The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Primary 2012: Trumpabee v. Rombargrich

2456764

Posts

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I can't look at santorum without wanting to punch him right in the glasses.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I can't look at Santorum without thinking about Dan Savage and what he and his readership did to that man's name. And giggling like a schoolgirl.

    Fixed for my personal reactions.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    The fact that we're already discussing the 2012 election, nearly 2 years out, makes me want to kill myself.

    In a couple of election cycles we'll have probably reached the point of never-ending campaigns.

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2011
    Going to be checking this thread daily for the next two years.

    Already called it for Obama in local conversations. All the little details are just window dressing. I agree though, Indecision 2012 is going to be the greatest thing.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    ...and when you are done with that; take a folding
    chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
  • Lord YodLord Yod Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Modern Man wrote: »
    The fact that we're already discussing the 2012 election, nearly 2 years out, makes me want to kill myself.

    In a couple of election cycles we'll have probably reached the point of never-ending campaigns.

    People have been talking about the main Republican candidates in the context of the 2012 election since November 2008.

    Lord Yod on
    steam_sig.png
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Yeah I'm not seeing much out there right now that presents a threat to Obama in the election. Unemployment is going down. HCR is kicking in. GOP just can't get anyone palatable to both their base and to the moderates where as Obama is.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Edith_Bagot-DixEdith_Bagot-Dix Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Modern Man wrote: »
    The fact that we're already discussing the 2012 election, nearly 2 years out, makes me want to kill myself.

    In a couple of election cycles we'll have probably reached the point of never-ending campaigns.

    That point is called "Canada".

    Edith_Bagot-Dix on


    Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Modern Man wrote: »
    The fact that we're already discussing the 2012 election, nearly 2 years out, makes me want to kill myself.

    In a couple of election cycles we'll have probably reached the point of never-ending campaigns.

    Well, it's hard to discuss the primary without discussing the election.

    And the primary is happening in less than a year.

    So while I agree with the sentiment, we aren't really any further from the first primary than we are from a movie or game release that might be discussed.

    Speaker on
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Just to be clear, I'm only going to put predictions about the Republican primary in the OP.

    Speaker on
  • HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Speaker wrote: »
    Just to be clear, I'm only going to put predictions about the Republican primary in the OP.

    I don't know man. I think this might be Rev. Sharpton's year.

    Hachface on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Forar wrote: »
    Have we done this Phalla somewhere? If not, it seems like an obvious choice.

    I don't even want to play, I just want to see all the behind the scenes on which faction(s) get which powers and see it play out.

    I did a political media Phalla in CF (with TDS as the mafia, naturally), because that's frankly more interesting.

    I would like to petition Speaker to change "Newt Gingrich" to "Newt Gingrich's Book" in the OP.

    As for predictions. !Palin wins Iowa and South Carolina in a walk, building enough momentum for Super Tuesday to take the nomination.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Thanatos on
  • HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »

    not going to lie

    I've thought about it

    Hachface on
  • ahavaahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I'm still almost convinced that Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia might be considered for a run.

    If not as the president, than as VP in the eventuals.

    But from that list in the OP....

    !predict Romney

    unless every single moderate who wants to save their party from the nutjobs stays home, at which point it'll be Palin.

    ahava on
  • Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I'll go out on a limb and !predict Krispy Kreme (Chris Christie).

    Brian Krakow on
  • LawndartLawndart Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I really don't think Romney's going to win it, since there are a few other (potential) "safe, insider, not batshit crazy frothing Teaper lunatic" candidates with less baggage (at least for Republican primary voters): Thune, Pawlenty, maybe Huntsman if more people think "candidate" than "Team Fortress 2 weapon".

    I'm actually thinking the final ticket will be Thune and Bachmann as VP as a sop to the Teapers so they think they'll have a voice in the White House.

    Lawndart on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I think Huntsman will get the VP nod as long as the primary ticket isn't someone like Palin, which I doubt it will be.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • ahavaahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I could go with Thune. I could actually easily see that.

    but then the Vp thing has to be, who do you pander to more, the old guard, or the teapers?

    I don't see huckabee or gingrich or giuliani getting anywhere close. But yeah... those three

    Pawlenty, Romney, Thune

    if I had to pick a possibe trifecta, they would be it.

    ahava on
  • LawndartLawndart Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I could go with Thune. I could actually easily see that.

    but then the Vp thing has to be, who do you pander to more, the old guard, or the teapers?

    I don't see huckabee or gingrich or giuliani getting anywhere close. But yeah... those three

    Pawlenty, Romney, Thune

    if I had to pick a possibe trifecta, they would be it.

    The GOP has to pander to the Teapers, especially if complaints about the GOP's winner take all primary process start to gather "we was robbed" steam once "the RINO" wins a few early primaries.

    Also, those crazy fuckers are motivated to heave their coal-powered Rascals down to the polling place and vote to save Medicare from Black Socialism, so alienating them too much isn't a good idea.

    That's why Romney's not my pick, since RomneyCare is a bridge too far for the base to cross.

    Lawndart on
  • ahavaahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I guess it all depends on who gets out and votes in the primaries.


    who is going to be willing to leave their homes and offices and voteon those days.

    and more than likely, that will be the Teapers.

    Unless the moderates get slightly unmoderate during it all and decided 'holyfuck what did we DO by being apathetic!?!?'

    but at the moment, I just don't see anybody NOT highly invested (crazypants mostly) coming out for the primary votes.

    which is why this is interesting.


    do we, as a democratic base (by we i am speaking generally), try to help convince our moderate republican friends (i know some of you must have them somewhere) to go out on their primary days and vote for the not crazy. Or, do we sit back and just let nature take its course and we get Palin/Bachmann in 2012?


    those situations are not too far out of the realm of possibility.

    ahava on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Yeah, I think you can safely immediately eliminate all the moderates. Then you can eliminate all the mormons.

    Thus: Romney and Hunstman are double toast.

    Next eliminate anyone who has ever said a kind word about a Democrat. So there goes Mitch Daniels.

    Then you eliminate people who are "running" to sell their book. Go away, Newt.

    And then you have the true contenders.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I guess it all depends on who gets out and votes in the primaries.


    who is going to be willing to leave their homes and offices and voteon those days.

    and more than likely, that will be the Teapers.

    Unless the moderates get slightly unmoderate during it all and decided 'holyfuck what did we DO by being apathetic!?!?'

    but at the moment, I just don't see anybody NOT highly invested (crazypants mostly) coming out for the primary votes.

    which is why this is interesting.


    do we, as a democratic base (by we i am speaking generally), try to help convince our moderate republican friends (i know some of you must have them somewhere) to go out on their primary days and vote for the not crazy. Or, do we sit back and just let nature take its course and we get Palin/Bachmann in 2012?


    those situations are not too far out of the realm of possibility.
    Neither. We encourage our moderate Republican brethren to go out and vote Bachmann/Palin, because we really want to see what happens.

    I think I'm going to register Republican and show up for the caucuses here, because the Dem caucuses are going to be super-boring.

    Thanatos on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Lawndart wrote: »
    I could go with Thune. I could actually easily see that.

    but then the Vp thing has to be, who do you pander to more, the old guard, or the teapers?

    I don't see huckabee or gingrich or giuliani getting anywhere close. But yeah... those three

    Pawlenty, Romney, Thune

    if I had to pick a possibe trifecta, they would be it.

    The GOP has to pander to the Teapers, especially if complaints about the GOP's winner take all primary process start to gather "we was robbed" steam once "the RINO" wins a few early primaries.

    Also, those crazy fuckers are motivated to heave their coal-powered Rascals down to the polling place and vote to save Medicare from Black Socialism, so alienating them too much isn't a good idea.

    That's why Romney's not my pick, since RomneyCare is a bridge too far for the base to cross.
    I think a lot of the Romney predictions are predicated on the idea that he's going to pull in a sizeable moderate vote while the crazies vote at cross purposes. Which, in my experience, is a bad thing to be putting money on for a couple of reasons. Moderates vote in much smaller numbers than crazies relative to their percentage of the population, the GOP is somewhere around a 50/50 split moderate/crazy right now, and Romney's not the only name-recognition moderate in the race.

    Romney is going to lose a couple of close races early and go into super tuesday with maybe a handful of delegates and all his people are going to jump ship. I don't see it playing out any other way unless there's a major shift in the Republican electorate.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I think I'm going to register Republican and show up for the caucuses here, because the Dem caucuses are going to be super-boring.
    Only if the Hillarites and Greens fail to show up.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Moderates are nowhere near half of the Republican-identifying population, and much less of the subsection that will be selecting the nominee. That said, Romney is the biggest 'moderate' by far; none of the others (namely Pawlenty) have anything close to his name recognition.

    Captain Carrot on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I think its a little early to start worrying about name recognition as long as candidate X isn't sitting at 0.

    We have two years of heavy campaigning ahead of us, there's no reason the unheard of guy today can't be the nominee in 2 years.

    Look at Obama.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I think I'm going to register Republican and show up for the caucuses here, because the Dem caucuses are going to be super-boring.
    Only if the Hillarites and Greens fail to show up.
    Obama could lose every caucus state; he'd still win the nomination.
    I think its a little early to start worrying about name recognition as long as candidate X isn't sitting at 0.

    We have two years of heavy campaigning ahead of us, there's no reason the unheard of guy today can't be the nominee in 2 years.

    Look at Obama.
    Obama, the guy who gave the keynote address to a standing ovation in the 2008 Democratic Convention? The guy who people were talking about as a future nom?

    Thanatos on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I suppose it does depend on if anyone jumps the gun. Like if Florida moves itself up, for example, that would be a huge boon to someone (Romney?). But if the first four states are the Iowa caucus, the New Hampshire primary, the South Carolina primary, and the Nevada I think primary, Palin wins 3/4 with Romney picking up New Hampshire.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I might vote for Sarah Palin here in NH.

    I don't know though. That's a psychic wound I'd have to carry for the rest of my life, and she doesn't have much of a prospect here.

    Speaker on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I think I'm going to register Republican and show up for the caucuses here, because the Dem caucuses are going to be super-boring.
    Only if the Hillarites and Greens fail to show up.
    Obama could lose every caucus state; he'd still win the nomination.
    I think its a little early to start worrying about name recognition as long as candidate X isn't sitting at 0.

    We have two years of heavy campaigning ahead of us, there's no reason the unheard of guy today can't be the nominee in 2 years.

    Look at Obama.
    Obama, the guy who gave the keynote address to a standing ovation in the 2008 Democratic Convention?

    Yes. And was unheard of prior to that and not a huge deal after that until he announced his nomination. No one thought he was going to get it when he did either.

    My point is just this: there's a long way to go. Flame outs and gaffes are going to happen. Who knows what politics will bring. I think its too early to start counting out too many people.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    They love Sarah Palin but I'm not sure the tea party will nominate her regardless. There has been some polling showing they don't want to and even Beck has said she's not ready.

    There seems to be a common thread of "We love Sarah but she's not ready to be president" theme, which I think is just how they square their ideology away with knowing she's a terrible politician.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • ahavaahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I dunno.

    I was pretty convinced after that Convention speech that he would run for president. I can't say that I expected it to be in 2008 (wasnt the convention speech on 06?), more like 2010 perhaps. but I was pretty sure that he would.

    just like i was pretty sure I'd vote for him. And I only heard the speech on the radio.

    ahava on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Speaker wrote: »
    I might vote for Sarah Palin here in NH.

    I don't know though. That's a psychic wound I'd have to carry for the rest of my life, and she doesn't have much of a prospect here.
    Yeah, but you're in New Hampshire, so your vote alone would bump her 2-3%.

    Thanatos on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I dunno.

    I was pretty convinced after that Convention speech that he would run for president. I can't say that I expected it to be in 2008 (wasnt the convention speech on 06?), more like 2010 perhaps. but I was pretty sure that he would.

    just like i was pretty sure I'd vote for him. And I only heard the speech on the radio.

    It was the 2004 Convention and everyone basically said "hey, that's our first black president." But yeah, people didn't expect him to run so early.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    I might vote for Sarah Palin here in NH.

    I don't know though. That's a psychic wound I'd have to carry for the rest of my life, and she doesn't have much of a prospect here.
    Yeah, but you're in New Hampshire, so your vote alone would bump her 2-3%.

    Maybe if they would just give me the 25,000 votes that I deserve.

    The governors office won't answer my letters to that effect though.

    Speaker on
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Abstract Metal ThingyRegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Predict! Mike Huckabee

    I think Romney has good prospects but being Mormon and presiding over Massachusetts version of obamacare can't play too well with the base.
    Palin plays well with some of the republican base but I don't think she will play well with the more informed primary voters of Iowa and New Hampshire.
    Huckabee seems like he might win by default by sucking the least.

    CommunistCow on
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    Huckabee was my bet for last year. I think he's getting too "perennial candidate" by now, and has some baggage.

    Thanatos on
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited February 2011
    You can't be a perennial candidate after running once.

    Captain Carrot on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I Predict! Santorum.

    I suspect he will be the horrid, soulless compromise the GOP and TP settle on.

    Quid on
  • Void SlayerVoid Slayer Very Suspicious Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    You can't be a perennial candidate after running once.

    But you can FEEL like a perennial candidate, as in you seem like very other person that's ever run for the office.

    Void Slayer on
    He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
This discussion has been closed.