FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: gyeonghwa on January 04, 2012, 04:10:21 am
-
So, Romney won by 8 points over Santorum but it was a close race. Perry dropped. Bachmann didn't. Gingrich is staying to personally spite Romney.
A friend told me that there isn't much of a chance of Romney swaying the conservative religious vote because of his religion and that it might end up splitting the conservative base. But I'm not too familiar with it all.
Anyways, what's more important is kicking those loons out of the House and Senate.
Edit: Cross posting for the stragglers.
-
Wait is that points or votes?
Ironbite-cause I'm getting a lot of stories that conflict.
-
Romney 30,015. Santorum 30,007
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/iowa-razor-thin-result-indicates-fierce-battle-conservatives-065415792.html
-
8....votes.
Ironbite-jesus fuck this is gonna be hilarious.
-
Somewhere, Dan Savage is having his best night ever.
-
A friend told me that there isn't much of a chance of Romney swaying the conservative religious vote because of his religion and that it might end up splitting the conservative base. But I'm not too familiar with it all.
Yeah. His Mormonism and perceived liberalism are both flaws in his campaign.
-
Santorum is just the remainder before the GOP is forced to support Romney. You can't even Google his fucking name and he doesn't have the money to continue.
-
Santorum is not going to win the nomination. There were two factors to his close second-place win: 1. Nearly every Republican candidate has had one week with frontrunner status. Santorum just got lucky: his frontrunner week was the same week as the actual election. 2. The Iowa caucuses lean heavily towards the evangelical candidate (Mike Huckabee won here in 2008).
Romney may have not always been polling as #1, but he has consistently maintained a steady footing in the polls. He will be the Republican nominee, with Ron Paul as a potential spoiler.
-
I disagree. As everyone knows, the Republican party has been searching for an alternative to Romney. Every time a front-runner collapses, their supporters jump to the next non-Romney.
Romney will likely win New Hampshire, given that he's focused there rather than Iowa. But Perry and Bachmann will likely drop out soon, and their supporters will probably shift to Santorum. Not to mention you'll have Gingrich going after Romney.
I actually think Santorum will be the nominee. And then Obama will crush him in the general election.
EDIT: This just in: Bachmann's out (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-expected-quit-presidential-race-following-poor-161724564.html).
-
Peh, Bachmann's been out, she just didn't know it.
I slipped over to Fox early this morning...like around 3am and they were already whining the race was too close to call and started bashing Romney.
Amazing. I'm sure if Romney had less votes they wouldn't have even bothered to do a recount, let alone two
-
EDIT: This just in: Bachmann's out (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-expected-quit-presidential-race-following-poor-161724564.html).
And Perry's still in, actually:
http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events (http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events)
-
Romney's going to win New Hampshire because New Hampshire, weird little state that it is, actually finds evangelism a turn-off. And he used to be governor of Massachusetts, which is close enough to make him "one of our own." No idea about the southern states like VA, though. Maybe Perry or Santorum?
-
EDIT: This just in: Bachmann's out (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-expected-quit-presidential-race-following-poor-161724564.html).
And Perry's still in, actually:
http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events (http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events)
What in God's name is Perry still doing in this race?
-
EDIT: This just in: Bachmann's out (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-expected-quit-presidential-race-following-poor-161724564.html).
And Perry's still in, actually:
http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events (http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events)
What in God's name is Perry still doing in this race?
He's pure Republican Id - he's got basically everything a Republican would want, minus the votes he lost by being an idiot on Youtube. And for some people that's actually a bonus. So he might think he still has the race.
-
NOM is apparently taking credit for Ron Paul not finishing on top.
-
NOM is apparently taking credit for Ron Paul not finishing on top.
But Ron Paul's a homophobic asshole. How could they not like him?
-
NOM is apparently taking credit for Ron Paul not finishing on top.
But Ron Paul's a homophobic asshole. How could they not like him?
He didn't sign the pledge to get rid of all SSM.
-
I'm curious to see how Ron Paul plays out in all of this. He's close enough right now to become a major spoiler for the top two. If he can stay there long enough he get some nice offers in exchange for his endorsement.
-
My prediction: Romney clinches the nom, but only after the California primary, which I believe is quite late in the season, like June or something. He then scrambles to find a VP that will offset his "Mormon-ness" in a desperate attempt to keep the evangelical Christians on board. (You already see this paranoid crap in one of the primaries, I forget which state, where they were making people sign a "loyalty oath" to support whoever the party nominates even if you don't personally support them.) In one of the strangest partnerships in politics since Caligula and his horse, he signs up Mike Huckabee to be his running mate. (The whole thing comes crashing down, of course, when it is revealed in late September that Huckabbe maintains a secret life in Key West as a drag queen named "Helena Handbasket.")
-
But I'm Helena Handbasket.
Ironbite-MIKE HUCKABEE STOLE MY IDENTITY!
-
EDIT: This just in: Bachmann's out (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/michele-bachmann-expected-quit-presidential-race-following-poor-161724564.html).
And Perry's still in, actually:
http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events (http://www.wistv.com/story/16443061/bachmann-perry-cancel-sc-events)
What in God's name is Perry still doing in this race?
He's pure Republican Id - he's got basically everything a Republican would want, minus the votes he lost by being an idiot on Youtube. And for some people that's actually a bonus. So he might think he still has the race.
I thought the Republican Party was just one big political Id.
-
NOM is apparently taking credit for Ron Paul not finishing on top.
But Ron Paul's a homophobic asshole. How could they not like him?
You know what's funny about this is that many gay folks believe he isn't homophobic.
-
NOM is apparently taking credit for Ron Paul not finishing on top.
But Ron Paul's a homophobic asshole. How could they not like him?
You know what's funny about this is that many gay folks believe he isn't homophobic.
The man who put forward a bill that would have prevented the Supreme Court from hearing cases related to the right to privacy and the First Amendment in relation to homosexuality is not homophobic?
-
NOM is apparently taking credit for Ron Paul not finishing on top.
But Ron Paul's a homophobic asshole. How could they not like him?
You know what's funny about this is that many gay folks believe he isn't homophobic.
The man who put forward a bill that would have prevented the Supreme Court from hearing cases related to the right to privacy and the First Amendment in relation to homosexuality is not homophobic?
And also supported a bill that would make it illegal for same-sex or unmarried couples to adopt children?
-
Yup. Go to any gay political site and there is at least one gay dude wanking over how LGBT friendly Ron Paul apparently is. It's like they aren't trying to pay attention.
-
Yup. Go to any gay political site and there is at least one gay dude wanking over how LGBT friendly Ron Paul apparently is. It's like they aren't trying to pay attention.
Ron Paul's public image is as purposefully wishy-washy as any good politician so that he can try to pick up some libertarian voters. Of course, anyone who actually researches his positions and values civil liberties will be very disgusted with his flip-flopping. It's like a fish dying on a dock, man.
-
Still don't understand why NOM doesn't love him. He supports subverting the Constitution for their cause - that takes dedication.
-
Still don't understand why NOM doesn't love him. He supports subverting the Constitution for their cause - that takes dedication.
Here was the quote from NOM's founder:
"The strong showing by both Santorum and Romney shows that supporting marriage is not only the right thing to do, it is the politically smart thing to do. This is a lesson that Ron Paul may be learning the hard way. Paul suffered a big loss by finishing third in Iowa, a state he was expecting to win. NOM aired television and online ads that were highly critical of Paul’s unacceptable stance on marriage, including his belief that civil marriage should be abolished altogether. No doubt our ads, along with tens of thousands of telephone calls and grassroots work with our thousands of supporters in Iowa were a factor in Ron Paul’s poor showing."
-
Still don't understand why NOM doesn't love him. He supports subverting the Constitution for their cause - that takes dedication.
Ron Paul is secretly homophobic. He's never made any statements himself that would lead people to think he's a homophobe, he just quietly supports that prejudice through his lawmaking. IIRC, a former campaign manager of his said that he was privately quite homophobic. He refused to use the bathroom of a gay supporter of his, and another time when a gay man reached out to shake his hand, Paul swatted it away.
-
So NOM is crediting itself with Ron Paul's 3rd place finish and not Paul's own work in the state?
Ironbite-that's some ego.
-
So, Romney won by 8 points over Santorum but it was a close race. ....
seriously am I the only one who saw this?
(http://upload.democraticunderground.com/imgs/home/120104-romney-squeezes-out-santorum.jpg)
-
Related.
(http://i.imgur.com/nvqX8.jpg)
-
Related.
(http://i.imgur.com/nvqX8.jpg)
This seems like one of those things that belong in the strange fetish thread.
-
That has to be 'shopped.
-
Nope, it's a parody twitter account.
-
Am I the only one who thinks this Santorum stuff is going too far?
Don't get me wrong, I don't support Santorum and I disagree with his politics but this namecalling thing is just childish.
Also it is funny that Romney has a steady small support and the rest of the Republicans go from one candidate to the other "We just want to vote someone who ISN'T Romney!!!"
-
I am surprised to see Huntsman is still in this race.
Gingrich has said that he'd stay just to smite Romney and here is his ad doing so:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EApRHZ1WAc
-
seriously am I the only one who saw this?
(http://upload.democraticunderground.com/imgs/home/120104-romney-squeezes-out-santorum.jpg)
No, I saw that on DU yesterday and laughed.
-
Am I the only one who thinks this Santorum stuff is going too far?
Don't get me wrong, I don't support Santorum and I disagree with his politics but this namecalling thing is just childish.
Also it is funny that Romney has a steady small support and the rest of the Republicans go from one candidate to the other "We just want to vote someone who ISN'T Romney!!!"
I guess equating the substance with the man is pretty insulting. Anal sex gets a bad enough rap as it is, why should we be connecting it to such a deplorable sack of shit?
Oh, wait. You think Rick Santorum deserves any respect. Adorable.
-
Am I the only one who thinks this Santorum stuff is going too far?
Don't get me wrong, I don't support Santorum and I disagree with his politics but this namecalling thing is just childish.
Also it is funny that Romney has a steady small support and the rest of the Republicans go from one candidate to the other "We just want to vote someone who ISN'T Romney!!!"
I guess equating the substance with the man is pretty insulting. Anal sex gets a bad enough rap as it is, why should we be connecting it to such a deplorable sack of shit?
Oh, wait. You think Rick Santorum deserves any respect. Adorable.
This is not about whether or not he deserves respect. My problem is that instead of attacking his politics Dan Savage and others decided to mock Santorum by name. I simply looked at Santorum's Wikipedia page and discovered that he supported waterboarding (he defended it claiming it helped find Osama), he is against GLBT rights, he wanted to include intellegent design in No Child Left Behind bill. There are so many things he has done/supported that could have been attacked.
This is just childish.
-
Ridicule (http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/ridicule-an-instrument-in-the-war-on-terrorism) is a very effective political weapon and the man is a childish, thoughtless, hateful prick. This isn't a matter of maturity, this is a matter of using a time tested political strategy.
-
Ridicule (http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/ridicule-an-instrument-in-the-war-on-terrorism) is a very effective political weapon and the man is a childish, thoughtless, hateful prick. This isn't a matter of maturity, this is a matter of using a time tested political strategy.
Especially since it works. Since Dan Savage dropped his Google bomb, no one can take Santorum seriously. Even if they do, it's still there in the back of their minds.
-
Tangentially related: after reminding her proved largely useless, I got my daughter to start saying excuse-me by calling her Farty von Fart-fart every time she forgot her manners.
-
This is not about whether or not he deserves respect. My problem is that instead of attacking his politics Dan Savage and others decided to mock Santorum by name. I simply looked at Santorum's Wikipedia page and discovered that he supported waterboarding (he defended it claiming it helped find Osama), he is against GLBT rights, he wanted to include intellegent design in No Child Left Behind bill. There are so many things he has done/supported that could have been attacked.
This is just childish.
It's not an either/or proposition. You can criticise his views, and you can make fun of him endlessly, assuming you're not one of his political opponents but just some minor person commenting on the situation (like Dan Savage). If, say, Romney had started the Santorum campaign, then it would rightly be considered a stupid and childish political manoeuvre. But it was just a joke between Dan Savage and his readers that happened to catch on. People have every right to make fun of other people they consider stupid, vile, hateful, or just ridiculous. That's kind of why this place exists, in fact.
-
This is not about whether or not he deserves respect. My problem is that instead of attacking his politics Dan Savage and others decided to mock Santorum by name. I simply looked at Santorum's Wikipedia page and discovered that he supported waterboarding (he defended it claiming it helped find Osama), he is against GLBT rights, he wanted to include intellegent design in No Child Left Behind bill. There are so many things he has done/supported that could have been attacked.
This is just childish.
It's not an either/or proposition. You can criticise his views, and you can make fun of him endlessly, assuming you're not one of his political opponents but just some minor person commenting on the situation (like Dan Savage). If, say, Romney had started the Santorum campaign, then it would rightly be considered a stupid and childish political manoeuvre. But it was just a joke between Dan Savage and his readers that happened to catch on. People have every right to make fun of other people they consider stupid, vile, hateful, or just ridiculous. That's kind of why this place exists, in fact.
I'd like to add to this that the campaign by Savage was started because of very anti-gay remarks made by Santorum. Which lead to Rick Santorum being known as Mr. Frothy because both Santorums ruin sexy-fun-time.
-
Am I the only one who thinks this Santorum stuff is going too far?
Don't get me wrong, I don't support Santorum and I disagree with his politics but this namecalling thing is just childish.
Also it is funny that Romney has a steady small support and the rest of the Republicans go from one candidate to the other "We just want to vote someone who ISN'T Romney!!!"
I guess equating the substance with the man is pretty insulting. Anal sex gets a bad enough rap as it is, why should we be connecting it to such a deplorable sack of shit?
Oh, wait. You think Rick Santorum deserves any respect. Adorable.
This is not about whether or not he deserves respect. My problem is that instead of attacking his politics Dan Savage and others decided to mock Santorum by name. I simply looked at Santorum's Wikipedia page and discovered that he supported waterboarding (he defended it claiming it helped find Osama), he is against GLBT rights, he wanted to include intellegent design in No Child Left Behind bill. There are so many things he has done/supported that could have been attacked.
This is just childish.
He is a childish man and the term that was named after him is a reference to his homophobia. It wouldn't be workable to associate his name with all the nasty shit he supports so instead they make a joke out of him. Instead he just is getting made fun of for being a douche canoe.
-
Am I the only one who thinks this Santorum stuff is going too far?
Don't get me wrong, I don't support Santorum and I disagree with his politics but this namecalling thing is just childish.
Also it is funny that Romney has a steady small support and the rest of the Republicans go from one candidate to the other "We just want to vote someone who ISN'T Romney!!!"
I guess equating the substance with the man is pretty insulting. Anal sex gets a bad enough rap as it is, why should we be connecting it to such a deplorable sack of shit?
Oh, wait. You think Rick Santorum deserves any respect. Adorable.
This is not about whether or not he deserves respect. My problem is that instead of attacking his politics Dan Savage and others decided to mock Santorum by name. I simply looked at Santorum's Wikipedia page and discovered that he supported waterboarding (he defended it claiming it helped find Osama), he is against GLBT rights, he wanted to include intellegent design in No Child Left Behind bill. There are so many things he has done/supported that could have been attacked.
This is just childish.
He is a childish man and the term that was named after him is a reference to his homophobia. It wouldn't be workable to associate his name with all the nasty shit he supports so instead they make a joke out of him. Instead he just is getting made fun of for being a douche canoe.
Yeah I still have to disagree with you guys. There are so many things that he could have been attacked with but Dan Savage chose the one thing he did not do, he didn't choose his own name.
I mean if you do some research on Santorum you will find out that he was in the board of directors of an hospital where the staff was guilty of: child abuse, fraud, pedophilia and many other crimes, you could find out that he defended catholic priests who were suspected of pedophilia (hmm sensing a pattern) you could hang this man by his own statements and acts.
These are the things you could find by doing a Google search of his name -except that you have to skip the first two pages untill you find any articles about him.
Maybe I'm just weird but all this namecalling made me sympathise with him, that changed after I did a bit of research on him.
I guess my point is that when the other side acts like complete assholes it is not an invitation to compete who is the bigger asshole. You have Rebublicans who want USA to be a corporate paradise, with laws based on fundamentalistic interpretation of bible, a country where natural resources are exploited and workers are exploited freely and anyone who dissents (or has a wrong skin colour) can be locked away without a trial. They want to start pre-emptive wars and some would actively spread christianity by wars.
When faced with this (and lets face it USA is alreade far on that path) the liberal left decides to resort to namecalling. Not the politicians though I have to admit that. They on the other hand either do nothing or actively assist the Rebublicans.
-
Yeah I still have to disagree with you guys. There are so many things that he could have been attacked with but Dan Savage chose the one thing he did not do, he didn't choose his own name.
I'm puzzled by this comment. Do you think Santorum's name had the frothy definition before Savage popularized it? Because that's the only way for this statement to make sense. Santorum decided to make anti-gay and anti-sex comments, so he's now associated with something people don't want when they're fucking. The frothy definition is quite appropriate because that is how vile the man actually is.
Maybe I'm just weird but all this namecalling made me sympathise with him, that changed after I did a bit of research on him.
Here is where I point out that you are not in the US, so his antics are less known to you. People here know that he's a terrible person (it's just that being a terrible person is a selling point for the GOP).
I guess my point is that when the other side acts like complete assholes it is not an invitation to compete who is the bigger asshole. You have Rebublicans who want USA to be a corporate paradise, with laws based on fundamentalistic interpretation of bible, a country where natural resources are exploited and workers are exploited freely and anyone who dissents (or has a wrong skin colour) can be locked away without a trial. They want to start pre-emptive wars and some would actively spread christianity by wars.
And you know what? Mockery is a far more effective tactic than talking about the issues. I've already posted a link to the effectiveness of mockery and humor. I'm also going to link to this (http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=full) which points out that simply correcting misinformation is not a viable strategy. It's hard to make people give a fuck about issues with statistics and data and charts (Al Gore actually lost the debates to George Bush by doing this). Politics is no academia, it can't be held to the same standards.
-
Yeah I still have to disagree with you guys. There are so many things that he could have been attacked with but Dan Savage chose the one thing he did not do, he didn't choose his own name.
People don't choose to be gay, dark skinned, poor, or not believe in the right god* yet he has attacked all those groups. You can attack him on these points but far to many people think that he right to make it truly effective and get under his skin. This is just a little bit of asymetrical warfare waged against a man who wants to be crowned king and is trying to do it by demonizing every marginal group he can in order to drum up support.
Fuck him, politics is a full contact sport.
*You don't choose to believe, you either do or you don't . You can pretend in order to fit in just like a homosexual can, but it doesn't change the fact that who you really are is being attacked.
-
Askold, the American political culture is way different from ours. Personal insults that would backfire badly here are just a part of the political discussion over there specially among the pundits.
-
OK. Maybe it really is because I'm from Finland and our politics are so different. Like I said before, I agree that Santorum is an asshole I never tried to actually defend him.
Yeah I still have to disagree with you guys. There are so many things that he could have been attacked with but Dan Savage chose the one thing he did not do, he didn't choose his own name.
I'm puzzled by this comment. Do you think Santorum's name had the frothy definition before Savage popularized it? Because that's the only way for this statement to make sense. Santorum decided to make anti-gay and anti-sex comments, so he's now associated with something people don't want when they're fucking. The frothy definition is quite appropriate because that is how vile the man actually is.
Maybe I just express myself poorly in english. I did know that the new meaning for santorum was made up just to insult him. Maybe it is just that our politics/cultures are so different and it just seems weird to me.
-
That shit doesn't really fly here either, and I live right next door to the U.S.
-
OK. Maybe it really is because I'm from Finland and our politics are so different. Like I said before, I agree that Santorum is an asshole I never tried to actually defend him.
Yeah I still have to disagree with you guys. There are so many things that he could have been attacked with but Dan Savage chose the one thing he did not do, he didn't choose his own name.
I'm puzzled by this comment. Do you think Santorum's name had the frothy definition before Savage popularized it? Because that's the only way for this statement to make sense. Santorum decided to make anti-gay and anti-sex comments, so he's now associated with something people don't want when they're fucking. The frothy definition is quite appropriate because that is how vile the man actually is.
Maybe I just express myself poorly in english. I did know that the new meaning for santorum was made up just to insult him. Maybe it is just that our politics/cultures are so different and it just seems weird to me.
It's an American thing. Basically, we are extremely immature when it comes to political discourse and have no problem with namecalling and other juvenile stunts. It's considered normal here.
-
LOL. An American thing? You obviously have never witnessed a session of Parliament in the UK.
-
LOL. An American thing? You obviously have never witnessed a session of Parliament in the UK.
It sounds like fun. Any cases stick out to you?
-
Geez, people. If we eliminate name-calling from political discussions my entire arsenal is wiped out.
-
On a class trip to Washington DC we got to sit in on a Senate/House session. There was a sign by our seats that told us to keep quiet, don't boo or even clap. As I sat there, I was thinking, "Who would clap or boo? This is so boring I can't even pay attention." Then I saw a clip of Parliament where one representative flat out called the other a liar and they started shouting. I thought, "I wouldn't have minded sitting in on that one!"
-
The main problem with attacking one republican's views/actions over another is that whatever he/she/it is guilty of, they've all done it. You can't just say Santorum has made homophobic remarks as if he's the only one who's done this. Name-calling's really all you have left.
I don't even think we can pick a LEAST homophobic, ultra-conservative, Christ-loving, money-grubbing piece of **** anymore. Might as well go for the one who'll provide the most-entertaining debates.
-
There was all out fist-fighting in China I think it was.
-
There was all out fist-fighting in China I think it was.
Taiwan actually. Happens every few years (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=taiwan+parliament+fight&oq=Taiwan+Par&aq=0&aqi=g10&aql=1&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=102l2232l0l3233l10l8l0l1l1l0l133l716l3.4l7l0), which is not surprising considering their parties really, truly hate each other's guts, and their media makes even the British tabloid culture or the American political feeding frenzy look like polite amateurs.
-
Maybe I just express myself poorly in english. I did know that the new meaning for santorum was made up just to insult him. Maybe it is just that our politics/cultures are so different and it just seems weird to me.
Okay, I’m still having trouble seeing where you are coming from myself. The whole point of Ridicule, whether or not you think it may be appropriate in a given context, is to make fun of a target. To be effective, you do have to identify the target somehow. When the target is an individual, then that person’s name or some easily recognized nickname will have to be used somehow. So no matter what stance you want to ridicule Santorum on, it will involve using his name at some point.
-
The point was that (ir :))regardless of its effectivity, ridicule, by such a dedicated effort as well as on an exceptionally juvenile level, is not, or should not be an acceptable tool in the political arsenal.