2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

[geezer]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Perry has shifted from presidential favorite to outside looking in and is now joining half the nominees as unelectable. Unless something radical happens, Romney's a shoein for nomination.

I thought Zogby put Herman Cain up for Frontrunner of the Month? Didn't Romney already get his turn?

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Which means the GOP and the Tea Party are complete failures as organizations.

Water is wet.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

You're assuming primary voters care about Perry's problems. Most would be happy to attend a ranch with the "name" on it that Perry and his pals apparently don't find the least bit of a problem with. One would think this sort of humor was left behind decades ago but I guess not.

A good point was brought up about Romney, which is he hasn't moved any in polls despite Perry's struggles (in fact Cain was the beneficiary). I can't see the Bachman/Cain/etc vote going to him. It either gravitates back to Perry or some new savior like Christie. At this point in the race the party shouldn't still be casting around for a champion. All's not lost though, as the 5 people currently pledged to Huntsman will most likely go The Mittster's way.

Lastly, the talking heads (as usual) are waaayyy off on Romney being the strongest general election candidate. Forget about Romneycare. He is absolutely going to get flayed, seared and eaten alive over outsourcing. This is an issue that gets zero mention in a GOP primary as Republicans and their corporate backers look favorably upon outsourcing of American jobs. In the Rust Belt, its a far different story. When Romney ran vs Kennedy in '94, he was on his way to a far better showing than the usual fodder the state GOP tossed up. That was until Kennedy ran devastating ads featuring factory workers in Indiana who got thrown out of work because Romney's company bought them and sent their jobs to a cheaper overseas locale. He never recovered, and there's no answer for that. Simply put, what was the right thing to do for his job at the time (a venture capitalist) is completely incompatable with the job he seeks to attain now. His boneheaded statement that GM should have gone out of business ain't gonna help him much either in any area that they have a factory, places like, oh I don't know....Michigan, Ohio, etc - the very states he needs to win.

Bottom line is, while I don't mind the guy and he did an overall good job as Mass governor, he's a lot more vulnerable than people think and it has nothing to do with his healthcare law.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

a question. just because I'm curious. I asked the kids this question a week ago.

are there any Republican candidates that you would vote for in the general election?

(kids all voted and still support Obama. two would be willing to vote for Ron Paul. one would vote for Romney. the other didn't know.)

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

You're assuming primary voters care about Perry's problems. Most would be happy to attend a ranch with the "name" on it that Perry and his pals apparently don't find the least bit of a problem with. One would think this sort of humor was left behind decades ago but I guess not.

A good point was brought up about Romney, which is he hasn't moved any in polls despite Perry's struggles (in fact Cain was the beneficiary). I can't see the Bachman/Cain/etc vote going to him. It either gravitates back to Perry or some new savior like Christie. At this point in the race the party shouldn't still be casting around for a champion. All's not lost though, as the 5 people currently pledged to Huntsman will most likely go The Mittster's way.

Lastly, the talking heads (as usual) are waaayyy off on Romney being the strongest general election candidate. Forget about Romneycare. He is absolutely going to get flayed, seared and eaten alive over outsourcing. This is an issue that gets zero mention in a GOP primary as Republicans and their corporate backers look favorably upon outsourcing of American jobs. In the Rust Belt, its a far different story. When Romney ran vs Kennedy in '94, he was on his way to a far better showing than the usual fodder the state GOP tossed up. That was until Kennedy ran devastating ads featuring factory workers in Indiana who got thrown out of work because Romney's company bought them and sent their jobs to a cheaper overseas locale. He never recovered, and there's no answer for that. Simply put, what was the right thing to do for his job at the time (a venture capitalist) is completely incompatable with the job he seeks to attain now. His boneheaded statement that GM should have gone out of business ain't gonna help him much either in any area that they have a factory, places like, oh I don't know....Michigan, Ohio, etc - the very states he needs to win.

Bottom line is, while I don't mind the guy and he did an overall good job as Mass governor, he's a lot more vulnerable than people think and it has nothing to do with his healthcare law.

Very good post. The GOP has an "image problem" in the rust belt, the image essentially being:

Romney exacerbates that and PA, OH, MI are important states in 2012. The GOP has one main thing (other than the various social issue sideshows) to run on: We Will Revive the Economy. They have to somehow blame all the systemic economic problems that grew up under their policies on Obama, which is a difficult case to make, though Obama's choice of a financial team and his atrocious caving on the Bush tax cuts sure helped them. Romney makes that case even harder, since he's another hood ornament for the greed market. Perry, for all his shortcomings, can at least vamp the outsider persona.

The Republicans have a tough high wire act: how can you run pro corporate capitalism and not get wrapped up in the public's hatred of... corporate capitalism? The answer is to show lots of ads with small business owners and family farmers and corner barbers and the other totems of Mom and Pop Business, and skate that those businesses are the very ones that were ruined by outsourcing and deregulation.

 

[unofan]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

a question. just because I'm curious. I asked the kids this question a week ago.

are there any Republican candidates that you would vote for in the general election?

(kids all voted and still support Obama. two would be willing to vote for Ron Paul. one would vote for Romney. the other didn't know.)

Johnson, Huntsman, maybe Romney depending on the running mate; even then I don't know.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

a question. just because I'm curious. I asked the kids this question a week ago.

are there any Republican candidates that you would vote for in the general election?

(kids all voted and still support Obama. two would be willing to vote for Ron Paul. one would vote for Romney. the other didn't know.)

Bill Cohen
Margaret Chase Smith
Abraham Lincoln
Theodore Roosevelt
William Taft

Oh, you mean of the current crop? No, not a one.

 

[BassAle]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

a question. just because I'm curious. I asked the kids this question a week ago.
are there any Republican candidates that you would vote for in the general election?

Would or could? Maybe Huntsman. "To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy." Supports civil unions, but not same-sex marriage (but neither does Obama, although I'm wondering if Obama will change his position and support same sex marriage it he is elected.) He is an Olympia Snowe/Susan Collins type of Republican (not insane), but those types of people can't win a GOP presidential primary.

The rest make me want to vomit.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Johnson, Huntsman, maybe Romney depending on the running mate; even then I don't know.

I would vote for Huntsman to reward the GOP for backing away from Mordor. It's only a matter of time until either the Neocons or the Theocons find an avuncular, charismatic Trojan horse. We have to defuse that bomb before it happens, and even it means a couple terms of paleoconservatism.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

a question. just because I'm curious. I asked the kids this question a week ago.

are there any Republican candidates that you would vote for in the general election?

(kids all voted and still support Obama. two would be willing to vote for Ron Paul. one would vote for Romney. the other didn't know.)

Michele Bachmann. The only purist in the bunch.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Michele Bachmann. The only purist in the bunch.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

You're assuming primary voters care about Perry's problems. Most would be happy to attend a ranch with the "name" on it that Perry and his pals apparently don't find the least bit of a problem with. One would think this sort of humor was left behind decades ago but I guess not.

A good point was brought up about Romney, which is he hasn't moved any in polls despite Perry's struggles (in fact Cain was the beneficiary). I can't see the Bachman/Cain/etc vote going to him. It either gravitates back to Perry or some new savior like Christie. At this point in the race the party shouldn't still be casting around for a champion. All's not lost though, as the 5 people currently pledged to Huntsman will most likely go The Mittster's way.

Lastly, the talking heads (as usual) are waaayyy off on Romney being the strongest general election candidate. Forget about Romneycare. He is absolutely going to get flayed, seared and eaten alive over outsourcing.

Bottom line is, while I don't mind the guy and he did an overall good job as Mass governor, he's a lot more vulnerable than people think and it has nothing to do with his healthcare law.

We'll see. The national election is won by independent voters in swing states. And 'Niggerhead' won't go over very well there. Perry still has an outside shot at the nomination...but there's a good chance that the presidency has sailed.

Romney's poll numbers imo will remain static. The thing is that the fringe vote is split now between Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, etc. The key is that no candidate (ie Perry) is likely to garner the majority of those votes as none are that 'exciting' to the right. So Romney's boat may not rise, but he has to stay afloat while #2 sinks.

The biggest chance of this changing is the entrance of a Christie to enter the race. That has the potential of dividing the moderate (Romney) side of the vote. But as we've seen, its tough to enter the race and stay on top...therefore, its still likely any votes Christie picked up would slip back to Romney anyways. And the polls do still have Mitt over Obama nationally.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

We'll see. The national election is won by independent voters in swing states.

But "independent" voters are overwhelmingly Republicans or Democrats who like to think their minds are still open.

The national election is won by turnout in swing states.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

The biggest chance of this changing is the entrance of a Christie to enter the race. That has the potential of dividing the moderate (Romney) side of the vote. But as we've seen, its tough to enter the race and stay on top...therefore, its still likely any votes Christie picked up would slip back to Romney anyways. And the polls do still have Mitt over Obama nationally.

The Sunday shows hammered the Christie angle and came to the conclusion that once he enters the race he's going to have just as many issues as Romney or Perry. Romney, Perry, or Christie getting the nod shows a complete lack of attention to current GOP/Tea Party orthodoxy. If Bachmann isn't good enough they should get one of the young lunatics like Ryan or Rubio in there.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

The Sunday shows hammered the Christie angle and came to the conclusion that once he enters the race he's going to have just as many issues as Romney or Perry.

It would be refreshing to have a president who looks like a typical American, though.

There's apparently some cognitive dissonance with Christie straying from the "Amerika Über Alles" line that Fox and Friends can't decide whether to ignore yet. He's the closest thing (other than Palin) to a Neocon in the field, and there's a lot of money, media and astroturfing potential for that brand, so he's probably worth keeping an eye on.

I don't believe Perry has somehow flamed out at all. He should be a shoe-in for every southern primary and that alone will build delegates and keep his name in the news. I think the nomination is his to lose.

 

[bronconick]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Florida moved their primary to January 31.

Today, South Carolina moved theirs to January 21. I assume that means by NH law, theirs is now January 14th.

Goddammitsomuch. This is idiocy.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Florida moved their primary to January 31.

Today, South Carolina moved theirs to January 21. I assume that means by NH law, theirs is now January 14th.

Goddammitsomuch. This is idiocy.

Didn't the RNC put in a rule in 2008 that anybody who moved up before some date (March 1?) forfeited 50% of its delegates?

I guess the strong candidates are helped by moving dates up since it maximizes the advantage of their name recognition. Also, if they can wrap up the nomination earlier they can build their war-chest earlier, which should help both them and the national party. There's really no force pushing the other direction right now.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Iowa just announced that they've moved their caucus to tomorrow, and the 2016 caucus to the next day.

 

[bronconick]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Didn't the RNC put in a rule in 2008 that anybody who moved up before some date (March 1?) forfeited 50% of its delegates?

I guess the strong candidates are helped by moving dates up since it maximizes the advantage of their name recognition. Also, if they can wrap up the nomination earlier they can build their war-chest earlier, which should help both them and the national party. There's really no force pushing the other direction right now.

From a state's point of view, an earlier primary (as long as you don't get all delegates stripped like Michigan's Dems in 2008) is probably better for the amount of $$$ being spent in state by a dozen candidates in January instead of less in March or nothing in June because it's over.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

From a state's point of view, an earlier primary (as long as you don't get all delegates stripped like Michigan's Dems in 2008) is probably better for the amount of $$$ being spent in state by a dozen candidates in January instead of less in March or nothing in June because it's over.

I was taking it for granted that the states are in a race to be early. I was looking for some countervailing force, but I don't see one, unless something convinces the national party that a nominee wrapping up too early makes him an easy target to wear down by the general election.)