntsman knows his moderate politics give him no chance in conservative Iowa but he may play well in independent-minded New Hamp. I've seen several polls that put him in the mid-teens there, which is three or four times the support he has nationally and in Iowa. If Romney suffers an embarrassing 3rd or 4th in Iowa and his moderate supporters think he is in trouble, Huntsman could get a real boost and become a player in all this.
    I've been following Huntsman's campaign closely. You're right that he's putting absolutely no effort into Iowa. One might think that as a supposed moderate candidate, he'd be likely to attack the tea party type candidates, but his main effort, I think correctly, has been to go after Romney. His strongest moment of the campaign was probably his back and forth with Romney at a recent debate about Afghanistan and the president's role as commander-in-chief. There's a reason his betting odds are above candidates who are polling better than him nationally in Perry and Bachmann. A lot of people believe he's running for VP or secretary of state or 2016, but I think it's too early to count him out completely yet. As I noted earlier, there's a long way to go, and maybe Huntsman will be the next in line of Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich...

    - Wan "I wonder if Pawlenty is seriously kicking himself over his decision to quit right now" der

  7. #27

    Would the process

    be better if we did away with primaries etc. and just let the party bosses pick someone in a smoke filled room.

    Just now the room would not be smoke filled.

    It does seem to me that the qualities needed to win the nomination today are not necessarily the qualities needed to win the election or to be a successful President.

    SoCal

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    Mitt picked up a big endorsement today from SC governor and tea party favorite Nickky Haley.(As opposed to the one from erstwhile Delaware senate candidate Christine "I am not a witch" O'donnell.)
    I seem to recall a poll in the last few days, indicating that Nikki's popularity has dropped pretty significantly lately. I am on the Georgia side of the Savannah so I do not follow it that closely, but take that FWIW.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    I've been following Huntsman's campaign closely. You're right that he's putting absolutely no effort into Iowa. One might think that as a supposed moderate candidate, he'd be likely to attack the tea party type candidates, but his main effort, I think correctly, has been to go after Romney. His strongest moment of the campaign was probably his back and forth with Romney at a recent debate about Afghanistan and the president's role as commander-in-chief. There's a reason his betting odds are above candidates who are polling better than him nationally in Perry and Bachmann. A lot of people believe he's running for VP or secretary of state or 2016, but I think it's too early to count him out completely yet. As I noted earlier, there's a long way to go, and maybe Huntsman will be the next in line of Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich...

    - Wan "I wonder if Pawlenty is seriously kicking himself over his decision to quit right now" der
    Huntsman can still surprise in NH, as they tend to try and repudiate Iowa.

    Ron Paul could still surprise in Iowa although I think last night's debate discussion on Iran is probably not a base-pleaser. As Nate Silver wrote, Ron helped himself with the 15% that agree with him and hurt himself with the 85% that don't.

    T-Paw blew his cash wad way to early and was broke. Gingrich can live off the free press he generates (for now, at least) because he stirs up so much bluster when he speaks (I mean "bluster" in a nonpartisan way -- he makes broad bold and somewhat controverial pronouncements, if someone wants a more neutral phrase). Most other candidates do not have a way to get the message out without serious cash.

    Speaking of, Romney's campaign itself has spent little money so far. Although one of its superPACs has been pretty busy.

    Interesting that the money donations to everyone seems to have dropped off -- the smart money wants to see what happens in the next few weeks.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    Mitt picked up a big endorsement today from SC governor and tea party favorite Nickky Haley.(As opposed to the one from erstwhile Delaware senate candidate Christine "I am not a witch" O'donnell.)
    I want to alert the community that the above comment is EXACTLY the kind of thing we want to avoid in this thread. It, at the very least, toes right up to the line of being partisan and probably crosses over it. THIS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED!

    The comment about "witch O'Donnell" has no relevance whatsoever to the conversation about the GOP Nominating Campaign. It largely just feels like a anti-Tea Party shot. Think about it this way, look at any comment you write and then imagine your beliefs were 100% opposite from what they currently are. If someone who was a rabid supporter of THE OTHER SIDE would have no problem with your comment, then it is fine.

    If someone wrote, "It will be interesting to see how the GOP standard-bearer fares against Barack 'I am not a Muslim, really...' Obama." that would get an infraction. Similarly, a comment about "witch O'Donnell" crosses the line.

    I have already spoken to 77devil about this but I want the rest of the community to understand the eggshells they are walking on in this thread. If you don't think you can do it, you are welcome not to post about politics here.

    --Jason "I think you folks can do it... please prove me right" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I want to alert the community that the above comment is EXACTLY the kind of thing we want to avoid in this thread. It, at the very least, toes right up to the line of being partisan and probably crosses over it. THIS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED!

    The comment about "witch O'Donnell" has no relevance whatsoever to the conversation about the GOP Nominating Campaign. It largely just feels like a anti-Tea Party shot. Think about it this way, look at any comment you write and then imagine your beliefs were 100% opposite from what they currently are. If someone who was a rabid supporter of THE OTHER SIDE would have no problem with your comment, then it is fine.

    If someone wrote, "It will be interesting to see how the GOP standard-bearer fares against Barack 'I am not a Muslim, really...' Obama." that would get an infraction. Similarly, a comment about "witch O'Donnell" crosses the line.

    I have already spoken to 77devil about this but I want the rest of the community to understand the eggshells they are walking on in this thread. If you don't think you can do it, you are welcome not to post about politics here.

    --Jason "I think you folks can do it... please prove me right" Evans
    I appreciate this thread being here. I miss the old PPB, and in any event this is a big current issue that interests many folks. Not having it here is kind of like avoiding the elephant in the room.

    Humor, unfortunately, involves poking fun at something. I hate to say that we should all avoid humor, because that's no fun, but that may be another way to monitor your posts. I assume that was '77's intent, and I understand your response.

    (And, for present purposes, I am assuming that a double meaning of "elephant" is not very funny except to a juvenile mind like me anyway).

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Nate Silver has Gingrich at 38% to win Iowa.

    http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/fi...primaries/iowa

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA

    Nanc

    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    Ever listen to NPR's "The Political Junkie", Ken Rudin? The amount of political trivia he has crammed in his head is unfathomable.
    Rudin's depth of knowledge regarding politics & elections is matched only by the depth of his collection of political campaign buttons.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Have not, but appreciate the head's-up. Does he have a specific show, or just appear at random times?
    He does a regular podcast with Ron Elving, NPR's senior Washington editor, called "It's All Politics." It's published every Thursday, about 20 min. long - well worth a listen.

    http://www.npr.org/series/111854594/...y-news-roundup

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love except when it's cold.
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    The comment about "witch O'Donnell" has no relevance whatsoever to the conversation about the GOP Nominating Campaign. It largely just feels like a anti-Tea Party shot.
    --Jason "I think you folks can do it... please prove me right" Evans
    The comment, in my opinion, was very much about the conversation which was the honest intent. There was no desire to take a shot or inflame, simply to juxtapose that in the pursuit of conservative endorsements, there are some individuals that Romney, I suspect, would prefer not to hear from.

    Another poster, it might have been you, was describing Romney's inability to date to breakout pf the mid 20's in the polls. This is because factions of the GOP distrust that his current positions on certain issues are sincere. Romney must delicately navigate the primary season to attract a broader coalition of the GOP if he is to become the party's nominee, while retaining the ability to tact back toward the center for the general election. This would be no small feat. I think the endorsement from the governor of SC is is fundamental to this strategy, while the one from unsuccessful candidate from DE was unsolicited, and would have been best left unspoken in the minds of Romney's campaign leaders. My comment about O'Donnell in the earlier post was not intended to be about any group, notwithstanding how it was apparently received.

    There is a reason you saw Mitt all over TV yesterday together with Nickky Haley and you won't with O'Donnell. And it's more than the DE primary being relatively inconsequential.
    Last edited by 77devil; 12-17-2011 at 09:17 AM.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    The comment, in my opinion, was very much about the conversation which was the honest intent. There was no desire to take a shot or inflame, simply to juxtapose that in the pursuit of conservative endorsements, there are some individuals that Romney, I suspect, would prefer not to hear from.

    Another poster, it might have been you, was describing Romney's inability to date to breakout pf the mid 20's in the polls. This is because factions of the GOP distrust that his current positions on certain issues are sincere. Romney must delicately navigate the primary season to attract a broader coalition of the GOP if he is to become the party's nominee, while retaining the ability to tact back toward the center for the general election. This would be no small feat. I think the endorsement from the governor of SC is is fundamental to this strategy, while the one from unsuccessful candidate from DE was unsolicited, and would have been best left unspoken in the minds of Romney's campaign leaders. My comment about O'Donnell in the earlier post was not intended to be about any group, notwithstanding how it was apparently received.

    There is a reason you saw Mitt all over TV yesterday together with Nickky Haley and you won't with O'Donnell. And it's more than the DE primary being relatively inconsequential.
    Mitt endorsed Nikki in the SC Gubernatorial Primary when she was still an underdog. (Well before Sarah Palin did, for example). So I think this is payback in part. I think Lindsey Graham's and Jim DeMint's decisions will carry more weight (I don't think they've endorsed anyone yet but I could be wrong). Still gotta think Newt is a big favorite in SC regardless.

    I agree that, of the front-runners, one would think that Mitt has an easier time tacking to the middle for the general than everyone other than perhaps Huntsman. But so far, it doesn't seem that the party is intersted in that -- the polls suggest that they want someone to fight for the conservative principles in which they believe. Throaty's parallel to Goldwater keeps coming to my mind.

    (As an aside, HBO had a great program a few years ago called "Mr. Conservative" I think, about the Goldwater revolution. Fascinating and worth hunting down if available -- regardless of your political bent).

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    York, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by Duke4Ever32 View Post
    On a cable news show I was watching this morning it was mentioned that in the last 52 years, only once has the GOP not nominated the individual who appeared "next in line" for the nomination.
    I think this is referring to Reagan and G.H.W. Bush. Reagan was not a Washington insider and had done some 'liberal' things in California as governor. Bush was chairman of the RNC, under serious consideration by Ford for his veep, appointed ambassador to China by Ford and then headed the CIA. I believe I recall reading some stuff about Bush and Reagan, or maybe it was their wives, having a frosty White House relationship because Bush felt passed over.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by lmb View Post
    I think this is referring to Reagan and G.H.W. Bush. Reagan was not a Washington insider and had done some 'liberal' things in California as governor. Bush was chairman of the RNC, under serious consideration by Ford for his veep, appointed ambassador to China by Ford and then headed the CIA. I believe I recall reading some stuff about Bush and Reagan, or maybe it was their wives, having a frosty White House relationship because Bush felt passed over.
    Reagan challenged Ford in the '76 primary, so I think the progression was not out of line in '80. IIRC, Ford only won by about 100 delegates at the convention. Bush Sr. had held several positions of prominence (CIA, Ambassador to China, even RNC Chair I think) but was in the banking industry during the Carter administration years.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    be better if we did away with primaries etc. and just let the party bosses pick someone in a smoke filled room.

    Just now the room would not be smoke filled.

    It does seem to me that the qualities needed to win the nomination today are not necessarily the qualities needed to win the election or to be a successful President.

    SoCal
    I just listened to an excellent audio book about President James Garfield -- "Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine, and the Murder of a President" by Candace Millard (I'm sure the book is good too). Garfied was an accidental nominee, in a convention that took two days and over 35 ballot votes. Garfield actually nominated one of the two main contenders (a fight between Grant's Stalwarts and the reformist "halfback" wing of the Republican party). Garfield was a reformist and a compromise choice. The party put Chester Arthur on the ticket as the VP -- who was a Stalwart and actively and publicly undermined Garfield during his short presidency.

    If anyone is interested in the nitty gritty of backroom convention politics -- or just a really interesting story about a great man most of us know nothing about -- it's a good book/CD/download.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love except when it's cold.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Mitt endorsed Nikki in the SC Gubernatorial Primary when she was still an underdog. (Well before Sarah Palin did, for example). So I think this is payback in part. I think Lindsey Graham's and Jim DeMint's decisions will carry more weight (I don't think they've endorsed anyone yet but I could be wrong). Still gotta think Newt is a big favorite in SC regardless.

    I agree that, of the front-runners, one would think that Mitt has an easier time tacking to the middle for the general than everyone other than perhaps Huntsman. But so far, it doesn't seem that the party is intersted in that -- the polls suggest that they want someone to fight for the conservative principles in which they believe. Throaty's parallel to Goldwater keeps coming to my mind.

    (As an aside, HBO had a great program a few years ago called "Mr. Conservative" I think, about the Goldwater revolution. Fascinating and worth hunting down if available -- regardless of your political bent).
    Graham and DeMint both said recently they won't endorse anyone, although DeMint left some wiggle room. Lindsey added specifically that he would not endorse Newt which is consistent with some other high profile pols who were in congress during his tenure as speaker. Nevertheless, I agree that Newt is the favorite in SC. I think it's a must win for him.

    It's been a long time since I've thought much about Goldwater and I'm going to do some reading about him. I'd like to understand where he would fit in the current GOP field. There was a mock election at my school in 1964, and I remember Goldwater supporters with big campaign button with a plastic bubble filled with water and shiny gold colored sparkles. Definitely the coolest and most sought after button at the time amongst the elementary school crowd regardless of political persuasion.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    It's been a long time since I've thought much about Goldwater and I'm going to do some reading about him. I'd like to understand where he would fit in the current GOP field.
    "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -- Barry AuH2O, Convention Acceptance Speech.

    He also said that the country would be better if we sawed off the east coast and let it sink (or something like that).

    FWIW, I see the "modern" equivalent as Pat Buchanan in philosophy, with a speaking style like Newt.


    BTW, here's a link about the movie I referenced before -- I hope HBO decides to re-air it (or put it on "in Demand") soon:

    http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/film.p...mrconservative

Similar Threads

  1. Politics of Preschool
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-05-2008, 02:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •