Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

[jk]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

vp marco rubio- telegenic hispanic conservative floridian, "crown prince" of the tea party movement.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

All of the rhetoric coming out of Washington is about spending, debt and deficits. It's been that way since 2010 mid-terms or perhaps the election of Scott Brown.

The politicians all claim they can fix the economy either by cutting taxes, raising spending or a combination of both and the message has been hammered home in the media for well over a year straight. The economy itself is always second banana to the debt.

So much so that the real committed Democrats will tell you that the economy crashed as a result of the Bush tax cuts. Or for what it's worth, that's the chatter I've heard recently. People just end up mimicing what their party leaders say. Of course on the other hand we've got conservatives that equate any attempt to clean up gov and properly regulate the banking system with red tape that strangulates potential new small business creators...

If anyone thinks there is any kind of political awakening around the corner, they are horribly mistaken.

[Ghent12]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

If anyone thinks there is any kind of political awakening around the corner, they are horribly mistaken.

I guess past is prologue. There haven't been any political awakenings in generations--not since Goldwater and the Civil Rights movement--so why should this time be any different?

[lektrode]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

maybe because if there isnt one, that our (US) very survival - at least the lifestyle to which most have grown quite accustomed to - is at stake?

necessity being the mother of motivation an all...

[Slimprofits]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

I thought Romney made Perry look foolish last night. It’ll be interesting to see how the poll numbers move after this.

[c1ue]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

If debate skills were really important, W. Bush wouldn't have been President 2 terms running...

[lektrode]

Ron Paul: damned by faint praise? >Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

while the 'mainstream' repub candidates seem to be intent on taking themselves out of the running...

we get the lamestream media working on keeping ron paul looking 'strange'

caught this one in one of the local (fishwrappers) out here:

Why Ron Paul is winning the GOP primary

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...ulK_story.html

By Dana Milbank, Published: September 21


Just 15 seconds into a question-and-answer session with reporters Wednesday morning, Ron Paul found a way to work in a mention of the Austrian School of economics.
From there, he moved inexorably through the Paul oeuvre: the need for the gold standard, the problem with energy-efficient light bulbs, why Greece should declare bankruptcy, why Grover Cleveland was his favorite president, and how our economy is collapsing “just like the Soviet system.”


“I mean, how many people have read ‘Human Action’?” the Republican presidential candidate asked, referring to an economic treatise from the 1940s by one Ludwig von Mises. “How many people have studied Mises and Hayek and Rothbard and Sennholz? … A lot of people just flat out don’t understand what I’m talking about.”
He’s right about that. Rarely does a man go far in public life hawking the sort of oddities that the gadfly from Texas does. And yet, in a sense, Ron Paul is winning the 2012 Republican presidential primary.

Paul won’t be the president, or even the party nominee, but that was never his goal. He aimed to shift the debate toward his exotic economic theories, and by that standard he has prevailed.
The former obstetrician fathered the Tea Party. His son won election to the Senate. Republican leaders in Congress have joined Paul’s crusade against the Federal Reserve. And his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination are stealing his ideas.

“The success of this message,” Paul said over his bacon and eggs at Wednesday’s Christian Science Monitor-sponsored breakfast, “is way beyond my expectations. Who would’ve ever dreamed that, after 100 years, we’d be talking about the Federal Reserve at debates? I mean, this is fantastic.”

A few weeks ago, the Post ombudsman questioned why the paper’s reporting on Paul had been so “sparse.” To this, there are two answers. Last time, in 2008, Paul was ignored because his ideas sounded crazy. This time, he’s being ignored because his ideas have become commonplace. What’s changed is not Paul but the party: Nearly a quarter-century after he quit the GOP to run for president as a Libertarian (he told me years ago that it was an “academic exercise”), he has brought the Republicans to him.

That may or may not be a good thing, but Paul has proven that issues can triumph. His campaigns have been absent of personality – his or anybody else’s. When I asked him at breakfast about photos showing Texas Gov. Rick Perry getting in his face at a debate, Paul downplayed the conflict: “It’s a friendly tap, punching the guy in the chest,” he explained.
Asked about Perry’s description of the Fed chairman’s actions as “treasonous,” Paul deflected: “[Ben] Bernanke isn’t the problem. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is the problem.” Toward the end of the hour-long session, he observed: “I don’t know if I’ve said anything negative about the president since I’ve been here. Probably not, because I usually don’t.” Indeed, he hadn’t.

Instead, he delivered his trademark message of doom. “We’re in a big mess,” he began. “Personal liberty is under attack. Our financial system is under attack.” Matter-of-fact observations continued: “Our foreign policy is a shambles. ... We’ve consumed our wealth. ... We are destroying our currency.... Total failure. ... It’s all going to end.”

In between the apocalyptic predictions came quirky libertarian tidbits, such as “the Austrian economists predicted [that] the artificial pseudo-gold-standard wouldn’t last,” and “a draft is an enslavement.” Asked which Democratic president he most admired, Paul instead offered up the late H.R. Gross, a Republican congressman who once tied the House in knots.
That’s a revealing choice, because Paul cares more about theory than power. “I have one goal in life politically,” he explained, “and the goal is to make this a better country, change economic policy, change foreign policy, change the monetary policy and explain to people why we have booms and busts.” Actually, that’s five goals, but Paul says his ambition is being realized. “The issues have come our way,” he said. “The attitude of the whole country is shifting in our direction.”
Exhibit A: A letter sent Monday by Republican leaders to Bernanke urging the independent body not to stimulate the economy. “It should’ve been said about 30 years ago or 40 years ago,” Paul said.

Exhibit B: Perry’s “treason” talk. Was Perry co-opting Paul’s anti-Fed message? “Co-opting might be a little bit strong, but, yes, he knows what people are thinking about,” Paul said. “That’s how politicians operate. ... I think it reflects the changing attitudes.”

For Paul, that is validation enough.

[sishya]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

Oligarch Perry is going to win the presidency. my favorite candidate Huckabee was forcefully taken out by the elites.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

Perry is going to win the presidency. my favorite candidate Huckabee was forcefully taken out by the elites.

I used to think he was going to win their nomination by not anymore. Perry has been a epic failure in the debates. It will be Romney. Romney will win Iowa and New Hampshire and his poll numbers will take off from there, as people quickly move towards the candidate with the greatest chance of success. if you talk to conservatives, instead of relying (not directed specifically at anyone) the mainstream media meme of "they don't like any of the candidates" you will hear that they will vote for the person that appears most electable because defeating Obama at all costs is the bottom line. I overlooked this before.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

I used to think he was going to win their nomination by not anymore. Perry has been a epic failure in the debates. It will be Romney. Romney will win Iowa and New Hampshire and his poll numbers will take off from there, as people quickly move towards the candidate with the greatest chance of success. if you talk to conservatives, instead of relying (not directed specifically at anyone) the mainstream media meme of "they don't like any of the candidates" you will hear that they will vote for the person that appears most electable because defeating Obama at all costs is the bottom line. I overlooked this before.

Not so sure:
Here's the primary schedule. Looks like a pretty even split. There's no way Romney wins in the south or west, except for Florida and Utah. Primaries are usually a test of the base, and the base of the Republicans is definitely Tea Party.

Perry will start his pit bull routine against Romney very shortly. Perry and Romney both have the money to go the distance. It's going to be a long bloody affair.

Where will Bachmann, Paul, and Gingrich support go as they fade and drop out? Who else will jump into the race (Christie?) rise to the top of the polls and get shot down like all the others? With each new debate and each new candidate, more campaign material is created for the Obama campaign.

January 31st: Florida (Likely to change)

February 6th: Iowa caucuses

February 7th: Minnesota GOP caucuses, Missouri, New Jersey

February 14th: New Hampshire

February 18th: Nevada caucuses

February 21st: Wisconsin

February 28th: South Carolina, Arizona, Michigan

March 6th (Super Tuesday): Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Colorado caucuses, Idaho GOP caucuses, Minnesota Democratic caucuses

March 11th: Maine Democratic caucuses

March 13th: Alabama, Mississippi, Hawaii GOP caucuses, Utah Democratic caucuses

March 20th: Illinois

March 24th: Louisiana

April 3rd: Maryland, District of Columbia

April 7th: Hawaii Democratic caucuses, Wyoming Democratic caucuses

April 14th: Idaho Democratic caucuses, Kansas Democratic caucuses, Nebraska Democratic caucuses

April 15th: Alaska Democratic caucuses, Washington Democratic caucuses

April 24th: Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island

May 5th: Michigan Democratic caucuses

May 8th: Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, West Virginia

May 15th: Nebraska, Oregon

May 22nd: Arkansas, Kentucky

June 5th: California, Montana, New Mexico, South Dakota, North Dakota Democratic caucuses

June 26th: Utah GOP primary

[Guest]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

I think it would be illuminating for someone to create a poll to see who iTulip visitors support.

[Adeptus]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

Roseanne Barr announces her candidacy for President of the USA at #OccupyWallstreet.

Before you laugh, listen. She's like the female version of Ron Paul

[Slimprofits]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

Silver's 538 blog:


The Moneyball of Campaign Advertising (Part 1) - NYTimes.com

The Moneyball of Campaign Advertising (Part 2) - NYTimes.com

[Slimprofits]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

These last two debates, I think, have been very telling.

Romney is the obvious front runner, but instead of going after him, the peanut gallery candidates go after his main challenger within the party.

First it was Perry - he was taken down a few notches in the last debate, unable to withstand or respond coherently to a peppering of questions.

And last night it was Cain, the latest 'flavor of the week' - with Bachmann and Rick Santorum repeatedly attacking his 999 plan.

[cjppjc]

Re: Election 2012 - predictions, discussion?

These last two debates, I think, have been very telling.

Romney is the obvious front runner, but instead of going after him, the peanut gallery candidates go after his main challenger within the party.

First it was Perry - he was taken down a few notches in the last debate, unable to withstand or respond coherently to a peppering of questions.

And last night it was Cain, the latest 'flavor of the week' - with Bachmann and Rick Santorum repeatedly attacking his 999 plan.

I think the theory is you want to be the last one standing with Romney. That the GOP base that votes in the primaries doesn't like him, and your best chance is to eliminate the other contenders before taking Romney on.