Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
The US GOP Primary Results/Prediction thread [UPDATE: Santorum suspends campaign]

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . . . 22 NEXT
 

image

*chuckle*

Didn't see Santorum winning Colorado but it has made for some interesting headlines...

edit: I was also a bit wrong on Paul's percentage of the vote. He got way more than 10% of the vote in Minnesota (ended seconds after Sontroum) but only 10% in the other two. Two out of three on both predictions isn't too bad I think.

Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

Seekster:
Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

I flipped through some US television stations. Some cable news channels didn't switch to their "election mode" last night and went with their regular line up with the occasional update and the results on the bottom.

Colorado and Missouri have 100% reporting. I've posted the full results for Colorado. Still waiting on Minnesota to finish counting. Needless to say, Santorum had a good night last night.

Seekster:
Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

That's us conservatives! We only care about money.

OT: I voted for someone who wasn't my choice for candidate because the one who was wasn't on the ticket in Missouri. It came as no shock to me that Santorum won that state.

CM156:

Seekster:
Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

That's us conservatives! We only care about money.

OT: I voted for someone who wasn't my choice for candidate because the one who was wasn't on the ticket in Missouri. It came as no shock to me that Santorum won that state.

Santorum was also the only candidate to even visit Missouri so it was a given he would win there.

No we don't only care about money but it doesnt make sense to print new ballots everytime someone drops out.

Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota should have their electoral votes taken away from them. Voting for Santorum is just plain irresponsible, and the rest of this country should all point and laugh at them.

A lot of people say "oh, if this guy or that guy was elected president, I'd leave the country", and most of them don't really mean it, but I can honestly say that if Santorum were elected president, I would start figuring out a way to get the fuck out.

Seekster:

CM156:

Seekster:
Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

That's us conservatives! We only care about money.

OT: I voted for someone who wasn't my choice for candidate because the one who was wasn't on the ticket in Missouri. It came as no shock to me that Santorum won that state.

Santorum was also the only candidate to even visit Missouri so it was a given he would win there.

No we don't only care about money but it doesnt make sense to print new ballots everytime someone drops out.

OH, I agree. I was just making a joke

everythingbeeps:
Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota should have their electoral votes taken away from them. Voting for Santorum is just plain irresponsible, and the rest of this country should all point and laugh at them.

A lot of people say "oh, if this guy or that guy was elected president, I'd leave the country", and most of them don't really mean it, but I can honestly say that if Santorum were elected president, I would start figuring out a way to get the fuck out.

Democracy: Everyone gets a vote, unless they vote for a person I don't like.

Are you aware of what you're saying? You're saying I shouldn't get to vote because my state voted for someone you don't like.

You can claim all you want about the man. What you're saying is just plain irresponsible.

CM156:

Democracy: Everyone gets a vote, unless they vote for a person I don't like.

Are you aware of what you're saying? You're saying I shouldn't get to vote because my state voted for someone you don't like.

You can claim all you want about the man. What you're saying is just plain irresponsible.

Voting for Romney is one thing. Gingrich is borderline, though I'm increasingly inclined to feel the same about him as Santorum. But Santorum, that's just inexcusable. Not only is he profoundly unqualified, he is MUCH further to the right than Obama is to the left. I'm offended that he's even allowed to run for office in this country. His beliefs are appalling to me. He's a monster of a human being.

It's not a matter of "everyone gets a vote unless they vote for a person I don't like". I don't like ANY republicans, and as much as I wish people would wake up and realize they're bad for this country, I wouldn't go as far as to say any republican state shouldn't be allowed to vote.

It's a matter of "everyone gets a vote, unless they prove themselves way too stupid to use it responsibly." And make no mistake, voting for Santorum is dumb. I would take a vote for Trump more seriously than a vote for Santorum.

everythingbeeps:

It's a matter of "everyone gets a vote, unless they prove themselves way too stupid to use it responsibly."

Interesting. How do you objectively define "responsible" use? Answer: You can't. Because it's really based on your subjective views.

And last I checked, the poll test was abolished. Unless you're talking about bringing it back...

If you honestly think that a party in one state choosing a candidate you find to be a "monster of a human being" (Nice ad hominem, by the way) disqualifies all citizens from being heard in the general election, I feel sorry for you.

CM156:

everythingbeeps:

It's a matter of "everyone gets a vote, unless they prove themselves way too stupid to use it responsibly."

Interesting. How do you objectively define "responsible" use? Answer: You can't. Because it's really based on your subjective views.

And last I checked, the poll test was abolished. Unless you're talking about bringing it back...

If you honestly think that a party in one state choosing a candidate you find to be a "monster of a human being" (Nice ad hominem, by the way) disqualifies all citizens from being heard in the general election, I feel sorry for you.

Don't feel sorry for me, I'm not the one living in a state full of idiots. Oh, and calling Santorum a monster wasn't an ad hominem. Wasn't a stupid debate tactic. He really is a monster. I just haven't decided yet if he's evil or just colossally stupid.

I love how Liberals love to paint conservatives as people like everythingbeeps where we want to destroy voting for everyone and go back to the 1800's yet you have someone like everythingbeeps says it and because it is his opinion, the fact that it basically goes back to before Jackson's period is despicable, not Santorum. While his ideas may not be the best, he is at least believing what he says and isn't just another Gingrich trying to get elected. Honestly, I would rather be friends with Santorum than most Americans because he seems like an all-around nice guy.

By the way, I would never vote for him in my life so don't try to accuse me as a Fox News watching rape supporter.

Well i can say that i plan to vote for Rick Santorum here in GA. My goal is to get a troll face Tshirt and find a way to get on camera. GA has an open primary meaning anyone can go and vote. I am a big black guy with Dreadlocks so hopefully i will stand out enough for CNN or someone to try to come talk to me. I plan on saying the most ignorant thing that comes to mind. A bunch of my friends might be doing it too.

I mean how awesome would it be to see Barack debate a guy who doesnt believe in evolution and would outlaw condoms if he could!

Santorum...won 3 states....? I am just speechless. I really just hope that he is the new anti-mitt and he losses steam REALLY quick. I MAY be able to handle a Santorum presidancy, I am not going to insult the guy because I am sure he is a good guy, its just that one "teny-tiny" issue that he loses people on. If he doesnt try anything, then I will be ok. But if he actually passes that God-awful Marriage amendment of his? He will instantly jump to the top of my worst presidents list, with -5% chance of getting out of the top spot, and I will write my congressman, the VP, ANYONE to get him to be impeached.

Seekster:
Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

Its more hilarious than interesting,and its pretty damn interesting. It just shows how many conservatives feel about Romney. People think that hell say anything to get their vote, and rightly so. There's just something out of place with Romney and republican voters are coming out in droves to vote for santorum as much as they're voting against romney.

Now Mitts going to have to waste even more money attacking his fellow republicans just to be the nominee, depending on how far santorum takes this, Romney could be in disastrous shape going into the general election superpac-wise.

SurfinTaxt:

Seekster:
Well last night was certainly interesting. Romney is still the front runner but it looks like Santorum may be the anti-Romney and not Gingrich.

On a side note I just want to strangle Wolf Blitzer and the entire CNN crew for their innane and mindless bantering last night. I swear you have talking heads and then you have empty talking heads and then you have Wolf Blitzer going "wait why are Perry and Cain and Huntsman on the ballot? What is wrong with those people? Why can't they print new ballots?" The reporter actually says "Well Wolf they are Conservatives, they probably just wanted to save money."

Its more hilarious than interesting,and its pretty damn interesting. It just shows how many conservatives feel about Romney. People think that hell say anything to get their vote, and rightly so. There's just something out of place with Romney and republican voters are coming out in droves to vote for santorum as much as they're voting against romney.

Now Mitts going to have to waste even more money attacking his fellow republicans just to be the nominee, depending on how far santorum takes this, Romney could be in disastrous shape going into the general election superpac-wise.

Just like CNN inane banter like you know what you are talking about, just wait and watch.

Seekster:

Just like CNN inane banter like you know what you are talking about, just wait and watch.

If that was a coherent sentence, I'm sure I would've understood what you were trying to say. Would you care to expand on that comment?

SurfinTaxt:

Seekster:

Just like CNN inane banter like you know what you are talking about, just wait and watch.

If that was a coherent sentence, I'm sure I would've understood what you were trying to say. Would you care to expand on that comment?

Oh just that your comment reminded me of CNN's talking heads the other day. All this talk from people who act like they know what they are talking about when they are clueless past what is directly in front of their face. They can't see past the now so to speak.

I do find it interesting that one of the republican frontrunners is basically running on "The 14th amendment is only talking about race" as a platform. It's kind of disgusting, really.

@Boom: Yeah, while I agree that Santorum is disgusting (very hard to get out of the sheets, as well), I kind of have to argue that even the strong threat, the will to pass something like that, makes him a reprehensible human being. It's like if a president proposed a bill that would legalize the impromptu lynching of negroes; you don't wait until he passes it to say, "Well, that candidate is an absolutely disgusting human being". And it doesn't reflect positively on the republican voters that he's come so far either.

You know, I really don't like Santorum. More than anyone else on the R ticket. I wondered why, after my visible disgust at the news of his victories, and then someone on Fox said that Santorum hates libertarians and would go so far as to fight that portion of the Republican party.

Clarity: that's why i don't like him.

BOOM headshot65:
I am not going to insult the guy because I am sure he is a good guy

I wouldn't say that, myself. I mean, Santorum is the utter demented pervert who brought home the corpse of his stillborn child, showed it to their son and kept it next to them in the bed at night. He is absolutely bad shit bonkers, it's not just a matter of policy.

Picking Santorum would be election suicide. He is more right than O'Reilly. That should scream something.

Stagnant:
I do find it interesting that one of the republican frontrunners is basically running on "The 14th amendment is only talking about race" as a platform. It's kind of disgusting, really.

@Boom: Yeah, while I agree that Santorum is disgusting (very hard to get out of the sheets, as well), I kind of have to argue that even the strong threat, the will to pass something like that, makes him a reprehensible human being. It's like if a president proposed a bill that would legalize the impromptu lynching of negroes; you don't wait until he passes it to say, "Well, that candidate is an absolutely disgusting human being". And it doesn't reflect positively on the republican voters that he's come so far either.

He is proof that the Republican party is in shambles. Rove and his manipulative strategy have created a situation where an electable Repbulican will either never run, or never make it out of the primaries which is why we have all of these wackadoos running on their side.

Ok I can't take it anymore so I will explain what is going on. You are witnessing the death agonies of the extreme far right...well maybe not death agonies but after this, if Romney wins the election at least (not just the nomination) then the Tea Party types will lose much of their influence and the Republican party will move a bit more to the center (ie closer to Reagan instead of further to the right of Reagan).

Think about it, in what universe is Santorum a viable candidate for President? Oh sure the man is affable and likable as a person if you are a strongly right wing (personally I find him to be a bit of jerk) but even against mediocre candidates like Romney or Obama Santorum is a joke. Limbaugh and his ilk realized that they are left with Santorum now sense Gingrich just has too much baggage so they are hysterical defending him. The other day I even heard Limbaugh try and call Mike Huckabee a part of the Washington Establishment in an effort to defend Santorum.

Oh sure Romney's out of context gaffe hurt him but he will recover. Now that Santorum is in the spot light it wont take long for his problems to come to light.

I still say this is Romney's race to lose and I can't imagine him losing it to the likes of Santorum.

Now some good news for Romney out of this is that now Gingrich has to attack Santorum and the problem with that is that Santorum and Gingrich are friends (sort of) and Santorum is actually likable while Gingrich is not. So who should get out of the race now Newt?

Rick Santorum actually winning something was completely out of the effing left field. I mean, holy shit I don't thin ankyone saw that one coming.

Just proves that a republican canidate doesn't have a snowflake's chance in hell of winning the election. If they can't universally agree on one guy to win (first Gngrich, then Romney, then wtf Santorum?), then where's the hope in them actually winning the electrion primer, since pretty mcuh everyone who sides with the left and independants will vote Obama? I mean, at least Ron Paul had the benifit of at least some liberals, left wings, and independants liking him. Santorum, Gingrich, and Rommney have zero appeal with anyone outside of the republican voting base.

And the worst part is, Republicans can't even decide what flavor of right-wing they even want. Ergo..

I'm still holding to my belief that Gingrich will win the nomination, and lose the election.

nyttyn:
Rick Santorum actually winning something was completely out of the effing left field. I mean, holy shit I don't thin ankyone saw that one coming.

Just proves that a republican canidate doesn't have a snowflake's chance in hell of winning the election. If they can't universally agree on one guy to win (first Gngrich, then Romney, then wtf Santorum?), then where's the hope in them actually winning the electrion primer, since pretty mcuh everyone who sides with the left and independants will vote Obama? I mean, at least Ron Paul had the benifit of at least some liberals, left wings, and independants liking him. Santorum, Gingrich, and Rommney have zero appeal with anyone outside of the republican voting base.

And the worst part is, Republicans can't even decide what flavor of right-wing they even want. Ergo..

I'm still holding to my belief that Gingrich will win the nomination, and lose the election.

You didnt see that coming, the polls showed he would win Minnesota and he was the only candidate to even visit Missouri since the primary doesnt bring any delegates.

If you didnt think Santorum would win anything why are you talking as if you know what will happen months from now?

Seekster:

nyttyn:
Rick Santorum actually winning something was completely out of the effing left field. I mean, holy shit I don't thin ankyone saw that one coming.

Just proves that a republican canidate doesn't have a snowflake's chance in hell of winning the election. If they can't universally agree on one guy to win (first Gngrich, then Romney, then wtf Santorum?), then where's the hope in them actually winning the electrion primer, since pretty mcuh everyone who sides with the left and independants will vote Obama? I mean, at least Ron Paul had the benifit of at least some liberals, left wings, and independants liking him. Santorum, Gingrich, and Rommney have zero appeal with anyone outside of the republican voting base.

And the worst part is, Republicans can't even decide what flavor of right-wing they even want. Ergo..

I'm still holding to my belief that Gingrich will win the nomination, and lose the election.

You didnt see that coming, the polls showed he would win Minnesota and he was the only candidate to even visit Missouri since the primary doesnt bring any delegates.

If you didnt think Santorum would win anything why are you talking as if you know what will happen months from now?

The polls showed at one point that STEPHEN COLBERT had a higher approval rating then most of the canidates. You can't count on polls. At all. Ever. They are about as reliable as asking a hobo on the street what he is going to do with your money once you give it to him. They are often taken in specific places to attempt to pull a peer pressure bias for their canidates. Oh look, I took a poll in DC! Who do you think is going to win, the local superpoular democrat, or the republican who just got in town?

And as for how I know what will happen, it's simple fact correlation. Every single primary has had a different winner. Ergo, the Republican power base cannot make up their minds, and as a result, will not be able to rally themselves to actually elect somebody into office.

It's cause and effect. I don't even think that the democrat party has to run any negative attack ads at this point, the republicans are doing a pretty good job of muddying themselves as it stands.*

*Sarcasm. The democratic party is likely going to run slander ads anyways.

nyttyn:

Seekster:

nyttyn:
Rick Santorum actually winning something was completely out of the effing left field. I mean, holy shit I don't thin ankyone saw that one coming.

Just proves that a republican canidate doesn't have a snowflake's chance in hell of winning the election. If they can't universally agree on one guy to win (first Gngrich, then Romney, then wtf Santorum?), then where's the hope in them actually winning the electrion primer, since pretty mcuh everyone who sides with the left and independants will vote Obama? I mean, at least Ron Paul had the benifit of at least some liberals, left wings, and independants liking him. Santorum, Gingrich, and Rommney have zero appeal with anyone outside of the republican voting base.

And the worst part is, Republicans can't even decide what flavor of right-wing they even want. Ergo..

I'm still holding to my belief that Gingrich will win the nomination, and lose the election.

You didnt see that coming, the polls showed he would win Minnesota and he was the only candidate to even visit Missouri since the primary doesnt bring any delegates.

If you didnt think Santorum would win anything why are you talking as if you know what will happen months from now?

The polls showed at one point that STEPHEN COLBERT had a higher approval rating then most of the canidates. You can't count on polls. At all. Ever. They are about as reliable as asking a hobo on the street what he is going to do with your money once you give it to him. They are often taken in specific places to attempt to pull a peer pressure bias for their canidates. Oh look, I took a poll in DC! Who do you think is going to win, the local superpoular democrat, or the republican who just got in town?

And as for how I know what will happen, it's simple fact correlation. Every single primary has had a different winner. Ergo, the Republican power base cannot make up their minds, and as a result, will not be able to rally themselves to actually elect somebody into office.

It's cause and effect. I don't even think that the democrat party has to run any negative attack ads at this point, the republicans are doing a pretty good job of muddying themselves as it stands.*

*Sarcasm. The democratic party is likely going to run slander ads anyways.

It was more than one poll. When you have a bunch of polls all saying about the same thing it means more than when you just have one poll.

I would point out that the Clinton-Obama primary went on far longer than the GOP primary is likely to go. In the end the GOP will rally behind their candidate the same way Democrats rallied around Obama (perhaps not with the same level of enthusiasm that the people had to candidate Obama...you know back before everyone realized that all his hope and change talk was just political theater).

The Democrats will be plenty negative and so will the Republicans, thats just politics.

Seekster:
Ok I can't take it anymore so I will explain what is going on. You are witnessing the death agonies of the extreme far right...well maybe not death agonies but after this, if Romney wins the election at least (not just the nomination) then the Tea Party types will lose much of their influence and the Republican party will move a bit more to the center (ie closer to Reagan instead of further to the right of Reagan).

Think about it, in what universe is Santorum a viable candidate for President? Oh sure the man is affable and likable as a person if you are a strongly right wing (personally I find him to be a bit of jerk) but even against mediocre candidates like Romney or Obama Santorum is a joke. Limbaugh and his ilk realized that they are left with Santorum now sense Gingrich just has too much baggage so they are hysterical defending him. The other day I even heard Limbaugh try and call Mike Huckabee a part of the Washington Establishment in an effort to defend Santorum.

Oh sure Romney's out of context gaffe hurt him but he will recover. Now that Santorum is in the spot light it wont take long for his problems to come to light.

I still say this is Romney's race to lose and I can't imagine him losing it to the likes of Santorum.

Now some good news for Romney out of this is that now Gingrich has to attack Santorum and the problem with that is that Santorum and Gingrich are friends (sort of) and Santorum is actually likable while Gingrich is not. So who should get out of the race now Newt?

I still stand by my opinion that if you want to bring that element of your electorate to heel, you cannot simply beat them, you have to crush them utterly and without mercy after putting them in a position that they simply cannot win. In other words, you need to nominate someone who will loose by a massive margin, either Santorum or Gingrich, someone who could put South Carolina in play. You have to give up the presidency to gain control of your party.

Romney still has a a 50/50 chance at best of obtaining the White House in November. If he looses, that base will believe it was right in opposing him and get stronger, possibly with this guy at them helm. What establishment power there is now will be thrown out in 2014 and 2016 primaries similar to 2010 and it will likely take a decade to reestablish the establishment power base within the party. During that time, your party's organizational structure will unravel and the extreme elements of the base will gun for leadership positions, likely winning them with their larger-share of the party. The cycle will repeat until you nominate another Goldwater to be crushed. That election could be as late as 2024.

The Gentleman:

Seekster:
Ok I can't take it anymore so I will explain what is going on. You are witnessing the death agonies of the extreme far right...well maybe not death agonies but after this, if Romney wins the election at least (not just the nomination) then the Tea Party types will lose much of their influence and the Republican party will move a bit more to the center (ie closer to Reagan instead of further to the right of Reagan).

Think about it, in what universe is Santorum a viable candidate for President? Oh sure the man is affable and likable as a person if you are a strongly right wing (personally I find him to be a bit of jerk) but even against mediocre candidates like Romney or Obama Santorum is a joke. Limbaugh and his ilk realized that they are left with Santorum now sense Gingrich just has too much baggage so they are hysterical defending him. The other day I even heard Limbaugh try and call Mike Huckabee a part of the Washington Establishment in an effort to defend Santorum.

Oh sure Romney's out of context gaffe hurt him but he will recover. Now that Santorum is in the spot light it wont take long for his problems to come to light.

I still say this is Romney's race to lose and I can't imagine him losing it to the likes of Santorum.

Now some good news for Romney out of this is that now Gingrich has to attack Santorum and the problem with that is that Santorum and Gingrich are friends (sort of) and Santorum is actually likable while Gingrich is not. So who should get out of the race now Newt?

I still stand by my opinion that if you want to bring that element of your electorate to heel, you cannot simply beat them, you have to crush them utterly and without mercy after putting them in a position that they simply cannot win. In other words, you need to nominate someone who will loose by a massive margin, either Santorum or Gingrich, someone who could put South Carolina in play. You have to give up the presidency to gain control of your party.

Romney still has a a 50/50 chance at best of obtaining the White House in November. If he looses, that base will believe it was right in opposing him and get stronger, possibly with this guy at them helm. What establishment power there is now will be thrown out in 2014 and 2016 primaries similar to 2010 and it will likely take a decade to reestablish the establishment power base within the party. During that time, your party's organizational structure will unravel and the extreme elements of the base will gun for leadership positions, likely winning them with their larger-share of the party. The cycle will repeat until you nominate another Goldwater to be crushed. That election could be as late as 2024.

If Romney wins he has at best a 50/50 chance unless something drastic happens in the world. This also means Obama has at best a 50/50 chance.

The GOP wants to run Rubio next time so your Goldwater scenario is pretty much moot.

Seekster:
The GOP wants to run Rubio next time so your Goldwater scenario is pretty much moot.

You speak for the GOP?

Marco Rubio first needs to decide if he wants to run and that's not exactly clear. If he runs for president in 2016, then he won't be able to run to hold his senate seat. If he looses to whoever the Democrats nominate, then he'll loose everything within 24 hours on election day. If he runs in 2020, he doesn't have that problem, but it will be unclear if he'll still have a passionate backing after 10 years of having to pander to the welfare-loving Floridian voters.

I've heard Senator Jim DeMint's tossed around for 2016 as well. He borders on being as unelectable as Newt Gingrich, but for different reasons. The establishment doesn't like him and he doesn't play well outside the south. He was regarded as a Tea Party kingmaker in 2010 and has conspicuously not endorsed anyone for the presidential nomination. Plus, the Democrats would relish the opportunity to go against him on a national stage.

Rand Paul a name that is floated around as well, but he runs into many of the problems that Rubio has in terms of timing and the problems DeMint has in terms of policy.

The Gentleman:

Seekster:
The GOP wants to run Rubio next time so your Goldwater scenario is pretty much moot.

You speak for the GOP?

Marco Rubio first needs to decide if he wants to run and that's not exactly clear. If he runs for president in 2016, then he won't be able to run to hold his senate seat. If he looses to whoever the Democrats nominate, then he'll loose everything within 24 hours on election day. If he runs in 2020, he doesn't have that problem, but it will be unclear if he'll still have a passionate backing after 10 years of having to pander to the welfare-loving Floridian voters.

I've heard Senator Jim DeMint's tossed around for 2016 as well. He borders on being as unelectable as Newt Gingrich, but for different reasons. The establishment doesn't like him and he doesn't play well outside the south. He was regarded as a Tea Party kingmaker in 2010 and has conspicuously not endorsed anyone for the presidential nomination. Plus, the Democrats would relish the opportunity to go against him on a national stage.

Rand Paul a name that is floated around as well, but he runs into many of the problems that Rubio has in terms of timing and the problems DeMint has in terms of policy.

No of course I don't and I shouldnt even need to clarify that. However I do know the GOP better than most of the people on this forum (having actually been a card carrying member of the party up until a few years ago when I got tired of having to defend stuff I didnt agree with).

Rubio may wait till 2020, the Republicans are aware that the Democrats once upon a time had their own golden boy who went to the Senate and then immediately went to the White House. Rubio has already waited longer than Obama did but probably waiting till 2020 would be best though if Romney wins the question becomes academic.

I think Jim DeMint is a maybe but more likely would be someone like Mitch Daniels, Paul Ryan, or Chris Christie in 2016 if the GOP loses in 2012 and Rubio doesnt want to run in 2016, that would be my guess anyway. A LOT can change between now and then though so this is all just speculation. I do know that whenever Rubio is brought up the Republicans start acting in a way not all unlike the way the Democrats acted when Obama was brought up prior to 2010.

Rand Paul is a possibility, I don't know much about him yet but from what I hear he has many of his father's ideals but isnt as crazy.

Seekster:
No of course I don't and I shouldnt even need to clarify that. However I do know the GOP better than most of the people on this forum (having actually been a card carrying member of the party up until a few years ago when I got tired of having to defend stuff I didnt agree with).

First: the number one rule of analysis: Maintain objectivity. Respectfully, being close to the subject has the tendency to skew one's perceptions, sometime to the willful denial of reality. Case in point: Ron Paul supporters. I'm not saying you're wrong, but, in terms of the objectivity of your analysis, I count that against you.

Second: distance determines strength. Those looking at a 2016 run are already beginning to lay the early whisper campaigns necessary to build early financial support. Those three, along with Cristie, Ryan, and Daniels, have such whisper campaigns already in motion, either started by them or by senior members of the GOP. The lone fact that I've already heard of these campaigns without being in the US political fold tells you something about whether they have support.

Third: Those who are even remotely electable in 2016 (i.e. not Ryan, Paul, or DeMint) will have to survive the GOP nominating contest with an electorate that will be extremely bitter about Romney in 2012. Every even-remotely moderate stance of their's may be crushed as being disqualifying. And this doesn't even cover the new debate-oriented format that has awarded one-liners and marginalized real plans.

The Gentleman:

Seekster:
No of course I don't and I shouldnt even need to clarify that. However I do know the GOP better than most of the people on this forum (having actually been a card carrying member of the party up until a few years ago when I got tired of having to defend stuff I didnt agree with).

First: the number one rule of analysis: Maintain objectivity. Respectfully, being close to the subject has the tendency to skew one's perceptions, sometime to the willful denial of reality. Case in point: Ron Paul supporters. I'm not saying you're wrong, but, in terms of the objectivity of your analysis, I count that against you.

Second: distance determines strength. Those looking at a 2016 run are already beginning to lay the early whisper campaigns necessary to build early financial support. Those three, along with Cristie, Ryan, and Daniels, have such whisper campaigns already in motion, either started by them or by senior members of the GOP. The lone fact that I've already heard of these campaigns without being in the US political fold tells you something about whether they have support.

Third: Those who are even remotely electable in 2016 (i.e. not Ryan, Paul, or DeMint) will have to survive the GOP nominating contest with an electorate that will be extremely bitter about Romney in 2012. Every even-remotely moderate stance of their's may be crushed as being disqualifying. And this doesn't even cover the new debate-oriented format that has awarded one-liners and marginalized real plans.

One: I HAD closeness with the subject but no longer do. This means I have more insight into the party than someone who was never a member but since I am no longer a member I can look at things more objectively (though one must always be mindful of one's own biases and compensate accordingly). I don't want to say I am 100% objective because someone who says that is just not mindful of their own biases but I would at least think I can be more objective than someone who is a member of either party and thus has a clear agenda to boost up their own party and attack the other party. I think both parties are worthless to about equal degrees.

Two: Well yes its good to have things prepared well in advance but over four years out is not a requirement.

Three: This one is, with respect, nonsense. Who is and is not electable (unless we are talking about Ron Paul) is subjective. It can be based on a reasonable argument for why they are unlikely to win election but judging electability is hard just one year out, never mind four years out. As for the debate format, blame the media.

For those who are eagerly awaiting the Minnesota results, counts are still at 95% at best. Nevada's took quite a bit of time, so hopefully they'll be posted by Monday morning.

If current trends continue, the winner of Nevada will be Ron Paul. Not that I think that will actually happen, but it would be HILARIOUS.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . . . 22 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked