The "not Romney" wave cycle

[ParadigmShifter]

He speaks French. 'Nuff said.

 

[Cutlass]

Newt does too

 

[Traitorfish]

Newt is only capable of using human tongues to tell outrageous lies, though, so that averages it out.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

At least Newt is kind of related to toads, see my avatar. Both of them are frog friendly, what did they ever do for you? (Helping out in the war of independence and that big statue doesn't count).

 

[Traitorfish]

Cinco de Mayo? Albeit in a roundabout sort of way.

 

[Cutlass]

Well the problem is that Newt only ever studied frog history. And so knows nothing of American history. Which is why he has such fracked up opinions on things here.

 

[Pangur Bán]

The vast majority of votes in the Republican primaries have gone to the so-called "nut-case" candidates, but the one estblishment pawn Romney looks like he is going to win. Not very democratic if you ask me.

Romney's victory speech was among the most vacuous disingenuous and sinister cliche-fests I've heard in a political speech in a while: optimism (imitate Obama slavishly because my advisors say it brainwashes the sucker-voter), repeal Obamacare (make sure my plutocrat friends can continue to enrich themselves at the expense of the weak and poor), make energy cheaper (rob your descendants of energy security and compromise the environment for my short-term political gain) and create jobs through tax-breaks for "job creators" (i.e. divie up the victory spoils with my outsourcing plutocrat friends).

 

[NickyJ]

He's the only one remotely rational and sane in the race and he can't sew it up yet even with rules extremely biases in his favor. That's not showing us much.

As if Obama had shown more at this point in 2008.

 

[Cutlass]

As if Obama had shown more at this point in 2008.

Obama was up against serious candidates and became stronger in performances over time. Romney is up against clowns and can barely differentiate himself from them.

 

[JollyRoger]

Ah, I see. You are correct. He has more than all of them combined once. Still, that's pretty efficient.

We are past Super Tuesday and there are still 3 clown cars he hasn't eliminated. It's not like any of them should have been formidable.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

-1

You want Gingrich to win?????

Romney's Mormonism doesn't matter to me, but his lies and flip-flopping do. As does Gingrich abandoning his sick wife.

Ron Paul has a clean bill on everything: Go Paul!!!

Except that Paul has ties to white supremacist organizations, his own string of racist newsletters, and proudly touts the fact that he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act.

Yes, but have you heard any Republican candidate at any time since W actually openly condemn it?

Santorum in particular has been very critical of Bush's presidency, even going so far as to vindicate Obama for the auto bailouts, because he was following precedent for the office set by Bush. That's not really true, the government has been saving companies for decades, but it's a conservative 1. actually being truthful about something regarding Obama (though poopy-pants drops the ball with most other words that come out of his mouth) and 2. a Republican candidate being critical of Bush's administration.

 

[AlpsStranger]

The details of the "not Romney" phenomenon concern me less than the details of the upcoming "not president" phase of Republican politics.

 

[kochman]

We are past Super Tuesday and there are still 3 clown cars he hasn't eliminated. It's not like any of them should have been formidable.

They aren't, they are just stubborn.
Paul stayed in last time until the end, why not do it again?

It's obnoxious that these clowns won't quit, but it's all over for them already. You can't make them quit.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It's obnoxious that these clowns won't quit, but it's all over for them already.

This seems to connect with a discussion (and I use that word quite wrongly) in another thread.

Santorum's wife is convinced it's God's will that he runs for president because if Obama gets another terms you guys will lose the America you know right now. You know. Just like you guys would lose the America you knew 4 years ago if Obama became president.

 

[Antilogic]

Like Gingrich dropping out after losing Mississippi and/or Alabama?

This might be the next major event that happens, and it only helps Romney seal up the nomination. Both of the states have moved from the strong Gingrich column to a tossup over the weekend.

...he can't sew it up yet even with rules extremely biases in his favor. That's not showing us much.

Not commenting on the first part, but I think the media narrative combined with the easy availability of money from a few major bankrollers (super PACs) have contributed more to lengthening this campaign season than the candidates themselves.

Well the problem is that Newt only ever studied frog history. And so knows nothing of American history. Which is why he has such fracked up opinions on things here.

If there is one thing I can't stand hearing Gingrich talk about, it's this. Rarely are speeches this physically painful.

They aren't, they are just stubborn.
Paul stayed in last time until the end, why not do it again?

It's obnoxious that these clowns won't quit, but it's all over for them already. You can't make them quit.

In addition to my above comment, there is this. When you got one guy who gives you a million or so dollars (or more likely your totally-not-affiliated-but-still-kinda-is super PAC), then why bother dropping out? Nothing to lose, right? The other guys run the attacks, your name is on the ballot, you might win in a state with favorable demographics.

Generally, many second-tier candidates would end their runs after Super Tuesday (I count the third tier as those who didn't get any traction by the first couple). The campaign season has just become so long on the front-end it feels like forever until we get to this point.

 

[NickyJ]

This might be the next major event that happens, and it only helps Romney seal up the nomination. Both of the states have moved from the strong Gingrich column to a tossup over the weekend.

Actually, it would hurt Romney. Most of Gingrich's supports would go for Santorum instead of Romney.

Not commenting on the first part, but I think the media narrative combined with the easy availability of money from a few major bankrollers (super PACs) have contributed more to lengthening this campaign season than the candidates themselves.

Agreed. Newt would have been out by now if it hadn't been for the casino owner.

 

[Antilogic]

Actually, it would hurt Romney. Most of Gingrich's supports would go for Santorum instead of Romney.

It's not so much a matter of support as a matter of moving on to the next stage, which only occurs when there is one candidate. Romney's far enough ahead only major gaffes by his campaign can stop him. And given all the gaffes we have seen so far from the Republican campaigns, I cannot emphasize how major these would have to be.

 

[NickyJ]

It's not so much a matter of support as a matter of moving on to the next stage, which only occurs when there is one candidate. Romney's far enough ahead only major gaffes by his campaign can stop him. And given all the gaffes we have seen so far from the Republican campaigns, I cannot emphasize how major these would have to be.

Yeah, but we're talking about the anti-Romney here. If people are still following Gingrich at this point, I don't think we can trust them to go the sensible route.

 

[JollyRoger]

They aren't, they are just stubborn.
Paul stayed in last time until the end, why not do it again?

It's obnoxious that these clowns won't quit, but it's all over for them already. You can't make them quit.

Why should they quit if they are still winning states?

 

[kochman]

Why should they quit if they are still winning states?

Because they are so far behind overall?