UNLIMITED GOP 2012 PRIMARY CANDIDATE THREAD

[Cain]

Too bad, the moonbase idea was almost enough to get me to vote for the scummy bastard regardless of everything else.

In 1986, Gingrinch said something to the effect of, if all the money on farming subsisdies were spent on the space program, then America would have floating agriculture stations, and they could put all the farmers up there, and America would be even richer!

I can back that plan, for pure craziness.

[Cramulus]

Space farms? Are you kidding? That's something that would get me donating to the Republican Party.

[East Coast Hustle]

Hell, I'd make cold calls for them.

I mean, completely different than the cold calls I make "for" them now.

[Cain]

Romney wins Florida, despite hilarious space-race pandering to voters by Gingrinch

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16827237

US presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has won a clear victory in the Republican primary election in Florida, official results indicate.

Mr Romney polled 46%, but rival Newt Gingrich, who only managed 32%, says he has no intention of dropping out.

Florida's primary was the biggest of the 2012 election season so far and saw a bitter TV ad battle between the men hoping to take on Barack Obama.

Exit polls indicated the economy was the key issue for a majority of voters.

Exit polling saw Mr Romney lead his main rival on a host of issues - including his likely handling of the economy. The data also suggested he appealed to a broad range of Florida Republican voters, including the state's crucial Hispanic population.

Mr Gingrich narrowly won the support of evangelicals and pro-life voters, but saw Mr Romney win the backing of a majority of Tea Party sympathisers.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

My sister and I had a conversation together about the upcoming Presidential election when we went for a long and moody walk the day after grandma's funeral back in October.

It was weird. My sister is exactly half my age at this point. I am the oldest, she the youngest.

We both agreed that it would come down to Obama and Romney. We both agreed that Obama would be the likeliest winner either way.

Guess we started talking about it because the Irish presidential was imminent and we were suddenly sucked in, weird as it was for us Americans over for a death. Point is, this is just one of those things that is just fucking writ on Yggdrasil. Most shit is just a mystery, but come on. If a 30 year old history major and a 15 year old 15 year old can independently come to the same conclusion well in advance that it actually happened, it's pretty fucking ridiculous, no?

[Cain]

Polling data for Obama vs Romney, for those who want them

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

But http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

Still, looking at the data, Gingrinch suddenly leapt ahead, only to suffer a massive drop in support over the holiday period, as people remembered how shitty he was, no doubt.  While he recovered slightly, Romney's two wins and Florida especially should work in his favour.

Also, the longer Santorum and Ron Paul stay in the race, the better it is for Romney.  While he's not everyone's favourite choice, he's usually everyone's second-favourite choice.  So long as the social conservative and anti-abortion vote keeps on getting split between 2-3 candidates, he is in with a very good chance, and this is something the polls would not necessarily reflect, since they select on a first past the post basis.

[Cain]

Interestingly, the data also shows that both Santorum and Ron Paul are stronger candidates against Obama than Gingrinch.  In other words, Gingrinch is the least likely candidate to capture the Presidency for the Republicans.

Yet more proof of Cain's Second Law: people as a rule care a lot more for ideological purity than for winning.  They'd rather have none of their agenda passed than 60% of it, by someone they disapprove of.

[Phox]

That's an interesting observation indeed, Cain.

[Cain]

Some Dems suffer from the opposite disease - namely "their side" must win, even if it will pass none of the agenda they want.

But by and large, the second law holds.  Tribalism and personality trump policy.  No-one believes in actually winning, there is a "cult of the underdog" which has developed, which is something of a good thing, as for the most part, the underdog is so because of vast power disparities and structurally unequal relationships, but is also bad because the language of the victim is equally open to all ideologies and interests.  Conservatism and fascism thrive on it as much as liberalism and socialism do.  Only monarchism seems to avoid it, for the few actual monarchists left in the world.  Defenders of the Ancien Regime tend to think of it as inherently right, conservatives tend to bemoan the loss of it (and blame the previous elite for their failures, adopting the victimised language as a matter of course).

Anyway, getting off point. I believe in winning.  I've spent my entire life believing in winning.  This could be an Australian attitude (my parents never believed it was the taking part that counted, or that coming second best was "good enough".  A loser is still a loser, even if they were the best of the losers) or it could be a result of my studies into strategy, which of course deals with getting the optimal outcome, typically within a zero-sum system.  But I suspect I am atypical in this respect.

[Cramulus]

well goddamn said

[Cain]

Oh dear fucking God.

Liberals are now referring, on their blogs, to Romney as "Rmoney".

Obam has $139 million in the bank, mostly raised from Wall Street donations.  Romney has $57 million.  Obama's top donations come from the Likes of Goldman Sachs, Comcast, Time Warner, General Electric and Morgan Stanley.  Romney's donations come from...Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, the Blackstone Group, Credit Suisse and Wells Fargo.

But clearly it's only Romney who's the "big money" candidate, because...fuck you Firebagger, why don't you go back to supporting Sarah Palin, that's why.

[Cramulus]

ugh, it really makes you laugh or cry.

I don't even know what to do.

There have been so many good points and rants and cartoons on the topic of dissatisfaction with Obama, but I don't know how to resolve that tension.

As much as I disagree with all of his politics, I'm starting to feel like voting for Paul, if only because it's an outsider voice.

[Luna]

ugh, it really makes you laugh or cry.

I don't even know what to do.

There have been so many good points and rants and cartoons on the topic of dissatisfaction with Obama, but I don't know how to resolve that tension.

As much as I disagree with all of his politics, I'm starting to feel like voting for Paul, if only because it's an outsider voice.

I thought about Paul, too.

Then I started digging.

http://www.alternet.org/story/152192/

[Cramulus]

I'm aware of those things. I don't think that voting for him will get him elected or anything. I just want an actual political dialog to take place. Right now we've got a bunch of clones acting like they're polar opposites.

I'm having a hard time justifying voting for Obama after he has sucked so badly at protecting privacy, eliminating corruption, and operating transparently. He signs NDAA but says he "feels bad" about it. He appoints a former Monsanto VP as advisor to the FDA. And aside from a little bit of student loan reform, he hasn't done much for the middle class. Oh but gays in uniform can kiss. It's just a bunch of cultural signaling, show me the Change he was talking about.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

At some point, someone figured out that we keep voting for the "lesser of two evils" no matter how bat both of them get, or how small the gap between them becomes. Romney wasn't the worst governor Massachusetts has ever had.