2012 Presidential Campaign

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

So, has there ever been a GOP primary where different candidates have won Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina? I believe the answer is no.

Hmm ... going back through Wiki it appears that relative few states held primaries through '68, so starting with '72 you had
'72 - Nixon - swept all 50 as incumbent
'76 - Ford v Reagan - a two man field basically
'80 - Reagan v Bush - Bush got IA, Reagan got the other two
'84 - Reagan - swept all 50 as incumbent
'88 - Bush v Dole v Robertson - Bush got NH, Dole got the other two (but Pat won three states)
'92 - Bush - swept all 50 as incumbent
'96 - Dole vs field - Dole got Iowa, Buchanan got NH, Dole got SC (Forbes won two early states)
'00 - Bush v McCain - Bush got IA, McCain got NH, Bush got SC
'04 - Bush - swept all 50 as incumbent
'08 - Field - Huckabee won IA, McCain won NH just 38-32 over Romney, McCain won SC just 33-30 over Huckabee

I think it's fair to remove the incumbent years, so it appears that it's something that hasn't happened so far in five legitimate chances ('80, '88, 96, 00, and '08)

In '64, there were several early primary winners: Lodge won NH in March, Goldwater won Illinois in April, Byrnes won Wisconsin in April, Scranton won PA in April, Rhodes won Ohio in May, Rockefeller won WV & OR in May.

In '68, a similar result with Nixon, Rockefeller, Rhodes, and Reagan all claiming primary wins between March & June.

[JPhillips]

Looks like this year will be a good test for the more likable candidate always winning vs. an incumbent with a poor economy. I just can't see any of the top GOP candidates winning a likability contest against Obama.

[Crapshoot]

Right JIMGA, meant in the modern primary era (ie, Iowa as a primary basically didn't gain its importance until Carter).

[CrimsonFox]

Newt Gingrich's Three Marriages Mean He Might Make A Strong President -- Really | Fox News

just shoot me...

[sterlingice]

BAWAHAHAHAHA! I love Fox News sometimes!

SI

[molson]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Newt Gingrich's Three Marriages Mean He Might Make A Strong President -- Really | Fox News

just shoot me...

I'm sold!

But I wonder, is there anyone who can top 3 wives and thus be an even better president?

[sterlingice]

LARRY KING 2012!

Unfortunately Liz Taylor died last year so he'll have to look for another running mate

SI

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Newt Gingrich's Three Marriages Mean He Might Make A Strong President -- Really | Fox News

just shoot me...

As I have written before for Fox News Opinion, I don’t think voters belong in a candidate’s bedroom.

Interesting position to take when candidates feel they belong on in the bedrooms of voters.

[CrimsonFox]

[sterlingice]

If Newt wins tonight, does Romney worry this starts sounding like the 2008 Dems? Hillary had her "firewall" states, has a lot more money and the stronger national organizations, Obama is going to implode somewhere, etc

SI

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If Newt wins tonight, does Romney worry this starts sounding like the 2008 Dems? Hillary had her "firewall" states, has a lot more money and the stronger national organizations, Obama is going to implode somewhere, etc

SI

Florida becomes the be-all and end-all for him. He loses that and I think the chance of a brokered convention becomes non-zero. He wins and this is just a bump in the road.

[JPhillips]

Amazing that this time last week it looked like Romney would have a sweep of the first three states and now he's 1 for 3. I still think he's the prohibitive favorite, but if Newt can carry momentum into FL I don't know what happens.

[JPhillips]

Mitt lost big among voters that wanted a candidate that shared their religious values. Is this about Mormonism?

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Newt Gingrich's Three Marriages Mean He Might Make A Strong President -- Really | Fox News

just shoot me...

That might be the most bizarre political opinion piece I have ever read. And I wonder what the author thinks of Newt's ethical violations from when he was Speaker of the House and how they might affect him psychologically should he become President?

Having lived here for more than 10 years now, I'm not surprised that Newt won the primary-no I'm surprised he had to come from behind in the last days to win it rather than just be the outright leader from day 1. Great job South Carolina, truly great.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Mitt lost big among voters that wanted a candidate that shared their religious values. Is this about Mormonism?

He lost even bigger -- 50% to 22% -- among the 65% who thought the debates were important to their vote.
Primaries - Exit/Entrance Polls - Election Center 2012 - Elections & Politics from CNN.com

[rowech]

These guys are going to spend the next three months destroying each other. Obama could win this election without even campaigning.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by rowech

These guys are going to spend the next three months destroying each other. Obama could win this election without even campaigning.

That's most likely going to happen regardless of the next three months.

There's simply not enough momentum for a candidate that represents a big enough improvement & garners enough trust to generate the necessary high 40% support level that he's going to get.

[sterlingice]

Really dumb question? Did Gingrich's wife (whichever one) coming out and sniping him the night of the debate make him a more sympathetic figure? Or was it pretty much the debate that did it for him?

SI

[Crapshoot]

Watching the GOP self-destruct is fascinating. Aren't they supposed to be the more disciplined, aligned party? Ie, the old Will Rogers line - "I belong to no organized party, I'm a Democrat."

[Jas_lov]

Originally Posted by rowech

These guys are going to spend the next three months destroying each other. Obama could win this election without even campaigning.

Especially if Gingrich wins the nomination. It's still very early but Romney polls better vs Obama and people just don't like Newt. He's usually at 45-55% unfavorable in those polls and that's what Mitt and Obama get for favorable numbers. Romney has the much better organization going forward so he'll probably still win but Newt has at least made it interesting for a little while longer.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

He lost even bigger -- 50% to 22% -- among the 65% who thought the debates were important to their vote.
Primaries - Exit/Entrance Polls - Election Center 2012 - Elections & Politics from CNN.com

Some really interesting votes...

Young people like Ron Paul, old and/or rich people really don't like him.

Santorum wins big with those who hold abortion as their biggest issue.

Romney only got 2% of the vote from those who said being a "True Conservative" was the most important trait in a candidate, Gingrich only gets 6% from those who say a "Strong Moral Character" is the most important. And almost half of the voters said that the most important quality in a candidate was "Can defeat Obama".

[panerd]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Some really interesting votes...

Young people like Ron Paul, old and/or rich people really don't like him.

Santorum wins big with those who hold abortion as their biggest issue.

Romney only got 2% of the vote from those who said being a "True Conservative" was the most important trait in a candidate, Gingrich only gets 6% from those who say a "Strong Moral Character" is the most important. And almost half of the voters said that the most important quality in a candidate was "Can defeat Obama".

Those statistics really support our two party system don't they?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Watching the GOP self-destruct is fascinating. Aren't they supposed to be the more disciplined, aligned party? Ie, the old Will Rogers line - "I belong to no organized party, I'm a Democrat."

I had never heard that quote before but it's definitely quality

SI

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I had never heard that quote before but it's definitely quality

SI

One of my favorites.

[Grover]

It'll be fantastic when Obama is re-elected in a landslide this November.

[SirFozzie]

I was thinking of the old Groucho (?) line:

"I wouldn't be a member of any group that would have me as a member"

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sabotai

And almost half of the voters said that the most important quality in a candidate was "Can defeat Obama".

Which reminds me of the old cliche about how "you gotta stand for something or you'll fall for anything".

[Swaggs]

I don't think Newt is electable in the general election, but I'm not so sure that it is a bad thing (for the GOP's presidential hopes) for him to challenge Romney for awhile if Romney ends up the eventual nominee.

Spending more time in the swing states and more resources on building up the ground game will make Romney much more competitive than simply taking a victory lap for the next couple months. As it is now, Obama is quietly building up field offices (I heard on NPR that Obama had more field offices than the entire set of GOP candidates in NH).

The problem for Romney, from my vantage point, is if Gingrich and Santorum align (Santorum as VP?) sooner rather than later. Then, "anybody but Romney" becomes Gingrich (maybe a little bit to Paul, but I suspect he is already mobilizing his troops as well as can be expected).

[molson]

I'm not sure of the mindset that Romney had to have a clean sweep to challenge Obama. It's the moderates that matter, are they really going to be turned off by Romney because he has trouble with the Republican base, or the fact that he's attacked for not being a "true conservative"?

Though, the Demoracts' arrogance is funny, the last time they were this cocky they lost the House.

[Grover]

Newt Gingrich isn't an elite? Seriously? Since when?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by molson

I'm not sure of the mindset that Romney had to have a clean sweep to challenge Obama. It's the moderates that matter, are they really going to be turned off by Romney because he has trouble with the Republican base, or the fact that he's attacked for not being a "true conservative"?

Though, the Demoracts' arrogance is funny, the last time they were this cocky they lost the House.

Between their buyer's remorse and a horrible economy, how many cocky Democrats do you know right now?

SI

[Grover]

I wish Newt would stop calling Obama a "Food Stamp President" when there were more people on food stamps under Bush.

[molson]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Between their buyer's remorse and a horrible economy, how many cocky Democrats do you know right now?

SI

I'm being short-sighted probably, and just reading a lot of Democrats handing the election to Obama because Romney can't win every state.

Bigger picture, probably not as cocky.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Grover

I wish Newt would stop calling Obama a "Food Stamp President" when there were more people on food stamps under Bush.

well maybe, but only because their benefits have expired as unemployment hits record highs.
Then again all of them suck.
Id vote for Foghorn Leghorn over Obama....and Id think twice in him vs the republican ticket.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

well maybe, but only because their benefits have expired as unemployment hits record highs.
Then again all of them suck.
Id vote for Foghorn Leghorn over Obama....and Id think twice in him vs the republican ticket.

Right, but demographically speaking, you're a white male in the South - you weren't going to vote for any Democrat in the last 20 years (well, maybe Clinton). Correct me if I'm wrong.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Grover

I wish Newt would stop calling Obama a "Food Stamp President" when there were more people on food stamps under Bush.

But at least he's willing to go to the NAACP and talk to their constituents about to get jobs instead of food stamps.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That's most likely going to happen regardless of the next three months.

There's simply not enough momentum for a candidate that represents a big enough improvement & garners enough trust to generate the necessary high 40% support level that he's going to get.

Exactly right. What a sad set of candidates the GOP trudged out.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Exactly right. What a sad set of candidates the GOP trudged out.

I don't think the candidates are really that different from what they have always been its just that in bad economic times people are more willing to call them out on the bullshit they spew.

[ISiddiqui]

No, I really do think these are ridiculously bad.

[Grover]

Originally Posted by miked

But at least he's willing to go to the NAACP and talk to their constituents about to get jobs instead of food stamps.

There are more white people on food stamps than black people.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by miked

But at least he's willing to go to the NAACP and talk to their constituents about to get jobs instead of food stamps.

Originally Posted by Grover

There are more white people on food stamps than black people.

I still can't believe that Newt has gotten even this far. If I'm the GOP he is pretty close to the worst possible nominee for the party. He is like the picture of everything that caused me to disavow any association with that group.

[Grover]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I still can't believe that Newt has gotten even this far. If I'm the GOP he is pretty close to the worst possible nominee for the party. He is like the picture of everything that caused me to disavow any association with that group.

I find him absolutely loathsome as a human being, say nothing about his politics.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Grover

There are more white people on food stamps than black people.

Of course, I was making fun of his earlier quote...but he's not racist.

[CU Tiger]

LOL...nope no need for voter ID verification.
Wouldnt want to piss of the zombies.

South Carolina's Attorney General detects voter fraud during pri - WTOC, Savannah, Georgia, news, weather and sports |

[JPhillips]

Not during the primary.

COLUMBIA, S.C. – South Carolina's attorney general has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.

Attorney General Alan Wilson sent details of an analysis by the Department of Motor Vehicles to U.S. Attorney Bill Nettles.

In a letter dated Thursday, Wilson says the analysis found 953 ballots cast by voters listed as dead. In 71 percent of those cases, ballots were cast between two months and 76 months after the people died. That means they "voted" up to 6 1/3 years after their death.

The letter doesn't say in which elections the ballots were cast.

The analysis came out of research for the state's new voter identification law. The U.S. Justice Department denied clearance of that law.

Wilson told Nettles he asked the State Law Enforcement Division to investigate.

I'm fine investigating this, but when all is said and done I'd bet very few of these are real cases of voter fraud. We don't know how the matches were determined. We don't know the number of elections. If they actually found 953 cases of voter fraud in an election I'd declare defeat and sign on to voter ID laws, but until now proponents have been almost completely unable to find prove of voter fraud.

[CU Tiger]

Humor me, what is the drawback to voter ID laws.
At least locally Ive had to show a DL every time Ive ever voted.
If the ID is free, and easily available why not require it to vote?

[lcjjdnh]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Humor me, what is the drawback to voter ID laws.
At least locally Ive had to show a DL every time Ive ever voted.
If the ID is free, and easily available why not require it to vote?

They tend to disenfranchise voters such as the elderly and poor, who don't otherwise have IDs (usually because they don't drive). Voter ID laws would, presumably, be much less objectionable if voting-age citizens were made well aware of the requirement and a concerted effort was made to provide them with free, government issued IDs.

[sterlingice]

I think the argument is because almost every ID has a fee associated with it so it's not actually free

SI

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Humor me, what is the drawback to voter ID laws.
At least locally Ive had to show a DL every time Ive ever voted.
If the ID is free, and easily available why not require it to vote?

Defending Democracy: Confronting Modern Barriers to Voting Rights in America | NAACP

[JPhillips]

Easily available is another problem. Look at what they tried to do in Wisconsin. After the voter ID law was passed the DMV proposed closing offices in highly Dem areas and opening new offices in highly GOP areas.

Most of the voter ID movement is just a way to make it harder for likely Dem voters.

edit: And you have to look at it in conjunction wit efforts to make registering more difficult, eliminating same day registration and limiting early voting.