33
   

The Winding Road To The Republican Nomination For President

 
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 01:49 pm
Good afternoon.
I was digging around today about what to watch for in MI where, as Cyclo noted, the polls seem to show Romney recovering against Santorum. Most of the polls are within the margin of error.
More significantly, the polls are of statewide "Likely Republican" voters.
MI started out with 59 delegates to the convention but they lost half of them when they scheduled their primary to be prior to March. The number of delegates is now 30.
Their are 14 congressional districts. Each district will award 2 delegates to the candidate who wins the most votes in the district. 14x2=28. The final 2 delegates will go to the candidate who wins the most votes statewide.
The Romney strategy is to win the urban and suburban Detroit districts and let Santorum have the rural areas.
The result may be that Romney wins the popular vote in MI (which would probably be the headline) but the delegate result is largely split.
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 02:03 pm
@realjohnboy,
By the way, Irishk asked about getting a discussion going covering the Senate and House races. Please visit the new thread. I have deliberately given it a boring title: "The U.S. National Elections For President, The Senate And The House Of Representatives."
I have started with the Senate. Please stop by. Adult refreshments will be served at 7 pm.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  0  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 02:31 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

So no money went to bail out the banks then? Bankers make political donations too.

The issue is risk of national bankruptcy. That risk is more elevated with a continuation of policies of Obama - and that record is of course public - than with any of the fiscal plans put forth by the 4 Republican candidates. Best summary report on all 4: http://crfb.org/sites/default/files/primary_numbers.pdf
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 02:46 pm
@High Seas,
If I recall rightly, Setanta asked us to take this sort of thing to another thread. He called me a clown and made me very sad.
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 02:48 pm
@izzythepush,
I think sad clowns are the best...
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 02:55 pm
@izzythepush,
I didn't see that post, but the plans of the 4 Republican candidates I just linked definitely belong to this thread, so you can stop being sad about it.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  5  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 03:07 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:

The issue is risk of national bankruptcy. That risk is more elevated with a continuation of policies of Obama - and that record is of course public - than with any of the fiscal plans put forth by the 4 Republican candidates

That's funny HS.

The crfb lists the GOP plans as increasing the budget deficits at a greater rate than projections under the current budget do. Figure 3 in crfb's analysis of the GOP plans

Current law projects the debt to GDP ratio will be about 61% in 2021
http://crfb.org/sites/default/files/crfb_analysis_cbo_projections.pdf

Under the GOP - the intermediate debt scenaris are as follows:
Santorum it would grow to 104% of GDP
Gingrich - it would grow to 114% of GDP
Romney - it would grow to 86% of GDP
Paul - it would grow to 76% of GDP

Even when the crfb makes reasonable adjustments to current law to extend certain items it only raises the debt/GDP ratio in 2021 to 84%.

For you to state the GOP plans are better than the current one is laughable. I don't understand how you made it with a straight face.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2012 05:03 pm
@izzythepush,
Discussing the stated plans of candidates is germane, pointing the finger about how the bail-out money was used is not. However, i am gratified to think that i made you sad.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  4  
Reply Sun 26 Feb, 2012 11:14 am
Santorum: JFK's speech (on separation of church and state) "...(M)akes me want to throw up."
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Feb, 2012 09:00 pm
If this piece of the Stratfor emails gets wide distribution I'm guessing we can discount any chance of Jeb Bush being a late entrant for the nomination

http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/347043_insight-mccain-5-internal-use-only-pls-do-not-forward-.html

Or maybe not?
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Sun 26 Feb, 2012 09:04 pm
@hingehead,
we've already had at least one too many bushies, thankyouverymuch...
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 05:36 am
@Rockhead,
Never thought I would ever say this...but Jeb Bush is head and shoulders above any of the Republicans still fighting on the primary circuit.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 10:43 am
@realjohnboy,
Wonder if Santorum throws up when Reagan said much the same?

Quote:
We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief.



source

revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 10:53 am
@High Seas,
Mitt Romney's Tax Plan Is a Mathematical Disaster


0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 11:39 am
@revelette,
revelette wrote:
Quote:
We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief.

That sounds pretty good to me. What part of that makes Santorum sick?
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 12:19 pm
@rosborne979,
The part about JFK speech where separation of church and state are absolute.

Quote:
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.


source

As you can see, Reagan said the same. "Church and state are, and must remain, separate. " Pretty absolute to me.
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 12:49 pm
@revelette,
revelette wrote:
The part about JFK speech where separation of church and state are absolute.
As you can see, Reagan said the same. "Church and state are, and must remain, separate. " Pretty absolute to me.

Yes, I googled a bit more on this and read Santorum's actual comments in context. Santorum not only misinterpreted the meaning of the original speech, but went on to further dig himself into a hole by objecting to the basic premise of the First Amendment relating to religion and government.

The one redeeming quality I seen in Santorum is that he seems to be consistent and honest about his personal opinions. That's refreshing and I wish others were more like that. It's just unfortunate (for him) that his opinions are so dangerous and obnoxious.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 05:28 pm
The Santorum campaign is confirming this afternoon that it is behind robocalls to Democrats urging them to vote for Santorum tomorrow. The ad notes that the Repub primary is "open" to any voter regardless of party affiliation and slams Romney for his "anti auto industry" stance.
There was confusion earlier in the day about whether the Dems were behind the calls.
Eva
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 06:12 pm
@realjohnboy,
Hilarious, rjb! No need for Dems to try to run down the Republicans...they're doing a fine job of it all by themselves! Smile
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2012 07:13 pm
@Eva,
I wrote before, Eva, that by my math 7500 non-Repubs would have to vote in the primary and vote the same way to give either Santorum or Romney a 1% change in the popular vote in MI.
I am resisting the urge to predict the outcome in the popular vote tomorrow. But I have Santorum winning more delegates: 18-12.
 

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 0.09 seconds on 04/18/2024 at 05:42:05