68
   

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2011 07:47 pm
@failures art,
50 years ago, my parents could not vote, and they were both born in the US.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Tue 27 Dec, 2011 07:04 pm
Rick Perry tonight, according to the AP (via Politico) has experienced a "transforming" event in his life. Right before the Iowa caucus, which is now just a week away.
Perry, who previously believed that abortions after pregnancies as a result of incest or rape should be allowed today tells an evangelical minister in Iowa that he has has seen the light. All abortions should be illegal.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 12:59 am
@realjohnboy,
Straight reporting or do you find this amusing or reprehensible?
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 01:26 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I don't think it's a big enough event in his life to swing him the nomination.

but who's to question the timing of God, anyways?
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 06:59 am
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

Rick Perry tonight, according to the AP (via Politico) has experienced a "transforming" event in his life. Right before the Iowa caucus, which is now just a week away.
Perry, who previously believed that abortions after pregnancies as a result of incest or rape should be allowed today tells an evangelical minister in Iowa that he has has seen the light. All abortions should be illegal.


well there's always a light or two on in the White House, right?
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 07:50 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
merely desperate pandering. kind of obviously pathetic really.
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 08:07 am
@revelette,
That was my take too, rev. It's hard to give anyone credit for divinely inspired changes of heart so close to voting day.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 08:23 am
a couple of interesting pieces in nymag recently

Quote:
O Lucky Mitt
A month ago, his candidacy was rusting. Now he’s on the road.


http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/mitt-romney-2012-1/


and Frank Rich talking about my particular area of interest for the past 3 or 4 years (American conservatives v Republicans and the language involved)

4 pages - I think it's worth the read

Quote:
The Molotov Party
For the new GOP, conservative isn’t nearly radical enough.


http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/gop-2012-1/

Rupert Murdoch seems to have his fine hand in the middle.

Quote:
Along with Rush Limbaugh, the most conspicuous conservatives missing from the list of Gingrich haters are Rupert Murdoch, who knows how to cover his bets, and most of his current stars. It was on The Wall Street Journal op-ed page that the Newt surge was anticipated in early November by Dorothy Rabinowitz of the paper’s editorial board, in a prescient piece titled “How Gingrich Could Win.” Her fellow board members, both in print and on their own Fox News program, have tended to be supportive of Newt (his $1.6 million take from Freddie Mac aside) and contemptuous of Mitt. Further empirical evidence of this tilt could be found in the airtime Roger Ailes bestows on Republican contenders. In a December 20 Media Matters accounting of the minutes Fox devoted to each candidate since June 1, Gingrich came in second to Cain, with Romney finishing behind Bachmann, Paul, and Santorum in this unofficial Fox primary. In Mitt’s most newsworthy appearance on the network, all it took was straightforward questioning about his record by the affable anchor Bret Baier to melt him down into a puddle of patrician prissiness.


<snip>

Quote:
If a candidate can attract only a quarter of his own party after essentially four years of campaigning, where is the groundswell going to come from next November? The thinness of that 25 percent is dramatized by the Real Clear Politics compilation of polls of Republican contenders and voters: Of 59 surveys taken since the Perry boomlet of August, Romney has only placed first in 20. A bomb-throwing non-Mitt, by contrast, would energize the 75 percent majority that whipped Mitt the other 39 times—particularly the activists who might otherwise be tempted to sit on their hands on Election Day. But fielding a radical ticket would come at the price of energizing any Democrats who also are thinking of staying home in 2012.


<snip>

Quote:
Whoever ends up on the GOP ticket or in the White House, the 75 percent is no sooner going to disappear than the aggrieved 99 percenters in the blue populist camp. What Republican aristocrats in denial like Karl Rove can’t bring themselves to recognize is that “the most unpredictable, rapidly shifting, and often downright inexplicable primary race” they’ve ever seen is not just a conservative revolution but one that has them in its sights.



not sure where the conservative v Republican discussion will go in the longer term but it's intriguing to watch




0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 08:26 am
Quote:
What Republican aristocrats in denial like Karl Rove can’t bring themselves to recognize is that “the most unpredictable, rapidly shifting, and often downright inexplicable primary race” they’ve ever seen is not just a conservative revolution but one that has them in its sights.


which is why they're now plowing tons of money into Mitt. They are the 1% and Mitt's their man.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 11:41 am
@JPB,
What's interesting about Iowa is the fact that Paul is "winning," but Romney is the clear winner, because Paul has no chance on the national scene.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:23 pm
@cicerone imposter,
What's interesting about the whole shebang is that the real problem is incomprehensibe, unmentionable and ineradicable and thus insoluble.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:28 pm
@spendius,
You have just described "all" politics. Drunk Drunk Drunk Drunk
TheLeapist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:31 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Haha. God bless America.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:35 pm
@spendius,
I heard alcohol works for many things that are otherwise insoluble.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:42 pm
@parados,
Yes--that's right. It was a settled institution in some Gothic tribes long ago that every important issue was thrashed out once sober and once pissed out of their brains. Historians are in dispute about whether that technique created modern Christian society.

At least one debate should require the contestants to drink 8 double vodkas at the start. That would take us forward a bit I should think.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:45 pm
@spendius,
Laurence Sterne discusses the subject in Tristram Shandy and tried the method in his composition.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 02:50 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Yes--that's right. It was a settled institution in some Gothic tribes long ago that every important issue was thrashed out once sober and once pissed out of their brains.



In most Gothic tribes, the one time when mead and all other intoxicants were strictly forbidden 'onthe premises',so to speak, was when important decisions were to be made in common council. This was certainly the case among the Jutes, for example.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 03:39 pm
@revelette,
That's my take too. Like, the thinking is "What have I got to loose, at this point?"
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 03:57 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
I imagine, Andrei, that your info. comes from a Temperance Society pamphlet. I'll stay with Sterne. He was right on so many things. And he had an extremely discerning audience. I don't think it was the Jutes he was writing about.

I only gave it as an example of a mode of discourse that might produce better results than we are seeing. And I quoted my source.
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Wed 28 Dec, 2011 05:13 pm
@spendius,
I doubt that I've ever read any Temperance Society pamphlets, Spendi. My information comes from several Scandinavian authors (obviously not Sterne), writing on the subject of how some legislatures e.g. the Icelandic Althyng, devolped from simple clan and tribal councils. Alcohol was usually taboo at these gatherings. And since these folk were close kissin' cousins to the Germanic Goths, Vandals, Angles (especially the Angles who hailed from Denmark) and Saxons, it's not too much of a stretch to assume that the prohibition was probably damn' near general. That doesn't mean, of course, that it might not have been violated from time to time. Their consumption of strong brew was prodigious at most other times.

In Stern's case, I would suggest the claim was just a matter of wishful thinking.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 03:50:04