Open thread: Are you ready for the Huckabee presidential forum? Update: Gingrich leads new Iowa poll, Paul second

posted at 7:25 pm on December 3, 2011 by Allahpundit

8 p.m. ET on Fox News, two full hours with Huck and the gang sans Huntsman and, of course, Cain. Rick Perry will attend despite his initial hesitation. No doubt he’d prefer to skip it given Huckabee’s issues with him, but he can’t afford to pass on a platform this prominent. Especially with social conservatives a core part of tonight’s viewership.

Speaking of debate attendance, second look at Ron Paul?

In a campaign statement released Saturday, Paul’s campaign called the [Trump] debate a distraction from the real issues of the campaign.

“The selection of a reality television personality to host a presidential debate that voters nationwide will be watching is beneath the office of the Presidency and flies in the face of that office’s history and dignity,” Jesse Benton, Ron Paul’s national campaign chairman, said in a statement.

He added, “Mr. Trump’s participation as moderator will distract from questions and answers concerning important issues such as the national economy, crushing federal government debt, the role of the federal government, foreign policy, and the like. To be sure, Mr. Trump’s participation will contribute to an unwanted circus-like atmosphere.”…

“Mr. Trump’s selection is also wildly inappropriate because of his record of toying with the serious decision of whether to compete for our nation’s highest office, a decision he appeared to make frivolously,” Benton said.

Gingrich will be there with bells on, allegedly for “entertainment value.” Is that also why he’s meeting with Trump next week?

Here’s your thread in lieu of a “Quotes of the Day” post. While we wait, watch the preview from yesterday’s interview with Jenna Lee. Huck’s vowing that the candidates won’t be allowed to attack each other, but good luck making Gingrich and an increasingly desperate Romney play completely nice with each other. (The White House, needless to say, is rooting for maximum casualties.) Oh, and keep your eye on this page at the Des Moines Register, as their new Iowa poll — the gold standard for the state — is expected to roll out sometime tonight. The numbers will be chaotic this week because of Cain’s in-or-out ambivalence when the poll was conducted, but if Gingrich is up big, the panic in Team Mitt this coming week will be palpable. I hope for his sake that the vaunted Romney organization is as good as they say.

Update: PPP will have its own Iowa poll coming out tomorrow. And it sounds like a doozy:

Initial impressions from Iowa: Newt winning, but by single digits. Expected bigger margin. Paul/Romney duking it out for 2nd

Other thing that grabs my attention in IA is Perry appears to be in double digits, much better than he’s been doing elsewhere


Update: As the clock strikes 8 p.m. on the east coast, the Register’s new poll is out.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul has risen into second place, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has slid to third with just over a month before the Iowa caucuses kick off voting in the presidential nominating process.

Gingrich has support from 25 percent of likely Republican caucusgoers, Paul is at 18 percent and Romney at 16 percent.

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann ties with retired Georgia business executive Herman Cain at 8 percent. The poll was conducted before Cain suspended his candidacy on Saturday. Rounding out the field: Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania at 6 percent each, and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman at 2 percent.

If it’s true that most of Cain’s support will break for Gingrich then Newt’s probably pushing 30 percent in reality. In fact, the Register says he’s the second choice for 43 percent of caucusgoers so he has room to grow. As for Rick Perry: Oof.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7 8

Give the guy a break. It is called the American Federation of Teachers.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:19 PM

How does that have anything to do with them being federal unions?

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:22 PM

No, that is why Romney doesn’t poll above 20 to 25%. The other 75% think he is a weasley RINO with no core principles.

karenhasfreedom on December 3, 2011 at 11:20 PM

And that’s why we’re nominating Newt Gingrich, baby!

You know what I’ve discovered from this primary? Conservative voters have no core principles.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:22 PM

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:19 PM

He reads them because like it or not what they write helps shape the news cycle. These guys are on the Sunday morning shows and what they write drives the media narrative. Cable News “Journalists” and I use the term very loosely, are lazy human beings who like to pull quotes from “prominent conservatives” to drive narratives about the candidates. From Brooks to George Will, they matter because the media says so. Unfortunately.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:24 PM

John the Libertarian on December 3, 2011 at 11:18 PM

I will talk with her tomorrow. Life is hectic for her with working and then spending evenings with contractors rebuilding their home and the kids school activities.

momoftxmomof3 on December 3, 2011 at 11:26 PM

I don’t remember a lot of punditry specifics about the 2008 election but was Brooke’s one of they guys who promoted Sen. McCain as the nominee and then voted (presumably) for The Won?

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:15 PM

I can’t remember either. I’ll see if I can find something.

INC on December 3, 2011 at 11:28 PM

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:20 PM

I can’t speak for others but there seems to be a running theme of Gov. Romney courting Independents and what I will rudely refer to as the squishy middle, of which Mr. Brooks is a proud member of. That is probably an acceptable game plan (I disagree) for the general but for the Republican nomination it is just plain stupid. The country is center right, Republicans are right. Far from securing the base, he seems to ignore them. I don’t understand the strategy.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:28 PM

Here’s your thread in lieu of a “Quotes of the Day” post.

Darn.

Electrongod on December 3, 2011 at 11:29 PM

You know what I’ve discovered from this primary? Conservative voters have no core principles candidates to chose from.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:22 PM

Either that, or you are actually the person with no core value. Probably negative value at best.

astonerii on December 3, 2011 at 11:29 PM

He reads them because like it or not what they write helps shape the news cycle. These guys are on the Sunday morning shows and what they write drives the media narrative. Cable News “Journalists” and I use the term very loosely, are lazy human beings who like to pull quotes from “prominent conservatives” to drive narratives about the candidates. From Brooks to George Will, they matter because the media says so. Unfortunately.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:24 PM

It’s still a little hard for me to completely agree. You bring up some good points, but it sure does seem like Romney is referencing that which he (always) agrees with.

Now, we don’t have to guess on this. We can look at his record and some of the positions he has recently pushed.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM

Conservative voters have no core principles.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:22 PM

So people who don’t agree with you don’t have any core principles? Interesting concept.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM

You know what I’ve discovered from this primary? Conservative voters have no core principles.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:22 PM

I discovered that those who support Romney are not conservative and have no principles.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM

You know what I’ve discovered from this primary? Conservative voters have no core principles.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:22 PM

I also discovered that you are holier than thou. Your candidate has no core principles, just a huge desire to be the nominee/president. There is somthing sick about those who have no clue why they run, and also about those who want it too much, for glory.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:28 PM

I don’t really think thats true, I think what he has done is be overly careful. I don’t think hes ignoring the base, I think he would love the support of the base, but hes not going to go out there and give the red meat that we want to hear because he doesn’t want to turn off those swing voters. I think his positions and beliefs are conservative, but his problem is he tries to balance and nuance every answer so it sounds like hes equivocating and can come off as weak and insincere.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:33 PM

So people who don’t agree with you don’t have any core principles? Interesting concept.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM

My point was that many here are very willing to drop whatever conservative value they had to support their candidate du jour.

When Perry was weak on immigration, all of a sudden illegal immigration didn’t matter any more.

With Gingrich, family values, who cares?

With Cain, foreign policy can be learned on the job.

etc etc etc

It’s not people who don’t agree with me don’t have core values, it’s that your core values are constantly changing in core importance depending on the candidate you are supporting that day. That’s by definition a lack of core values.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

I think his positions and beliefs are conservative, but his problem is he tries to balance and nuance every answer so it sounds like hes equivocating and can come off as weak and insincere.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:33 PM

I’d say Romney is insincere, then. There is no seem about it.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM

At least he has never cheated on his wife.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:36 PM

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM

I hear what your saying, I think his positions and track record are pretty good overall, but I understand Im in the minority here. He has issues, but I think Newt has issues too that are being skated around for now, but will be an issue as this primary unfolds and if hes the nominee in the general.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:36 PM

Good. In that case, you wouldn’t mind eliminating the provisions that apply these extra-Constitutional measures to American citizens.

JohnGalt23 on December 3, 2011 at 10:15 PM

You’re right, I wouldn’t.

beatcanvas on December 3, 2011 at 11:36 PM

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

Respectfully disagree.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:37 PM

When Perry couldn’t debate, debating didn’t matter.

Now that Newt is the new hot candidate, everyone can’t wait to see Newt debate Obama.

Give me a break guys. The only constant has been fickleness.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:37 PM

My point was that many here are very willing to drop whatever conservative value they had to support their candidate du jour.

When Perry was weak on immigration, all of a sudden illegal immigration didn’t matter any more.

I cared. He was pretty much taken off my list. It did take a little bit more than that, of course.

With Gingrich, family values, who cares?

I don’t, but I didn’t.

With Cain, foreign policy can be learned on the job.

Cain’s slipping on Libya clearly cost him big.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:38 PM

but his problem is he tries to balance and nuance every answer so it sounds like hes equivocating and can come off as weak and insincere.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:33 PM

He wants to best Bill Clinton.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:38 PM

It’s not people who don’t agree with me don’t have core values, it’s that your core values are constantly changing in core importance depending on the candidate you are supporting that day. That’s by definition a lack of core values.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

All of the candidates have weak points and strong points. A supporter of one can go from one who flames out to another without abandoning his principles. He just makes a decision that on balance the good outweighs the bad.

sharrukin on December 3, 2011 at 11:39 PM

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

We’ve noticed that when Mitt has differing views on a subject it is a change of mind due to more information but when others change their mind it is a character flaw. People, including you, tend to give their “favorites” a pass. Human nature, including yours’.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:39 PM

I think Newt has issues too that are being skated around for now, but will be an issue as this primary unfolds and if hes the nominee in the general.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:36 PM

I don’t know… A lot of stuff is being thrown Newt’s way in a short amount of time.

But, hey, we could always make haner happy – vote Ron Paul.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:39 PM

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:38 PM

I don’t think that comparison is a fair one.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:40 PM

My point was that many here are very willing to drop whatever conservative value they had to support their candidate du jour.

It’s not people who don’t agree with me don’t have core values, it’s that your core values are constantly changing in core importance depending on the candidate you are supporting that day. That’s by definition a lack of core values.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

You describe yourself to perfection…oh, the irony. Find a mirror.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:40 PM

I don’t think that comparison is a fair one.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:40 PM

Life’s not fair. Weasels are of different nuances.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:41 PM

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:39 PM

A little bit, not really, not yet. Whats fortunate for Gingrich is people are about to tune out for the Holidays and then its caucus and primary time. Thats when this starts to get exciting.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:41 PM

Now that Newt is the new hot candidate, everyone can’t wait to see Newt debate Obama.

Give me a break guys. The only constant has been fickleness.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:37 PM

Actually, one reason Newt is the hot candidate is because it became abundantly clear that he was running a campaign to
1) fight the msm

and

2) fight Obama.

And a lot of conservatives will be able to vote for a man with such a spotty past under those circumstances.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:42 PM

Give me a break guys. The only constant has been fickleness.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:37 PM

People are by nature fickle, and it is easy to persuade them of something, but difficult to keep them persuaded. (Niccolo Machiavelli)

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on December 3, 2011 at 11:42 PM

So the question is, why is Mitt reading the jokers? Are they jokers in his eyes?

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:19 PM

Who knows at this rate, Meat. My belief in Romney’s unflappable competence is diminishing after his endorsement for Brooks and his disastrous Bret Baier interview. It would appear he is not interested in winning the Republican nomination, or is instead too stupid to tell his consultants that reading a quote by Brooks is poisonous in the process of winning said nomination.

Punchenko on December 3, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:41 PM

Ok, I’m not going to argue with you but personally and professionally they could not be more different.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:43 PM

(The Proclaimers – “Get Ready,” playing in the background as this rolls out)

Apacalyps Christmas Blitz – Operation BACHMANN IA

During this month, we will do everything we can to help Michelle Bachmann get the victory in Iowa and help her defeat, God willing, Barack Hussein Obama in November 2012. So join with us and participate and together we can work to save America, Israel, and Western civilization. We’ll see you on the forum.

Apacalyps’ nation-wide Christmas primary blitz, Operation BACHMANN IA, is scheduled to run until Tuesday the 3rd January.

Countdown 5… 4… 3… 2… 1… 0!

“It’s on,” Apacalyps insists. “It’s on.”

Operation Iowa Goes to Bachmann has commenced.

apacalyps on December 3, 2011 at 11:44 PM

2) fight Obama.

And a lot of conservatives will be able to vote for a man with such a spotty past under those circumstances.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:42 PM

A man can be Jew or Christian, or he can be an Obama supporter, but he can’t legally be Jew or Christian, and be an Obama supporter … … except in the usual way: one of the two with the mouth, the other with the heart. The spirit of Judaism and Christianity proclaim the survival of Israel and the meaning of that has no longer been left to guesswork, but made tremendously definite … the Jew and the Christian must fight all who would commit or enable another genocide or enslavement of the Jews. That is the spirit and the law of Judaism and Christianity. Well, Obama has his beliefs and actions and it is a perfectly definite set, there is no vaguenesses about it. He commands that the Jew bow to the Muslim at every turn they do him hurt or threaten him and his children with death. Word it as softly as you please, the spirit of Obama is the spirit of the evil black shadowed specter of the beast of Austria insidiously billowing in and building and building to ever more horrific heights. The moment there is a question about a boundary line or a building or some Muslim somewhere complaining about any matter, see Obama rise, and see him spit at the Jew from the corner of his twisted mouth. The spirit of Obama being in its nature narcissistic and selfish, it is in the man’s line, it comes natural to him — he can live up to all of Jeremiah Wright’s teachings to the letter; but the spirit of Judaism and Christianity is entirely impossible to him.

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on December 3, 2011 at 11:44 PM

There are NO good candidates in this round.

The 3 AGs in tonight’s forum would all be better choices. They at least know what they stand for, the constitution.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:44 PM

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:33 PM

By not standing with the base now, when their support is paramount, he leaves them with the feeling that he will not fight for conservative beliefs later when the going gets tough. As unfair as this might seem, I get the feeling that Gov. Romney will feel obliged to compromise with Democrats on everything, even if the Republicans hold all of Congress and it will be because he agrees with them.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Who knows at this rate, Meat. My belief in Romney’s unflappable competence is diminishing after his endorsement for Brooks and his disastrous Bret Baier interview. It would appear he is not interested in winning the Republican nomination, or is instead too stupid to tell his consultants that reading a quote by Brooks is poisonous in the process of winning said nomination.

Punchenko on December 3, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Mitt Romney has been being groomed for the Presidency from the day he was born.

He has wanted to be president for a good 5+ years. You can’t tell me he wants to lose this thing.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Ok, I’m not going to argue with you but personally and professionally they could not be more different.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:43 PM

Indeed…they aim for glory, each in their own weasely way.

God help the land.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:46 PM

By not standing with the base now, when their support is paramount, he leaves them with the feeling that he will not fight for conservative beliefs later when the going gets tough. As unfair as this might seem, I get the feeling that Gov. Romney will feel obliged to compromise with Democrats on everything, even if the Republicans hold all of Congress and it will be because he agrees with them.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Let’s remember, the rationale for Romney snubbing the base is that he wants to win. So, it’s safe to assume that he wants to go two terms. Does that mean we have to wait 5 years for a (maybe) conservative leader?

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:48 PM

Cindy,

J.H.: Ha. Well, let’s cut to the chase here, David. How hard is it going to be for you to pull the lever for Barack Obama next week?

D.B.: Times policy forbids me from answering that question with any honesty. We’re not allowed to publicly endorse. How do you want me to dodge?

A couple more–Brooks is a bit hard to take.

From August 2009–this remembers the pants crease.
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-courtship

“Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says. “He sees his view of the world as a view that understands complexity and the organic nature of change.” Moreover, after the Bush years, Brooks seems relieved to have an intellectual in the White House again. “I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains. “Of recent presidents, Clinton could sort of talk like us, but Obama is definitely–you could see him as a New Republic writer. He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime….

His famous Obama sap column from September:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/opinion/brooks-obama-rejects-obamaism.html?_r=2&ref=davidbrooks

INC on December 3, 2011 at 11:49 PM

I have every confidence in the world that haner will make sure everyone is aware of Newt’s shortcomings.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:49 PM

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:45 PM

I don’t see how, on the issues, hes not standing with the base. I disagree about what you think he will do in office. Paul Ryan said he was impressed with the passion and commitment Romney demonstrated in his conversation with him about entitlement reform. But its not my job to convince you of this, its his and if he is the nominee he has a lot of work to do.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:49 PM

You describe yourself to perfection…oh, the irony. Find a mirror.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:40 PM

I haven’t changed any of my core values that I want to see in a president: conveying the importance of marriage as the basic social unit, commitment to enforcing illegal immigration laws (E-Verify), strong commitment to the defense of Israel and our allies, a stronger tone on Chinese trade imbalances and intellectual property theft, and an emphasis on lower taxes where possible.

This is why Gingrich, Cain and Perry were never on my list.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:50 PM

Ask yourself this. Which of the people on stage do you believe would risk their 2nd term as president by doing the right thing?

Mitt Romney?

Newt Gingrich?

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:50 PM

canopfor on December 3, 2011 at 11:01 PM

Thanks! I’m a long time lurker, necessary reading every day. Registered for two years. Just starting to post.

momoftxmomof3 on December 3, 2011 at 11:08 PM

momoftxmomof3:Glad,that you are here,your daughter does have
common sense,nice job on that!:)

canopfor on December 3, 2011 at 11:51 PM

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:49 PM

I believe that Rep. Ryan also complimented Mr. Cain and Gov. Perry’s plans. He wants to have the conversation, he doesn’t care who starts the ball rolling. I will vote for the nominee but I am still open for my primary vote.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:52 PM

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:50 PM

I think people are going to be bitterly disappointed if/when Gingrich is elected.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Ask yourself this. Which of the people on stage do you believe would risk their 2nd term as president by doing the right thing?

Mitt Romney?

Newt Gingrich?

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:50 PM

astonerii on December 3, 2011 at 11:53 PM

But, hey, we could always make haner happy – vote Ron Paul.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:39 PM

What? I would never vote for Ron Paul because of his foreign policy stance.

But I wouldn’t be surprised to see a Ron Paul third party run if Gingrich were to be the nominee.

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Let’s do this. It’s time.

apacalyps on December 3, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:52 PM

Your with the majority, many people in the party haven’t decided yet.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:54 PM

haner on December 3, 2011 at 11:50 PM

Why on Earth would Romney be on your list? No need to bother.

All adherents are nutty in this round. There is NO good candidate. Combine all and we still don’t have a good one. In the deepest need the land lacks a great leader. God help her.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:54 PM

He has wanted to be president for a good 5+ years. You can’t tell me he wants to lose this thing.

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:45 PM

I think it’s the latter, Meat. I don’t think Romney is as sharp as some are saying he is. The Bret Baier interview, the Brooks quote, and his other gaffes are raising a lot of red flags as to whether or not he would be the best chance for us to boot out Obama. I don’t think Romney has the stuff to win this thing.

Punchenko on December 3, 2011 at 11:54 PM

MeatHeadinCA on December 3, 2011 at 11:48 PM

I think it is safe to say the Gov. Romney’s conservative is not my conservative. But then again, I’m not sure any of them are a fit for me. I’m just going to do the best I can.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:55 PM

Punchenko on December 3, 2011 at 11:54 PM

The Brooks quote, despite the sin of being by Brooks, was excellent. The Bret Baier interview was a blip and only notable because he usually handles interviews so well. To argue he’s not as conservative as one would like is one thing, but to say the guy is “not sharp” is ridiculous.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:57 PM

INC on December 3, 2011 at 11:49 PM

The artful dodger. Tomorrow when I’m not so tired (and remember) I will try to find out what Mr. Brooks said about Sen. McCain. Maybe he was a Romney promoter in 2008.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:58 PM

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:54 PM

The problem is that Gov. Romney doesn’t appear to be interested in my vote.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Police move on #OccupyPortland to clear camp – Livestream
10 Minutes
Update

http://www.breakingnews.com/
==================================

Live Feed NOW
***************

http://www.livestream.com/occupyptown

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:01 AM

I don’t know what you want him to do to show hes interested. He is, believe me, lol, they guy wants votes.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2011 at 11:54 PM

support and vote only for the candidate leading in the polls. You may have to switch a few times but you’ll always be with the one on top. It’s a lot less stressful and it increases the odds you’ll win. Just try it for a few weeks. :)

a capella on December 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM

@PortlandPolice
Shamanski Park is now closed at SW Park amd Salmon. We are asking people to vacate the park and remove their belongings.
26 Mins ago
===============

http://www.breakingnews.com/

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:04 AM

I think people are going to be bitterly disappointed if/when Gingrich is elected.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:53 PM

Gingrich is the consummate arrogant statist/collectivist, well after Obama by heart, but before him by intellect, thinking everything is connected to, and dependent on, everything else and only he has the intellect to see just how. I think he sees himself to politics as Einstein was to physics, but I see him more as a mad scientist with such ideas as that for local community boards that would decide which illegal aliens to cast out and which to embrace, which frankly sounds like something he picked up while 3/4 asleep with the TV turned on to one of these Voting off the Island TV shows.

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on December 4, 2011 at 12:06 AM

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:04 AM

Dang, they are actually going to take their stuff with them?

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:07 AM

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:04 AM
Dang, they are actually going to take their stuff with them?

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:07 AM

Cindy Munford:Should of heard the profanity!:)

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM

Anyone watched Pushing Daisies before? I was watching on Netflix the other day, the short blonde character Olive Snook reminded me of Newt’s current wife.

Sorry just a tangent.

haner on December 4, 2011 at 12:11 AM

All #occupyportland tents taken down, but some – chanting – still refuse to leave after 50 police sweep park
5 Mins ago
Hot
update
===========

http://www.breakingnews.com/

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:11 AM

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM

I’ll try to whip up some sympathy for them.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Michelle Bachmann > Republican candidates

apacalyps on December 4, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Romney is the best chance the Republicans have. And I like Newt, but you don’t change Washington by sending in a Washington insider.

joncoltonis on December 4, 2011 at 12:13 AM

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on December 4, 2011 at 12:06 AM

He is also someone obsessed with status (refers to himself as a “celebrity”) and an ego that is out of control. He also tonight did not tell the truth about his past positions on cap and trade and even said that Pelosi ad was only a mistake because Pelosi was “toxic” and being with her obscured the message which he still agrees with. Whether people take the time to research him now or once hes the nominee or once he becomes President, they will in for a shock. I just hope he is figured out sooner rather then later.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:13 AM

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM

At least he isn’t last on my list.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:13 AM

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM
I’ll try to whip up some sympathy for them.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Cindy Munford:I have ZERO,there a bunch of Anarchist Idiots!:)

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:15 AM

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:13 AM

He’s not the last on mine either, but he’s close.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:15 AM

joncoltonis on December 4, 2011 at 12:13 AM

I don’t care who the Republican nominee is, considering the state of this country Obama is reelected we deserve everything we get. I will plan accordingly. I am dumbfounded that The Won is even considered a viable candidate for dogcatcher.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM

Live Stream: Occupy Portland

Same Feeed as above Breaking News Linky!
========================================

http://www.kgw.com/news/Live-Stream-Occupy-Portland-132965728.html

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:18 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/opinion/brooks-the-spirit-of-enterprise.html?_r=1&ref=davidbrooks

i didn’t watch the huck thing…but Brooks does say good things sometimes (who knows why he sounds so stupid the rest of the time)

but if Romney quoted from this column, about europe, then he’s right on the money…this is a great column (i didn’t see it posted on HA)

r keller on December 4, 2011 at 12:19 AM

r keller on December 4, 2011 at 12:19 AM

I posted it earlier and your exactly right.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:20 AM

The Brooks quote, despite the sin of being by Brooks, was excellent. The Bret Baier interview was a blip and only notable because he usually handles interviews so well. To argue he’s not as conservative as one would like is one thing, but to say the guy is “not sharp” is ridiculous.

nswider on December 3, 2011 at 11:57 PM

Brooks’ idea of “meritocracy” is not excellent, nswider. Brooks’ idea of “meritocracy” yields idiots like Jon Corzine and Barack Obama to lord over us simply because of their university GPA and credentials.

I also disagree that Mitt handles interviews well. Most of the time Mitt says something incredibly stupid or comes across as awkward and nervous. I have yet to see Mitt on Meet the Press or Fox News Sunday; and sadly, Mitt’s Bret Baier interview would suggest why I haven’t seen him on those programs.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 12:20 AM

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:15 AM

Was it obvious that I was talking about Gov. Romney? I can be less than clear. Despite all of Newt’s faults, he has a history of accomplishing some conservative goals. I’d like to see that done again and I think he will be worried enough about history and his legacy to accomplish good things.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Otay H/A,I’m gett’n info overload,I’ll post the Debate Video Replay later,Goodnight everyone—————————–:)

Nite Cindy Munford:)

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 12:20 AM

He’s been on both programs many times in the past. I also disagree with how your parsing that quote, the idea that you are awarded based on merit and not entitlement is a conservative idea and principle. We should be glad hes out there saying it when so many in this Country (like those ignorant protesters) feel entitled have things without working for them.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:25 AM

I don’t know what you want him to do to show hes interested. He is, believe me, lol, they guy wants votes.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:03 AM

I want Mitt Romney to close the door on running away from conservatives during the general election to pander to centrists. He needs to kiss the Tea Party ring. I want him to go in so deep that he has no choice but to stick with us. Here is a starter list of things Mitt can do to make me feel more comfortable with him:

1.) Fully endorse Paul Ryan’s budget. Host a town-hall forum with Chris Christie that will solely focused on the need for serious entitlement reform.

2.) Address a Tea Party rally. Give a speech titled “What the 10th Amendment Means to Me.”

3.) Call President Obama a “socialist” on each day of Christmas.

4.) Go hunting with Sarah Palin.

5.) Sign a pledge swearing that he will never, ever, ever quote David Brooks as president.

This would be a good start.

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:27 AM

canopfor on December 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Sweet dreams, I think I’m going to call it a day myself.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:27 AM

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM

Yes I knew you were talking about Romney.

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:28 AM

Brooks’ idea of “meritocracy” is not excellent, nswider. Brooks’ idea of “meritocracy” yields idiots like Jon Corzine and Barack Obama to lord over us simply because of their university GPA and credentials.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 12:20 AM

We don’t even know what BHO’s GPA was.

Meritocracy is like democracy and capitalism. It’s a mediocre and imperfect system, until you compare it to cronyism and nepotism, and that’s exactly what you would have without meritocracy.

haner on December 4, 2011 at 12:29 AM

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:27 AM

Well he has already endorsed the Ryan budget and addressed the Tea Party, but I think the hunting with Palin thing is a good idea. How funny would that be if that happened? lol

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:30 AM

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:27 AM

LOL! Can the hunt be televised?

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:30 AM

LOL! Can the hunt be televised?

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:30 AM

Nope, just Sarah and Mitt in the Alaskan wilderness surviving off the land for a week. She’ll deliver the verdict on Mitt Romney when they return. I’d like to see it on live TV too, but its better this way.

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Why Apacalyps endorses Michele Bachmann

When people ask me what do we do after Mike Huckabee’s very unfortunate decision not to run for President in 2012, next year, which was a big dissapointment and where do we go from here because that certainly was a big dissapointment. I’ll tell you the truth. There is only one candidate running other than Huckabee that I actually like and that candidate is Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. I happen to like Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. I didn’t want her (chuckles) I didn’t want her to run when Huckabee was gonna run. I thought if Huckabee was gonna run she would have taken votes away from Huckabee, but now that Huckabee is out of the race she’s the only one that’s running now that I like. She’s the only one that I like.

apacalyps on December 4, 2011 at 12:41 AM

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:37 AM

Okay, your goals, your rules.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Good night everyone, sleep tight!!

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 12:44 AM

He’s been on both programs many times in the past. I also disagree with how your parsing that quote…

nswider on December 4, 2011 at 12:25 AM

There wasn’t any parsing of the quote. Romney admires David Brooks and Brooks’ idea of a “meritocracy” — the same “meritocracy” that gave us Obama, Corzine, and the Clintons.

Personally, I have no desire to be governed by an elite clique of technocrats solely based on university GPA, pants crease, and a fetish for shallow credentialism. There is nothing conservative about the society Brooks and his cohorts wish to build. With that said, I do want to be governed by those with a range of experiences, triumphs and pitfalls — not just those with a Harvard Law degree and summa cum laude scrawled on their diploma.

I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

-William F. Buckley Jr.

Buckley knew the real conservative position. :-)

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 12:54 AM

Why Apacalyps endorses Michele Bachmann

apacalyps on December 4, 2011 at 12:41 AM

Michelle Bachmann picking up the endorsement of the apocalypse comes as no surprise, a lot of people here have suspected her of being one of its four stalking horses for awhile now.

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:55 AM

O/T

To anyone else who is still awake, it looks like riot police are about to confront Occupy Portland: http://www.livestream.com/occupyptown

Lawdawg86 on December 4, 2011 at 12:59 AM

can’t speak for others but there seems to be a running theme of Gov. Romney courting Independents and what I will rudely refer to as the squishy middle, of which Mr. Brooks is a proud member of. That is probably an acceptable game plan (I disagree) for the general but for the Republican nomination it is just plain stupid. The country is center right, Republicans are right. Far from securing the base, he seems to ignore them. I don’t understand the strategy.

Cindy Munford on December 3, 2011 at 11:28 PM


Mitt’s stretegy is to ignore conservatives once he gets beyond the primaries as they will then have no place else to go. Until then he’s running out the clock with a prevent defense. Of course, the only thing a prevent defense does is prevent you from winning.

Right now, he’s not so much ignoring conservatives as keeping his option open to move toward the center after the primaries are over. He’s got one more set of policies changes ahead of him now, if he decides to attack Romneycare to win the primaries, he’ll have TWO sets of flip-flop charges to look forward too. (He’ll be charged with flip-flopping if he attacks Romneycare to win the primaries and again when he “nuances” RomneyCare/ObamaCare after the nomination.) This way he cuts out one whole set of attacks.

Fred 2 on December 4, 2011 at 1:03 AM

You know what’s really great? TSA strip-searching an 85-year-old woman.

NUKE THE TSA.

John the Libertarian on December 4, 2011 at 1:04 AM

Part 2 – Why Apacalyps endorsed Michele Bachmann

She’s also a Bible-believing Christian. Obviously, I prefer a biblical Christian. Obviously, I’m gonna prefer a candidate like that. She’s a Christian who supports Israel. She has made statements on Israel that are very strong statements. She has said that she loves the Jewish people. She has said that she loves the state of Israel and the Jewish people and the land of Israel and that this is the land of God. She has said that America will be destroyed if America does not support Israel. She said that America will not exist if America does not support Israel. I mean, that’s the type of statements she’s been making and she got tremendous ridicule. I mean, you know, when people say things like that the media and all the other anti-Israel, anti-Bible, fifth collumnist garbage, start saying, “Oh, that’s ridiculous. Oh, how crazy. Oh, that’s crazy!” I mean, you know, I certainly don’t have to tell all of you decent Americans about the anti-religious, anti-Bible, uh, criminals that run the news media and the Establishment in this country, and, she, despite all the ridicule, she stood firm and she said NO we must support Israel and we must support the Jews and she loves the Jews! She even said she considers herself to be Jewish because of her roots – because those are the roots of Christianity. OK, she’s not Jewish. I mean, you know, but that statement shows her frame of mind at least. It shows her frame of mind. It shows that she has a frame of mind that is pro-Jewish and pro-Israel and I think she means it. I think she’s sincere. I think she really believes in God and really believes in the Bible and she really believes that America’s future will be decided by what America does in regards to Israel. I really think she understands that from the Bible. So I like her. I like Michele Bachmann, and, not only that, on other issues she has a reasonably conservative record. She’s definitely better than the other ones. So, if she was elected President I would be delighted. I would be happy if she was elected President. I mean, to me she is almost as good as Huckabee if she was elected President.

apacalyps on December 4, 2011 at 1:05 AM

No bible-thumpers.

John the Libertarian on December 4, 2011 at 1:08 AM

Part 3 – Why Apacalyps endorsed Michele Bachmann

Because Bachmann can win. She is electable. She raises a lot of money. She’s developed a good fundraising system and she has been able to raise money which Huckabee was not able to do. Financially, I mean, money wise she actually is stronger than Huckabee. But the problem is because she’s a woman there’s discrimination and people ridicule her. They compare her to Sarah Palin, which, btw, is not a fair comparison. Sarah Palin is not ready to be President. Michele Bachmann I think is. Michele Bachmann, I think is ready to be President. She was a tax attorney. She was a teacher. I mean, she did all types of things in her background. She was very involved in her community and in the educational process and all types of things, and, of course, a Congresswoman for 6 years and she was a State legislature before that. She certainly has more experience, or at least as much experience as that phony in the White House Barack Hussein Osama. So, you know, she certainly, I mean, I think she has what it takes.

apacalyps on December 4, 2011 at 1:13 AM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7 8