GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 3

[anitram]

From the NYTimes:

 

[Irvine511]

seems not even the Republicans can keep the American economy down for long (or at least down long enough to be politically harmful to Democrats, since that's much more important than unemployment).

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

That's one thing I absolutely support now, the bailout of the auto companies. They're doing so well , they've added jobs, and they have actually paid back most of the money. Can't imagine how much worse things could be without that.

 

[Irvine511]

so, does this qualify as a "dog whistle"? or is this more of a foghorn?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kxw4uZAezaI



it's also hilarious. yes, that peasant girl on a bike TOOK YER JABS!

 

[yolland]

Her "Chinese accent" sounds more informed by Full Metal Jacket than anything else.

ETA -- okay, so apparently they aired this in MI during the Super Bowl?

 

[trojanchick99]

so, does this qualify as a "dog whistle"? or is this more of a foghorn?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kxw4uZAezaI



it's also hilarious. yes, that peasant girl on a bike TOOK YER JABS!

Wow. I was half expecting her to end with "love you long time". That was awful.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Yes that ad was aired during the Super Bowl. Classy.

boston.com

By Shira Schoenberg, Globe Correspondent

President Obama has opened his strongest lead yet against Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in the Washington Post-ABC News poll released today.

Obama would beat Romney among registered voters nationally, 51 percent to 45 percent, according to the poll. The Democrat would have an even stronger lead - 54 percent to 43 percent – if the Republican nominee were former House speaker Newt Gingrich. This is the first Washington Post poll in which Obama has been above 50 percent among registered voters in a head-to-head match-up with Romney.

About 53 percent of voters believe Obama better understands the economic problems they face, compared with 36 percent for Romney. A slim majority of respondents believe Romney will do a better job handling the economy and the federal budget deficit. They are split on which candidate will best create jobs. But they believe Obama will do a better job handling terrorism, international affairs, and taxes, as well as protecting the middle class.

The poll put Obama’s approval rating at 50 percent, the highest in several months. Obama has been helped by recent signs of a stronger economy, though a majority of voters still disapprove of his handling of the economy, job creation, and the federal budget deficit.

With the GOP presidential primary turning increasingly negative, voters are not happy with what they are hearing from the candidates. Just 36 percent of respondents approved of what they, with 54 percent disapproving.

The poll also showed that Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, is most likely to be the Republican nominee. He has opened a 14-point lead over Gingrich among GOP-leaning voters nationally, 38 percent to 24 percent. Voters said they trust Romney more than Gingrich to handle the economy. By a large margin, voters judged Romney to be the Republican candidate most likely to beat Obama in the general election.

However, there were danger signs for Romney. More than half (52 percent) of voters said they liked Romney less the more they heard about him. (Sixty percent said the same about Gingrich.) Voters said that as a corporate investor, Romney did more to cut jobs than to create them. And 60 percent thought Romney had not paid his fair share in taxes. (The question noted that Romney paid a 14 percent effective tax rate on an income of $22 million.)

The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Feb. 1-4 and has a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

 

[Irvine511]

holy shit. this is the website. in this day and age?

Debbie Spenditnow | Hold Debbie Stabenow accountable for reckless spending

oh right, it's just about spending, guys. remember that.

 

[anitram]

Is that for real? It's gotta be a spoof, right??

 

[anitram]

That's one thing I absolutely support now, the bailout of the auto companies. They're doing so well , they've added jobs, and they have actually paid back most of the money. Can't imagine how much worse things could be without that.

Karl Rove hated the ad. He's totally lost the plot here.

“I was, frankly, offended by it,” said Karl Rove on Fox News Monday. “I'm a huge fan of Clint Eastwood, I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, but it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising.”

 

[Irvine511]

Is that for real? It's gotta be a spoof, right??

nope. totes real.

 

[yolland]

Salon, Feb. 6

The screwed generation: Libertarian, not liberal
by A.J. Dellinger

There is an old adage that says, “If you’re young and conservative you have no heart, if you’re old and liberal you have no brain.” The idea is that young people tend to make decisions more on idealistic views or out of passionate attempts at charity and altruism. While there is some truth to that for Generation Y (meaning people born in the ’80s and ’90s), the results are manifesting themselves in a totally different way.

We are the generation that continues to pay into Social Security with every paycheck but suspects we may never see the benefits of it. We are the recipients of degrees that don’t mean much from educational institutions that teach less and cost more. We are the casualties of wars that have gone on for over half of the lifetime of 2012′s first-time voters. In short, we are the screwed generation. The decisions of those before us has left us with an uncertain future and little opportunity to fix things through traditional means.

The ever-present skepticism of youth is even greater within the collective consciousness of Generation Y. And how could it not be? With our first real chance to make a splash in the world, we got behind Barack Obama in overwhelming numbers. He was a candidate who promised progress in every issue that the under-30 crowd found to be important: end the wars, defend gay rights and provide universal healthcare to the American people. While he’s made some steps forward, it’s been slow moving. Meanwhile, the House and Senate have deliberated on bills that would censor our voices on the Internet, a medium on which my generation relies heavily for communication and pretty much everything else. Just as we organized online to support Obama in 2008, we organized the protests against legislation like SOPA and PIPA, and the Occupy Wall Street movement uses the Internet to broadcast its events and actions.

Ask any kid on the street their opinion on gay marriage. I can almost guarantee you they’ll be in favor of it, or at the very least aren’t opposed to it. Ask the same about abortion and you’ll find a similar amount of permissiveness. If they aren’t in possession of marijuana, they probably know someone who is. This is what we bring to the table: a lenient, open-minded approach to personal decisions. It’s reflected in almost every part of our culture. We’re decidedly less religious, with only 44% of our age bracket finding religion to be important. That doesn’t mean there aren’t still many people of faith in our generation, but even those who believe are more understanding of those who don’t. We’re a generation that pirates television shows, movies, games and music, but will show up to more concerts and support independent artists and the media we love. Many of the universal views of our generation come down to holding a permissive attitude toward the behaviors of individuals.

...This is why libertarianism—and the Ron Paul candidacy—has been so appealing to young voters. Paul ended his candidacy for president in 2008 polling at about 6.5% nationally. From the moment the campaign trail opened back up for a 2012 run, his support has increased steadily, and he currently sits at around 12% in national polls. He’s also continually dominated the youth vote in nearly every primary. It’s no fluke that the old guy preaching liberty and personal freedom is getting the attention of the youngest demographic, either. Because Paul supports sending social issues down to the states, he’s no longer having those discussions; he’d rather talk economics. This is what makes the Ron Paul movement truly important. He’s not the perfect candidate, but watch any event that he shows up to in any given state. His audience is overwhelmingly made up of college-age kids who happily applaud at ideas like a 0% income tax, abolishing the Federal Reserve, and reinstituting the gold standard (or something equivalent) that would put value behind the US dollar again. Not only do they cheer, but they understand. These are concepts that aren’t lost on them, but rather resonate in them. These are the conversations that we’re willing to have, and the ideas we’re willing to debate about.

We still vote with our heart; it’s just in a slightly different place. We’d rather bring home our troops from overseas and save those lives while spending that money to establish a universal healthcare system that will save even more. This isn’t necessarily because we believe the government should take care of us, it’s because everyone deserves to be healthy and the powers that be before us mangled the system so badly that it’s becoming impossible to afford. This is an example of our generation trying to take care of our own as much as it is trying to create change. While the concept of universal healthcare may be defined as “liberal,” it’s a fairly libertarian approach of non-interventionism and personal rights that brings us there.

Paul, of course, opposes universal health care, a contradiction to the author's endorsement(?) which goes unaddressed.

The generalization that "Gen Y" has stronger libertarian impulses than older Americans seems right to me, though I don't find this author's attempts to frame support for Ron Paul's economic policies as retooled liberalism very convincing.

Thoughts?

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

The article's pretty spot on about its summary of my generation and how we feel about all the big issues of the day, and finally addresses our frustrations about some of these issues (the Social Security thing-yeah, thank you) in a way that barely anyone talks about. And I think the author is right in why Ron Paul appeals so much to younger voters.

However, yeah, there are things about Paul's platform that do fly in the face of some of those issues we care about. And there's still those papers from his past. I can't get past that. But I don't know how many young voters know that story.

The link to that "Debbie" ad-wow. That is horribly offensive.

And Karl Rove talking about how taxpayers' money shouldn't go to corporate advertising and political stuff of that kind? That is RICH (no pun intended ).

 

[Canadiens1131]

Freudian slip:

 

[BVS]

 

[Diemen]

Freudian slip:

Awesome.

 

[2861U2]

Really? You guys can't take five seconds to double-check something like this?

Mitt Romney 'Rmoney' Photoshop Kind Of Says It All (PHOTO)

 

[BVS]

No one said it was real, just funny.

 

[Canadiens1131]

Really? You guys can't take five seconds to double-check something like this?

Ewwww, HuffPost is in Canada now, too? I feel dirty.

Not clicking as to keep them from getting my pageview.

 

[BoMac]

They're launching a Quebec site tomorrow.

 

[Canadiens1131]

Not a big fan of work-for-free article mills for wannabe journalists, scrambling around to get Ariana Huffington ad revenue from pageviews.

 

[PhilsFan]

Bleacher Report is satanic. Guys who can't spell writing articles that get millions of views simply because their slideshow format exponentially increases their pageviews.

 

[U2DMfan]

Agreed.
Bleacher Report is hack central.

 

[financeguy]

hope that helps.

Not really, unfortunately. It's superficial analysis from the MSM.

Kitco - Commentaries - Scott Silva

 

[BVS]

MSM

 

[Irvine511]

Not really, unfortunately. It's superficial analysis from the MSM.

Kitco - Commentaries - Scott Silva

so it's still falling, then?

thanks.

 

[Irvine511]

also, rough night for Mittens.

Victories revive Santorum's White House hopes | Reuters

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Santorum has a shot at going 3-for-3 tonight since turnout in the Colorado suburbs was much higher than in the cities (basically, the rural folks are so anti-Romney that they're showing up in droves).

You have to wonder who Newt Gingrich would prefer out of the two. The sooner he drops out of the race, the sooner Republicans could get behind Santorum and prevent a Romney victory. Also, one wonders what would happen if Republicans have a convention where nobody collected a majority of delegates. It would seem probable that some faction could form together to accumulate more than Romney (say, Paul giving a hundred or so to Santorum and making a deal that Ron's the VP candidate). In fact, this would be such a good strategic decision for both that I could see Santorum urging his followers to vote for Paul in states like Indiana and Virgina where Mr. Santorum failed to make the ballot.

Also noteworthy is that the final primary is in Utah. If it's anywhere close, Mitt Romney will certainly be given the delegate magic number thanks to that state due in part to both his Mormonism and Republicans wanting to avoid a brokered convention.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Santorum has a shot at going 3-for-3 tonight since turnout in the Colorado suburbs was much higher than in the cities (basically, the rural folks are so anti-Romney that they're showing up in droves).

And there are some incredibly conservative areas in eastern Colorado. Boulder and Denver are pretty liberal, but get outside of that area and it changes quickly. I remember reading an article in Rolling Stone a few years ago that talked about just how conservative certain areas of that state are.

You have to wonder who Newt Gingrich would prefer out of the two. The sooner he drops out of the race

*Gets down on knees and prays for this to happen as soon as possible*

That is a good question. It'd be awfully funny if Gingrich endorsed Romney, given all the back and forth fighting between them thus far, but I can see him endorsing Romney if need be (albeit perhaps through clenched "they're making me do this" teeth). If he ties himself to Santorum, that "family values" mantra of Santorum and his supporters is going to be up against Newt "been married three times and left two wives when they fell ill" Gingrich's situation, so...yeah.

Also noteworthy is that the final primary is in Utah. If it's anywhere close, Mitt Romney will certainly be given the delegate magic number thanks to that state due in part to both his Mormonism and Republicans wanting to avoid a brokered convention.

Ooh. Yes. That one will be quite interesting to watch.

 

[deep]

Los Angeles Times | Feb. 7, 2012 | 10:09 p.m.

Rick Santorum swept all three Republican presidential contests held on Tuesday, winning caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota as well as Missouri's primary. Though no delegates were at stake in Tuesday's contests, Santorum's wins give his campaign fresh momentum against national front-runner Mitt Romney. Santorum's win in Colorado was confirmed by the Colorado GOP chairman late Tuesday night.

the winner tonight