mr_genius Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 10:54 AM) Total turnout yes, self-identified RepublIcans no. The number of people who now identify as 'Conservative' rather than 'Republican' has increased a lot. That doesn't mean these 'Conservative' GOP primary voters are going to be voting Obama come the general election. The turnout has been up, you can parse it out any way you want, but I suspect these voters are looking for a Obama alternative, rather than just voting in GOP primaries because they have nothing better to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/...to-lose/251728/ Mittens will still most likely win the GOP nomination because Newt's organization down the line can't compete with Romney's and his money but Mittens is batting 1 for 3 right now. Huntsman IMO would've been able to challenge Obama but I guess the GOP aren't really serious about winning the GE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 I'm really hoping this is real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 12:28 PM) http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/...to-lose/251728/ Mittens will still most likely win the GOP nomination because Newt's organization down the line can't compete with Romney's and his money but Mittens is batting 1 for 3 right now. Huntsman IMO would've been able to challenge Obama but I guess the GOP aren't really serious about winning the GE. I wish Huntsman would run as an Independent. He would siphon votes away from Obama and give the GOP an easy win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 02:54 PM) I wish Huntsman would run as an Independent. He would siphon votes away from Obama and give the GOP an easy win. Very, very few Democrats would vote for Huntsman. A whole lot of his policies are to the right of Mittens, he just occasionally calls out Republicans for being nuts the week before embracing that policy. And a "Centrist challenge to Obama" for democratic votes would just get laughed off...you can't challenge the center from the right and expect it to be "a Centrist challenge" or whatever. He'd stay with his Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 01:59 PM) Very, very few Democrats would vote for Huntsman. A whole lot of his policies are to the right of Mittens, he just occasionally calls out Republicans for being nuts the week before embracing that policy. And a "Centrist challenge to Obama" for democratic votes would just get laughed off...you can't challenge the center from the right and expect it to be "a Centrist challenge" or whatever. He'd stay with his Let the voters decide! I welcome a Huntsman third party run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Mittens will release 1-2 years of tax returns this week. Does his campaign seriously not get how tone-deaf that is, or does he actually have something from 2005-ish that really needs to be hidden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 03:18 PM) Mittens will release 1-2 years of tax returns this week. Does his campaign seriously not get how tone-deaf that is, or does he actually have something from 2005-ish that really needs to be hidden? WHy do you, or anyone else, care? You know he is rich already. How far back do you want him to go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 04:53 PM) WHy do you, or anyone else, care? You know he is rich already. How far back do you want him to go? Most people give somewhere on the order of 5-10 years. Obama did 6. The problem here is that it's completely tone-deaf. His own father was the guy who set the decade standard and publicly came out and said that he was releasing that many because he wanted to prove he had nothing to hide. The reality here is that it looks like he has something he's trying to hide. If he doesn't have anything to hide, then he could have ended any controversy before it started by releasing something similar to what every candidate does. Instead he's given every one of his opponents a huge opening, and there's really no defense other than "I'm trying to hide something for God's sake!". His own father explained it perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 04:01 PM) Most people give somewhere on the order of 5-10 years. Obama did 6. The problem here is that it's completely tone-deaf. His own father was the guy who set the decade standard and publicly came out and said that he was releasing that many because he wanted to prove he had nothing to hide. The reality here is that it looks like he has something he's trying to hide. If he doesn't have anything to hide, then he could have ended any controversy before it started by releasing something similar to what every candidate does. Instead he's given every one of his opponents a huge opening, and there's really no defense other than "I'm trying to hide something for God's sake!". His own father explained it perfectly. Soooooooo by that logic Obama had something to hide when he refused to release his transcripts or birth certificate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 04:18 PM) Soooooooo by that logic Obama had something to hide when he refused to release his transcripts or birth certificate? He released his bc years ago but the crazy conspiracy theory right-wingers couldn't accept reality. some still don't. There is also a lot of precedent for releasing tax returns. Not so much for college transcripts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Whoever "Insider Advantage" is, they're first in line for having a post-Carolina poll out for Florida (for the Republican magazine Newsmax). They polled Newt with a 34-25 lead over Mittens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 01:59 PM) Very, very few Democrats would vote for Huntsman. A whole lot of his policies are to the right of Mittens, he just occasionally calls out Republicans for being nuts the week before embracing that policy. And a "Centrist challenge to Obama" for democratic votes would just get laughed off...you can't challenge the center from the right and expect it to be "a Centrist challenge" or whatever. He'd stay with his If Huntsman ran as a 3rd party candidate, you are correct, he would get only a small number of Dems. But he also wouldn't ever do it, and would get very small numbers of ANYONE to vote for him anyway. If on the other hand he won the GOP nomination, or wouldn't get many democrats, but he'd have probably gotten a large share of the independents and swing voters. Doesn't matter either way. The only guy who might run as 3rd party is Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Jon Huntsman is not a moderate. I don't know why the media kept that narrative going. I really don't see Paul running 3rd party. He's been a loyal ® for decades now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 08:15 AM) Whoever "Insider Advantage" is, they're first in line for having a post-Carolina poll out for Florida (for the Republican magazine Newsmax). They polled Newt with a 34-25 lead over Mittens. Rasmussen is showing the same 9-point Gingrich lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 09:34 AM) Jon Huntsman is not a moderate. I don't know why the media kept that narrative going. I really don't see Paul running 3rd party. He's been a loyal ® for decades now. Hunstman is around the spot where Reagan was on the scale, in my view. So he'd have been a center-right President. He's moderate when compared to the rest of the field he was in. Paul is, I think, nearing a point where he no longer gives one s*** about party label. I think the only thing that might make him hesitate to run 3rd party is his son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 10:16 AM) Hunstman is around the spot where Reagan was on the scale, in my view. So he'd have been a center-right President. He's moderate when compared to the rest of the field he was in. Paul is, I think, nearing a point where he no longer gives one s*** about party label. I think the only thing that might make him hesitate to run 3rd party is his son. Paul isn't running as a 3rd party. He's had the chance before and never done it. There is no reason for him to do so now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 10:19 AM) Paul isn't running as a 3rd party. He's had the chance before and never done it. There is no reason for him to do so now. Timing is everything. At this point in his career, he may be fully willing to give up the leverage in Congress, especially since he has lost most of it anyway. He may see this as the right time for his big shot. Plus the wave of libertarianism is running strong right now. All signs say that, if he was ever going to, this is the cycle to do it. But he probably doesn't want to screw over his son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 10:16 AM) Hunstman is around the spot where Reagan was on the scale, in my view. So he'd have been a center-right President. He's moderate when compared to the rest of the field he was in. He was a very conservative governor. His tax plan was right in line with the rest of the GOP field. The only thing that got him the "moderate" label from the media were those couple of tweets about evolution and climate change, and he later backtracked on the climate change one. I don't think he's the same as the other candidates in their radical proposals or apocalyptic statements about Obama, but he's still very conservative. That's he more sane than the rest of the nuts in this current crop doesn't change the nature of his policies. Paul is, I think, nearing a point where he no longer gives one s*** about party label. I think the only thing that might make him hesitate to run 3rd party is his son. I don't know what he gains from a 3rd party run and, as you said, it'd really damage his son's standing with the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 10:22 AM) Timing is everything. At this point in his career, he may be fully willing to give up the leverage in Congress, especially since he has lost most of it anyway. He may see this as the right time for his big shot. Plus the wave of libertarianism is running strong right now. All signs say that, if he was ever going to, this is the cycle to do it. But he probably doesn't want to screw over his son. He'd put Obama back in office for sure if he ran as a 3rd party. That's why he won't run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 11:19 AM) Paul isn't running as a 3rd party. He's had the chance before and never done it. There is no reason for him to do so now. He actually has done it before. In 1988. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 02:16 PM) He actually has done it before. In 1988. But back then he had a much more important message to get out (that everyone needed to arm themselves because the blacks were coming, according to his newsletters.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 08:15 AM) Whoever "Insider Advantage" is, they're first in line for having a post-Carolina poll out for Florida (for the Republican magazine Newsmax). They polled Newt with a 34-25 lead over Mittens. Goes to prove Republicans really really don't like Mittens that they'll give Newt a chance. Mittens is the worst candidate you can run in this climate, it shows just how tone deaf the GOP is, a billionaire so out of touch with your average working American.Romney has NO chance at beating Obama in My opinion unless the country goes off the deep end economically this year and people just want to get rid of Obama. Short of that, Mittens won't sniff the White House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Neither of them are particularly strong candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'm not sure if he's right, but he's the kind of guy who would know what the "insiders" are saying, as this Steve Schmidt guy was one of McCain 08's top 2 strategists. SCHMIDT: Look, I think, not only are we not moving towards a coalescing of support by the Republican establishment for Newt Gingrich, we're probably moving toward the declaration of war on Newt Gingrich by the Republican establishment. And if Newt Gingrich is able to win the Florida primary, you will see a panic and a meltdown of the Republican establishment that is beyond my ability to articulate in the English language. People will go crazy and you will have this five week period until the Super Tuesday states which is going to be as unpredictable, tumultuous as any period in modern American politics. It will be a remarkable thing to watch should that happen in Florida. I'm not sure if I want to see this happen or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts