The Politics Thread

[DRW50]

Romney's son is beating the birth certificate and grades drum. So much for Romney being any different than the million other Republican candidates who would rather focus on this than a real issue.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/mitt-romneys-son-obama-should-release-birth-certificate-grades.php?ref=fpblg

[Roman]

It will be a slaughter. Obama in a walk.

[Max]

Roman, assuming Romney is the GOP nominee, our beloved president will carry every state outside the racist Deep South.

Strangely, Carl doesn't seem to share your optimism regarding a Romney/Obama matchup.

Edited December 30, 2011 by Max

[Roman]

He will be, and it will be.

I'm now skeptical if Romney's first name is Willard with all the flip-flopping and lying he's done thus far.

[Roman]

Obama is derided by many in his party because they feel he runs against Congress and does not do enough to support Democrats in the Senate. From Carl.

And Carl is right.

[Max]

If you feel that Barry isn't "progressive" enough, then why is he deserving of a landslide re-election? Is it simply because he isn't "crazy right" like Willard?

[Roman]

Yes. And he actually has good sense. See, Barack has done his best, whether I have agreed with him or not, for this Country. All Willard can do is lie his tail off and flip flop on whatever he said before and then act like an indignant child when he is called out on it.

That, among other things, is why it will be a landslide for Barack Obama, the President Of the Untied States Of America.

[Max]

Since Obama--a man who has always put principle before politics--is going to have huge coattails, will Democrats be able to regain control of the House as well?

Edited December 31, 2011 by Max

[juppiter]

They need 25 seats to regain control but I do not see it happening. Republicans made big gains in state legislatures, so the states that are redistricting will have district gerrymandered to protect Republican incumbents. Not saying the Dems wouldn't have done the same thing, they totally would have (in my state, NY, they passed a law to count prisoners in their home districts for state legislature redistricting instead of at prison because this creates more seats in the liberal downstate as opposed to the more conservative upstate where most of the prisons are).

I think the Democrats could keep the Senate, or it could flip. That is the more interesting chamber to watch for IMO.

Edited December 31, 2011 by juppiter

[Roman]

Yes, I believe that they can and will.

[Max]

Juppiter, I was just being sarcastic with my friend Roman when I said that the Democrats would regain control of the House. In all seriousness, the GOP will retain control unless a far-right fringe candidate (like Santorum or Bachmann) is nominated or a major scandal involving the top Republican Congressional leadership arises shortly before Election Day.

You are absolutely correct that the Senate is the more interesting chamber to watch. The Republicans need a net gain of four seats to take control, and at this point (when the nominees in many races are unknown) it is too hard to predict which party will have the majority in that chamber. Basically, the only seats that one can safely assume will change hands are those from MA, ND, & NE; the Dems will pick-up the MA Senate seat, while seats they currently hold in ND and NE will switch to the GOP.

[Roman]

The House will be lost this year. Dems (if they can decide not to screw things up) will regain control this year.

[Soapsuds]

Romney's son is [!@#$%^&*] hot! Romney doesnt have a chance against Obama.

[Max]

Who here wants to predict the outcome of tomorrow's IA Republican caucuses? While I cannot guess the percentage of the vote each candidate will garner, here is the placement I believe the GOP candidates (excluding Huntsman, who is not competiting) will finish in:

1. Santorum

2. Romney

3. Paul

4. Gingrich

5. Perry

6. Bachmann

Gingrich peaked too early (and Bachmann peaked way too early), while Santorum is ascending at just the right time. I believe he will win for three reasons: (1) his message resonates with religious conservatives, (2) he visited all 99 of Iowa's counties, and (3) he flew under the radar for so long that none of his opponents attacked him (until it was too late).

My predictive powers are mixed at best, so what I say is hardly set in stone. Polls currently show Santorum, Romney, and Paul in a dead heat, so it is possible that any one of those three could be the winner.

[DRW50]

1. Romney - as always, default. He hates the right people, and he and his family know how to appeal to the extremes (witness the recent birther comments) while pretending to be mainstream conservative. He also has a lot of money, the media adores him, and he is seen as electable. Most of all, the more blatant movement conservatives have canceled each other out.

2. Paul - good organization and most who support him will not be dissuaded.

3. Santorum - the last gasp of a flirtatious base, one that in the end will probably go with Santorum as a protest vote against their party leaders. He is too dull and process-like to move beyond that.

4. Perry - all cattle no hat

5. Gingrich - never a good fit for Iowa, and a deeply unpleasant personality all around

6. Bachmann - She ain't seen nothin' yet...and she never will.

Meanwhile, here's the fascinating Politico article that Perry's people are furious over.

http://www.politico....1211/70976.html

Edited January 2, 2012 by CarlD2