Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every time I see "Santorum" and "#2" in the same sentence, I giggle.

Its funny how liberals hate someone so much for believing in an alternate view.

Gee I can't imagine why they hate someone who compares them to dog-f**kers.

Bunch of whiners: I can say anything and you must love me for it. We are now not allowed to hate hate.

The first amendment allows you to say what you want but it does not medically prevent you from being a douchebag.

If you want to be loved, treat others with love. Be pc if you want pc back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every time I see "Santorum" and "#2" in the same sentence, I giggle.

Its funny how liberals hate someone so much for believing in an alternate view.

Santorum is a hateful person -- someone who will divorce loving couples, families. He compared homosexuality to _ing a dog! The alternate view is a hateful one. Is it wrong to hate the views of the white power movement or the Taliban? Or should we "tolerate" that too?

Anonymous wrote:Every time I see "Santorum" and "#2" in the same sentence, I giggle.

Its funny how liberals hate someone so much for believing in an alternate view.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:A few random thoughts:

1) much of the country has never heard of Rick Santorum. Tomorrow they will wake up and begin Googling him.2) More people voted in the last DC mayoral primary then voted in the Iowa caucus.
3) Santorum essentially moved to Iowa. He has little staff or money. He just happened to be the "non-Romney" standing when the music stopped. He will have a very difficult time reproducing this result.
4) Because New Hampshire has always been considered a sure thing for Romney, it won't be that important. That means South Carolina becomes the key to the futures of Perry and Gingrich.

At which time they will be introduced to the phrase "frothy mix." For better or for worse.

Brace for Impact!

Every time I see "Santorum" and "#2" in the same sentence, I giggle.

jsteele wrote:A few random thoughts:

1) much of the country has never heard of Rick Santorum. Tomorrow they will wake up and begin Googling him.2) More people voted in the last DC mayoral primary then voted in the Iowa caucus.
3) Santorum essentially moved to Iowa. He has little staff or money. He just happened to be the "non-Romney" standing when the music stopped. He will have a very difficult time reproducing this result.
4) Because New Hampshire has always been considered a sure thing for Romney, it won't be that important. That means South Carolina becomes the key to the futures of Perry and Gingrich.

At which time they will be introduced to the phrase "frothy mix." For better or for worse.

It's a typical breakdown: voters who were higher income and cared most about the economy went for Romney. Evangelicals who thought abortion was the most important issue went big for Santorum. I find it interesting that there is no divide any longer between Catholics and evangelicals, who used to be virulently anti-catholic. That schism is pretty much gone. Santorum was embraced by the Iowa evangelicals. However, the evangelicals now have shifted their prejudice away from Catholic to Mormons.

On another note, when Santorum gets a little scrutiny, his life cycle will be over. He's too unlikeable, too nasty, hates the media -- all a prescription for disaster. Bob Kerrey was right, Santorum must be latin for asshole.

Actually I just looked at the Iowa map and it appears that he swept the small towns and rural areas. That reinforces the impact of evangelicals, and it could bode well for him in the south.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-3-2012/indecision-2012---romspringa---rick-santorum-s-surge


Jon Stewart nails it again. Funny.

jsteele wrote:A few random thoughts:

1) much of the country has never heard of Rick Santorum. Tomorrow they will wake up and begin Googling him.
2) More people voted in the last DC mayoral primary then voted in the Iowa caucus.
3) Santorum essentially moved to Iowa. He has little staff or money. He just happened to be the "non-Romney" standing when the music stopped. He will have a very difficult time reproducing this result.
4) Because New Hampshire has always been considered a sure thing for Romney, it won't be that important. That means South Carolina becomes the key to the futures of Perry and Gingrich.

I think those are good observations. On New Hampshire however, Santorum could do better than expected in NH. There are a lot of Irish and Italian Catholics there. Anything that diminishes a resounding NH victory for Romney could be devastating to the image of him as the de facto frontrunner. If Santorum gets numbers that are considered a success, he'll get money.

Of course Santorum is one of the scariest possibilities for me because (a) every time the guy hears the word "gay" his eyes start blinking and he makes a face like a toddler being fed asparagus, and (b) he's not a complete idiot with no experience and therefore he may not implode. He's a known quantity that won't get worse with time. BUT I think he can't win a general election (at least I hope) and the longer he stays in the race, the more he drags Romney over into Rightyville USA. By the end we will be able to broadcast his own unedited campaign speeches as attack ads.

Concerning Jeff's comment about Googling Santorum, I can report that Rick is now fortunate enough that the Iowa result is the first thing that comes up, and the connection to anal sex has dropped to number two. Of course, Rick also dropped to number two in Iowa, but he's probably still thrilled, considering where he was a few days earlier. However, now that people will be Googling him they will learn more about him, which is not so great for him.

Mitt is probably pretty happy about his number one finish, even if it was only eight votes above Rick. However, it was six votes behind his 2008 finish, when Huckabee clobbered him by 10,000 votes. So it's still the old story about Mitt spending millions and getting about the same 25% support within his party.

A few random thoughts:

1) much of the country has never heard of Rick Santorum. Tomorrow they will wake up and begin Googling him.
2) More people voted in the last DC mayoral primary then voted in the Iowa caucus.
3) Santorum essentially moved to Iowa. He has little staff or money. He just happened to be the "non-Romney" standing when the music stopped. He will have a very difficult time reproducing this result.
4) Because New Hampshire has always been considered a sure thing for Romney, it won't be that important. That means South Carolina becomes the key to the futures of Perry and Gingrich.

XXXXX is standard headline saving text - any of the names would fit. Well, except Santorum. Who appears to be winning.

I am looking at the predictions at this time, and the numbers are:

Santorum: 25%
Romney: 25%
Ron Paul: 21%
Gingrich: 13%
Perry: 10%
Bachmann: 5%
Huntsman: 1%


Complete clusterf**k

I think that we have to remember this is a caucus. And in a caucus, a concerted ground effort can yield a lot of results. So the heroic Santorum victory-ish result may be hard to pull off elsewhere in a primary setting.

But I think that this is agony for Romney. The guy CAN"T break the 23%-25% cap that shows up in every poll I have ever seen. Every time some candidate implodes, those supporters go to someone not named Romney. What is it with him? Is it bigotry against Mormons? Is it questions about his commitment to conservatism, his history of Romneycare?

I can't think of a time when the lead horse had such a hard time making his case.

According to HuffingtonPost:

A HuffPost reader sent along a screenshot of the homepage of the Des Moines Register this evening, when the newspaper accidentally put up a draft headline of the caucus results, reading, "Iowa Politics Insider: XXXXX wins!"

They didn't say XXXX (Cain or Paul), XXXXXX (Romney), XXXXXXX (Santoro), or XXXXXXXX (Bachmann, Huntsman, or Gingrich), but XXXXX, which can only be Perry.