Open thread: Iowageddon; Update: Could Perry miss South Carolina debate? Update: Bachmann not dropping out; Update: Perry to “reassess” campaign; Update: McCain to endorse Romney tomorrow; Update: Romney wins — by eight votes

posted at 7:16 pm on January 3, 2012 by Allahpundit

The big huddle begins promptly at 8 p.m. ET with results to follow by 10, hopefully. We’ll get “entrance poll” results at some point too, so don’t wander off. I’m less interested tonight in who wins the caucuses, actually, than who wins the death struggle between Perry and Gingrich to become the “electable” conservative Not Romney in South Carolina. (Why can’t Santorum be the electable conservative Not Romney again?) The loser of that arm-wrestling match is all but done, as is Bachmann. Perry should beat Newt: He’s spent way more in the state than Gingrich has and is set to make an impressive show of organizational muscle by turning out lots of precinct captains. Some of his fans have been insisting on Twitter, in fact, that he’s going to surprise Paul or Santorum and end up finishing third. (Perry himself is confident enough that he’s begun buying airtime in SC.) I’m skeptical, but if that happens, it’ll be big news tomorrow as a bona fide election-night surprise.

And really, that’s all we’re watching for tonight: Surprises. If, as expected, the top three are Romney, Paul, and Santorum then it doesn’t much matter in which order they finish. As long as Romney’s within a few points of first place, he’ll probably go on to steamroll everyone in New Hampshire. If he finishes a distant second or third, well, that’s a surprise and that’ll be the storyline for the next week. If Perry or Gingrich breaks into the top three, that’s a surprise and another major storyline ahead of South Carolina. Problem is, I don’t see how either of them does that. Santorum’s the social con who’s been surging and nothing’s happened in the past 48 hours that might change that. Paul’s taken damage from the coverage of his newsletters so he’s more likely to underperform, but it’s hard to imagine his supporters would come this far to let him down now. Figure he’s got a solid 12-15 percent who are willing to turn out for him even in a Category Five hurricane; he’s also got a terrific organization bent on turning out another 10-12 percent of disaffected Democrats, curious independents, and none-of-the-above Republican protest voters. I can’t believe he won’t crack 20 percent, and I also can’t believe that Perry will. My prediction: Santorum 27, Romney 24, Paul 21, Perry 13, Gingrich 10, Bachmann 5.

Here’s your dandy Hot Air/Townhall Twitter widget. I’ll be updating this post too with whatever tea leaves I can scrounge up on the wires, so don’t be stingy with the refresh button. To follow the results, I recommend two interactive state maps: One at the Des Moines Register and the other at Google. Confused about which counties matter and why? No worries, we’ve got cheat sheets for that too. Try the Iowa Republican and Politico. WaPo also has an interesting scorecard that attempts to set county-by-county goals for Romney based on his 2008 showing. That might be useful at a glance later to gauge whether he’s over- or underperforming.

Odds of anything happening tonight that resembles an encouraging outcome: Nearly zero. Stand by for updates, needless to say.

Update: Howard Fineman sums up Romney’s strategy this way: “Mitt showing off his savage machinery to GOPers as a reason to vote for him: Don’t vote for me, vote for the weaponry I will use on Obama.”

Update: Here’s Chris Matthews, whose candidate of choice will spend upwards of a billion dollars next year, comparing Romney’s attack ads against Gingrich to … the bombing of Dresden. Click the image to watch.

Update: Patrick Ishmael sends along the results of today’s HA reader survey. After roughly 3,000 responses: Perry 27.38% Gingrich 22.88% Romney 18.72% Santorum 17.46% Paul 6.58% Bachmann 4.94%.

Update: Ten minutes until caucus time and a friend points out that Romney’s odds on InTrade of winning Iowa have dropped to a shade above 40 percent. He was above 50 percent earlier today. Hmmmm.

Update: Bad news for Perry fans: According to the entrance poll, it is indeed a three-way race between Romney, Santorum, and Ron Paul.

Update: Food for thought: If you’re hoping for a brokered convention, what’s the optimal result tonight? Probably Santorum, Paul, and Romney in that order, no? Paul will fight on no matter what, but Santorum needs major encouragement to make it and keep it a three-way race.

Update: Take a look at what’ll be running in New Hampshire’s most influential paper tomorrow.

Update: The entrance poll has it Paul 24, Romney 24, Santorum 18, but Huckabee ended up far outperforming his entrance-poll numbers on caucus night 2008. More from the Hill:

As expected, Paul polled best with younger voters, garnering more than half of the support of voters under 29 and a plurality of those aged 30-44. Romney, meanwhile, led the field among voters over 45.

Paul also led with nearly four-in-ten voters who had never before attended a GOP caucus, while Romney earned the vote of nearly three-in-ten previous caucusgoers. The 71 percent of those surveyed who called themselves Republicans broke more for Romney than any other candidate, while almost half of self-described Independent voters went for Paul.

Santorum, meanwhile, earned more than a quarter of those who self-identified as very conservative, and led among voters who said they “strongly support” the Tea Party. Moderates and liberals were most likely to vote for Paul.

According to Zach Wolf of ABC, fully six in 10 Ron Paul supporters don’t identify as Republican. He’s apparently cleaning up among independents, as expected — and they’re turning out in higher than usual numbers.

Update: Hearing on Twitter that Fox News expects Bachmann, the Ames straw poll winner, to finish last based on the entrance poll. That’s the end of her campaign, and probably the end of Ames being taken even remotely seriously.

Update: It’s early but still interesting: As of 8:50 ET, the Google map I linked above shows Paul at 24 percent, Santorum at 24 percent, and Romney at 22 percent, all of which is in line with entrance polls. Surprisingly, though, Newt is fourth with 13 percent; Perry trails with 10. Here’s Perry’s precinct speech tonight, which was good on the merits but not good enough to push him into the top tier.

Update: According to Jake Tapper, the Paul campaign is taunting Huntsman:

@RonPaul tweeted then deleted 2 Huntsman “we found your one Iowa voter, he’s in Linn precinct 5 you might want to call him and say thanks”

Update: Says Chuck Todd, “Every model our elex team has indicates as little as .3% separates 1st and 3rd.” You know who this benefits?

Update: Come and get it: CNN has published full crosstabs for the Iowa entrance poll.

Update: If you’d rather follow statewide totals instead of county-by-county, CBS has you covered. As of this writing, with 270 precincts reporting, Paul leads Romney by roughly 120 votes.

Update: As of 9:28, with 433 precincts reporting, here’s the CBS vote count. No joke:

Rick Santorum 6,067
Mitt Romney 6,060
Ron Paul 6,018

The margin between first and third is 49 votes. Remind me again: Now that we know who the top three will be and that it’ll be very close, what does it matter what the order is? If Romney finishes third, that’ll be good enough for a tepid “is Romney underperforming?” narrative this week, but it does nothing to answer the question of who’s supposed to emerge from the field and beat him in the long slog to the convention.

Update: At 9:39 ET, with almost a third of all precincts reporting, Gingrich leads Perry by slightly more than a thousand votes. That doesn’t sound like much in the abstract, but remember that this is a small pool of voters; right now, Romney leads with a little over 7,800 votes total. Starting to look like Newt will be fourth place, which means Perry’s on life support.

Update: Nate Silver knows who this benefits — and it isn’t necessarily Romney:

In particular, Mr. Huntsman might be hoping for a highly ambiguous finish, especially an effective three-way tie as is projected by the current polling, and which would leave no candidate with demonstrable momentum. That would free up news bandwidth for him in New Hampshire, where his polling is stronger but where he will have to compete with several other candidates for attention. The less news coming out of Iowa, the more time the news media will have to speculate about whether it is finally Mr. Huntsman’s turn to surge.

Update: An actual tweet from Buddy Roemer: “Hermain Cain is currently beating me in Iowa. #seriously”

Update: Lefty Ari Melber: “THIS is the key data: It’s not a 3-way race among self-identified Republicans: 28% for Santorum, 27% for Romney, 14% for Paul & Gingrich”

Update: Someone on Twitter points out that Romney’s on pace at the moment to do slightly worse in Iowa than he did in 2008. In a way, that’s apples and oranges — he invested more time and money in the state then versus now. But still: 23 percent. The 23 percent juggernaut. Says Dan McLaughlin, “Just imagine if anyone had run negative TV ads vs him.”

Update: At 10:05 ET, things are starting to shake out. Romney and Santorum are neck and neck with just 110 or so votes separating them, but Paul has slipped to third and fallen more than a thousand votes behind. Gingrich continues to put distance between himself and Perry, too. He now leads by 1,600 votes.

Update: With almost half the precincts reporting, Newt’s lead over Perry has opened up to more than 1,700 votes. Perry’s total number of votes right now is 5,671, so realistically he’s not going to catch Gingrich. What does a fifth-place finish mean for South Carolina? Maybe this:

To participate in the CNN/Southern Republican Leadership Conference debate January 19th, two days before the South Carolina primary, a candidate must place in the top four in Iowa or New Hampshire. A candidate can also qualify for the debate by averaging seven percent support in three polls conducted nationally or in South Carolina by certain approved media and polling organizations.

Either Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, it appears, will receive the debate invitation that comes with a fourth place finish in Iowa. With 31 percent of precincts reporting, Newt Gingrich is in fourth place (13 percent) and Perry is in fifth place with ten percent support. (Romney, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul are in a dead heat for first with approximately 23 percent support each).

Perry was right at seven percent in the last Gallup poll of South Carolina. Will he stay there in the next two polls after tonight?

Update: At shortly before 10:30 ET, Fox News says Perry will finish fifth behind Gingrich. No surprise per my last update. He spent $6 million in the state for this; one of the subplots of the coming week will be whether he should drop out and endorse Santorum or Gingrich in order to try to stop Romney.

Update: And right on cue, here’s prominent Iowa social con Bob Vander Plaats (who endorsed Santorum) calling for the rest of the field to consolidate:

Iowa conservative leader Bob Vander Plaats called on Rep. Michele Bachmann to drop out of the Republican race and for Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry to reassess their campaigns following expected lackluster performances in the Iowa Caucuses…

“The worst thing that can happen to Mitt Romney is to run head to head against Rick Santorum,” he said. “He wants to have a multiple candidate field, so I think some of these candidates — they need to reassess where they are at tonight.”

“I think Michele Bachmann has to definitely [drop out],” he added.

Update: A bit of drama towards the end of this boring, depressing horse race: Romney’s come back to take the lead from Santorum by nearly 500 votes with roughly 75 percent of precincts reporting. Paul is now 3,000 votes off the pace and will almost certainly finish third.

Update: See saw: Another batch of votes came in just as I updated. Santorum has surged back ahead with 87.5 percent reporting and now leads by … 45 votes. The spin tomorrow, I assume, will be that Santorum’s made it a race now by showing he can challenge Romney, but I don’t get that. Of course he can challenge Romney in Iowa: It’s tailor-made for him with its heavy evangelical presence and he’s spent months there doing retail politics. Like Ben Smith says, the deeper lesson is that if Santorum can’t even beat a weak frontrunner like Mitt here, where can he beat him?

Update: This’ll get lost in the shuffle tomorrow, but do note that Ron Paul felt confident enough about his position this weekend to predict a first or second place finish. Quote: “I doubt if I’ll come in third or fourth.”

Update: If you can believe it, with 1,629 of 1,774 precincts reporting, the spread between Romney and Santorum is 13 votes.

Update: Bad news for the Not Romney contingent: Bachmann says in her concession speech that she’s going to press on, inexplicably, guaranteeing that the conservative vote splits a bit further in South Carolina.

Update: The first real news of the evening: Perry says in his concession speech that he’s headed back to Texas to “reassess” whether there’s a path to the nomination for him. He was scheduled to go to South Carolina tomorrow to start campaigning, so this is a genuine change of plans. Now that he’s signaled to his donors that he’s wavering, it’s hard to believe he’ll end up pressing ahead. Sounds like it’s over.

Update: Are you ready for the game-changing Maverick endorsement?

Arizona Senator John McCain, his party’s 2008 nominee, will endorse Mitt Romney in New Hampshire tomorrow, a well-placed former McCain aide told BuzzFeed Tuesday.

Update: No foolin’: With 1,749 of 1,774 precincts reporting, Santorum leads with 29,662 votes to Romney’s 29,657. A five-vote margin.

Update: It’s 1:37 ET and we’re waiting on two precincts. I’m taking a screenshot of this for posterity:

The margin is precisely one vote.

Update: As I write this, it’s exactly 2:00 ET and Santorum has a four-vote lead with just one precinct left. But Jan Crawford of CBS has a scoop:

Romney team says he won by 14 votes. Just talked to state party officials.

Philip Klein of the Examiner said earlier on Twitter that this result is less “too close to call” than “too close to care” since the storyline for the next week about Santorum’s surge is already set regardless of who actually wins. True enough. Until we see a New Hampshire poll showing Romney still comfortably ahead, the media buzz for the next few days will be about whether Romney has a glass jaw.

Update: I missed it on Fox but apparently Karl Rove is also hearing that Romney won by 14 votes and that both his camp and Santorum’s camp agree on the numbers. Every last candidate tonight, including Herman Cain and Buddy Roemer, got more votes than the final margin, so every one of them was technically in a position to play kingmaker. If Cain had stuck around and competed in the the caucuses, even with a cloud of suspicion hanging over him due to the harassment charges, he probably would have done well enough to push Santorum back several points, possibly even past Paul.

Update: At 2:34 ET, we finally have an official result. Romney 30,015; Santorum 30,007. Out of more than 122,000 votes cast, just eight separate first and second place. So that’s Iowa; the next big moment will come late tomorrow or Thursday when we get our first post-caucus polls of New Hampshire to see if Santorum, Paul, or even Huntsman are getting some sort of bounce or whether Romney’s got things in hand and we can all start to focus on South Carolina. A report floated by on Twitter a few hours ago that Santorum’s already reached out to Rick Perry. Huntsman, who’s pals with Perry, will no doubt reach out too. He fared badly tonight, but his endorsement would still mean something to social cons in SC or to conservative voters nationwide who might otherwise be leery of giving Huntsman a second look. We’ll see.



Related Posts:

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 31 32 33 34

Bishop on January 4, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Wow, Bish, I really feel for ya…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Thanks for clearing that up, Steve…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Not a problem.

Welcome back to the party. We missed you.

Steve Eggleston on January 4, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Ugh.

I once talked to ol’ Betty at the state fair, she’s got that weird dancing light in the back of her eyes that makes you take a step back when you look into them.

Bishop on January 4, 2012 at 9:10 AM

As I said before- Asperger’s Syndrome runs in my family.

There is currently no way to test for autism prior to birth-but let’s say there was…and the pre-born baby was diagnosed in the womb with autism.
Would that child-in your eyes-be deserving of life-or would you decide to murder it because it would be inconvenient and a lot of work and might get picked on in school?
Does someone like me have the right to live…or is my question just ‘drivel’.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 4, 2012 at 8:58 AM

can we move on. I dont want to be a champion of this “cause”. its not something i care deeply about. I already hurted people that actually have childreen with disabilities.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Not a problem.

Welcome back to the party. We missed you.

Steve Eggleston on January 4, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Thanks, glad to be back…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 9:11 AM

If Romney wins this thing, maybe we could still take advantage of it. Romney has no spine. Let’s face facts. His positions have changed so many times it is ridiculous. Debbie Wasaman Schultz was on Fox this morning pointing that out to Gretchen so you know it is in jugears’ bag of tricks to use in the general.

If we elect enough conservative members to the congress, I think we could push him to do the right things when it comes to the serious issues. I don’t have faith in Romney to do it on his own but we might be able to persuade him via congress.

JAGonzo on January 4, 2012 at 9:11 AM

Here we go with the hissy fit directed at conservatives who won’t vote for a “reasonable, electable” candidate like McCain…or Romney.

Does it ever enter your head that the GOP establishment and their sycophantic voters are corrupt big-government types with no principles who have more in common with Democrats than the authentic conservatives they pander to with their lip service?

They have contempt for us. That’s been obvious for awhile now. Keep rewarding them with your votes, and they’ll keep pushing Doles, McCains, and Romneys on us forever.

DRayRaven on January 4, 2012 at 8:03 AM

Do I think the GOP establishment is corrupt? No. Unprincipled? Absolutly.

I consider conservative voters to be the least sycophantic of the electorate.

On your average news day, you can pick pretty much any liberal stance on any issue and see why it is toxic to America and her Constitution.

I do, however, believe the GOP establishment has contempt for us.

My only answer for this treatment is to leave the GOP and register as an Ind. Then at least they can’t feel they have my vote carte blanche. Also, by donating straight to the candidate of my choice, I cut out the establishment all together.

Mudhog on January 4, 2012 at 9:12 AM

1. Brilliant if you want our buffer to be Seattle, San Diego, Miami, Portland Maine, etc. Not so wise if you don’t want to cede real estate to potential threats.

2. Maybe they can safeguard world commerce at all those chokepoints on the Mississippi River from the vast piracy problem in that part of the world.

anuts on January 4, 2012 at 1:28 AM

No, our buffer is our Navy and Air Force. And how would we be ceding real estate that isn’t ours? Maybe you’d care to engage in a discussion instead of making silly comments that don’t indicate you grasp he issue?

Dante on January 4, 2012 at 9:13 AM

If the DFL has its way, the pus will be exploded on top of you.

Steve Eggleston on January 4, 2012 at 9:03 AM

And on that happy note, I’m going to go grab a bite to eat.

RINO in Name Only on January 4, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Bottom line: there are no viable candidates to the right of Romney. This will still be the case down the road. Romney will be our nominee.

writeblock on January 4, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Not a Romney supporter at all, but you gotta marvel at the guy for coming through and winning this, 8 votes or not (for now). His new name is Teflon Rom.

RepubChica on January 4, 2012 at 8:19 AM

He got 25% and ran against 5 others who split the conservative vote.

Shain1611 on January 4, 2012 at 9:15 AM

And on that happy note, I’m going to go grab a bite to eat.

RINO in Name Only on January 4, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Enjoy your breakfast :-)

Steve Eggleston on January 4, 2012 at 9:16 AM

I guess those threatening to stay home forget about the down ticket races. We’re going to need to retake the Senate and hold on to the House, no matter who wins the presidential race.

Flora Duh on January 4, 2012 at 8:20 AM

What we need to do is clean out all the Rhinos’ and replace them with true conservatives who will undo everything Obama has done and even some of things Bush did.

Shain1611 on January 4, 2012 at 9:21 AM

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:10 AM

No. Let’s not move on.
You opened this can of worms with your vile comments yesterday about how unworthy of life pre-born Downs babies were.
Now-answer my question.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 4, 2012 at 9:22 AM

So what’s shakin’ in your area?

Bishop on January 4, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Nada. My jersey suburb is eerily quiet this morning. Not even the dogs are barking. We need a fine man from Minnesota to get this party started.

Hey, ALT. Happy New Year, amiga.

RepubChica on January 4, 2012 at 9:23 AM

People have got to come to terms with Romney being the nominee. The only thing that matters in this cycle is defeating Obama, and defeating him by as large a margin as possible. Larger margin = less Democrat opposition to the future policies of a Republican administration.

None of the conservatives left in the field would defeat Obama by as large of a margin as Romney could. Not saying it is a certainty, but it is the best bet right now. When it comes to ideology – continue supporting your people for Congress. Work on getting a good base of conservatives installed there. It will be far more important in the long run.

The next president is going to be a target for all the upcoming union rage and welfare recipient rage.. it’d be easier for the movement to defend itself if hes viewed as a moderate.

tflst5 on January 4, 2012 at 9:28 AM

He got 25% and ran against 5 others who split the conservative vote.

Shain1611 on January 4, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Oh, I know. And he still managed to scrape by that dastardly suit. Here’s the victory message his camp just put out.

RepubChica on January 4, 2012 at 9:30 AM

People have got to come to terms with Romney McCain being the nominee. The only thing that matters in this cycle is defeating Obama, and defeating him by as large a margin as possible. Larger margin = less Democrat opposition to the future policies of a Republican administration.

None of the conservatives left in the field would defeat Obama by as large of a margin as Romney McCain could. Not saying it is a certainty, but it is the best bet right now. When it comes to ideology – continue supporting your people for Congress. Work on getting a good base of conservatives installed there. It will be far more important in the long run.

The next president is going to be a target for all the upcoming union rage and welfare recipient rage.. it’d be easier for the movement to defend itself if hes viewed as a moderate.

tflst5 on January 4, 2012 2008 at 9:28 AM

ITguy on January 4, 2012 at 9:36 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 4, 2012 at 9:22 AM

i would say i opened a can of rabid prolifers.
no, let it go.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 AM

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Hitler also believed that certain people-starting with the disabled-were unworthy of life.
To paraphrase Mother Teresa: It’s a tragedy that any child should have to die so that you can live as you wish.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 4, 2012 at 9:43 AM

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 AM

How shocking. On a right of center blog? Who would have thought?

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Here’s the victory message his camp just put out.

RepubChica on January 4, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Heh!

Yesterday, when I saw the HA headline of “White House to Boehner: Ditch your caucus and pass some bills with Dem help”, I thought of the following exchange:

Barack Obama: “You are beaten. It is useless to resist. Don’t let yourself be destroyed as ‘W’ did.”

There is no escape. Don’t make me destroy you… John, you do not yet realize your importance. You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the planet.

John Boehner: “I’ll never join you!

Barack Obama: “If you only knew the power of the dark side. ‘W’ never told you what happened to your father.

John Boehner: “He told me enough! He told me you killed him.

Barack Obama: “No. I am your father. Who’s your Daddy?

ITguy on January 4, 2012 at 9:44 AM

McCain endorsing Romney… That’s the kiss of death.

jeffn21 on January 4, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 9:44 AM

+1

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 9:53 AM

So how irrelevant is Ames now? The winner of Iowa didn’t bother competing, and the winner of Ames is probably withdrawing.

amazingmets on January 4, 2012 at 9:54 AM

How shocking. On a right of center blog? Who would have thought?

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 9:44 AM

I was not expecting such intensity.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:57 AM

I was not expecting such intensity.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:57 AM

It’s the difference between having an opinion concerning the sanctity of life and actually valuing it,and the difference between believing in a standard of values, ethics, and morality, and believing that it’s all relative.

kingsjester on January 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I was not expecting such intensity.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Why not? Yesterday when you made these post as well, you were told by SEVERAL posters that they had down-syndrome children, siblings or knew someone who had it. Wouldn’t you be intense if some anonymous person said that someone you love should have been killed in the womb?

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 10:05 AM

“Of course he can challenge Romney in Iowa: It’s tailor-made for him with its heavy evangelical presence and he’s spent months there doing retail politics. Like Ben Smith says, the deeper lesson is that if Santorum can’t even beat a weak frontrunner like Mitt here, where can he beat him?”

I really have to disagree with this. My take is here: http://wannabeanglican.blogspot.com/2012/01/more-poormouthing-of-santorum.html

After months of said retail politics, Santorum was still in Huntsman and Bachman territory in the polls nationwide and in Iowa. That he so caught fire the past two weeks is quite a phenomenon and accomplishment . . . and shows how earnestly most Republicans do not want Romney. To write it all off as just Iowa is mistaken at best. With indications that Bachman and perhaps Perry are dropping out soon, expect conservatives now to flock to Santorum to stop Romney.

The real lesson is the establishment Romney machine can be beat . . . and Santorum may be the man to pull it off.

WannabeAnglican on January 4, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Obama’s dream of a weak Paul or Newt or Perry candidate to beat like a cheap throw rug evaporates.

Look for an unhappy Barry to come out flailing.

profitsbeard on January 4, 2012 at 10:10 AM

I was not expecting such intensity.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Not sure why defense of human life would surprise you with its intensity.

The Schaef on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 AM

RINO in Name Only on January 4, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Goldwater created Reagan and what became the Reagan wing of the party.

You could argue that Goldwater led in the short term to Nixon and we don’t have the luxury of time considering the urgency of the current crises, but I would argue that there is no Nixon hanging around and the issues are far different. Nixon couldn’t even dream of a GOP House or Senate.

Not only is there no Nixon in the wings, there is an already functioning Reagan wing that does need time to grow. I’ve looked at the map a number of different ways and as of today I can’t see any of the current candidates beating Obama… but a lousy moderate pretending to be a conservative, suppressing the conservative vote, will not portend well for 2016. A true conservative exciting the base, igniting the Senate and House races would set up 2016 much better.

mankai on January 4, 2012 at 10:13 AM

kingsjester on January 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I just cannot respond to her/him/it, I am too livid and outraged…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 10:14 AM

kingsjester on January 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 10:05 AM

The Schaef on January 4, 2012 at 10:11 AM

i am moving on.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 10:25 AM

i already answered this this argument in the other thread. lets move on.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:04 AM

It is pretty hard to top the advocation for the killing of a disabled human being, isn’t it?
BTW-moving on? It’s pretty hard to actually want to respond to any other things you have to say here on HA with such ‘morals’ as you have displayed.

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 10:29 AM

I stayed up last night and listened to the last two speeches, and hoorah for Santorum. I was one of those who has been impressed with him from the start but believed I was alone. When I voted in the various polls, I always put him as a second choice after Newt who would make a great President and actually be able to change Washington because he really does know where the bodies are buried.

Not that anyone asked, but I’ll share my assessment of the candidates:

Michelle Bachman: I found her high turn-over in staff on the Hill very problemmatic. My experience was that kind of problem is directly attributable to the Member and not in a good way. If it was somehow the staff, then Michelle simply wasn’t very good at judging character and ability of employees. Not good for a President. And I got very irritated with her claiming SHE lead me to Washington, D.C. for a Tea Party rally. I went because I was furious and scared over the $800 billion stimulous, the 20% increase in the federal budget and Obamacare. I had no “leader”. I led myself. I met no one else who came to those rallies because of any “leader” including Michelle.

Huntsman: Arrogant. The self-satisfied smile and declarative statements about his superior grasp of “science” while hawking a book that claims American Indians are really Jews who traveled to the Americas in 600 BC and got “dark” skin because they were “cursed” make Scientology look reasonable.

Rick Perry: I don’t dislike him even though he thinks I’m heartless because I’m very tired of spending $10,000 a year to educate illegal alien children, which means legal alien children and American children do without. I live in Maryland where one of the richest counties in the country can’t fill its potholes because it’s welcomed the illegals Virginia is busy ejecting. Crime has risen and our Governor is now going to tax us for watching TV and fixing our car.

Ron Paul: He’s so far right, he’s gone left, and I have a problem with ANY candidate’s supporters who conduct themselves like fascists. That worries me. A lot. And his foreign policy? He supports another Jewish genocide barely one generation after the first? (and don’t give me that “they can go it alone”. Look at a map and count the hordes in the neighboring countries) And he thinks Iran ought to get the bomb but will, of course, defend us after Iran takes out New York or Washington with a nuke. And those news letters? I find it as difficult to believe he didn’t have a clue what he was hawking as to believe Obama didn’t know a single thing about Reverend Wright’s rhetoric.

Newt Gingrich: He knows Washington; he knows the intricacies of legislation and where the law needs changing and every trick Harry and Nancy can pull. He understands the sweep of history and can pick out the important, central themes in a debate and an issue and knows a red herring when he hears one and the importance of defining terms in a debate. THIS IS important not just in debates but in actually governing. President Slogan himself has to understand that a pretty speech is no substitute for real smarts and real ability and experience. Remember how Harry and Nancy and Barrack successfully attacked Republicans for holding up a CR because they wanted to deny women health care (Planned Parenthood)? Why didn’t Republicans reply, “Democrats want to shut down the federal government to protect a group who was founded by a eugenisist who wanted to eliminate undesireable races?” or “Democrats want seniors to eat cat food so girls who don’t use birth control can kill their accidents?”

Mitt Romney: See my comments about Huntsman and science. And you people had better believe the Democrats have a whole arsenal of information. Even the spectre of opening the can of worms known as “black liberation theology” isn’t going to stop the Democrats who are just fine with lies and double speak and who will simply revert to their racist meme and refuse to report any salient information. It’s not Romneycare that Obama can eviserate him with—I mean how’s that argument going to go? “Romney isn’t socialist enough. Reelect me.” And it’s not Bain Capitol. It’s going to be exactly like “Santorum is CRAZY…he played with a dead baby”.

Oh, and can you imagine a President who won’t even be able to UNDERSTAND an Irish Priest drinking joke? There will be no wine, no beer summits and no coffee at the White House and a lot of sanctimony about how not indulging makes Romney morally superior.

Santorum: I like him. He is principled; like Newt, he understands Washington and how the Congress works and he has no baggage either personal or arrogant. He debates very well when given the chance. He tells the truth, AND like Marco Rubio, he understands WHY our ancestors left family and tradition to travel here with nothing but opportunity waiting. And he knows the working man and woman unlike President Special who attended expensive private schools and never mingled with the hoi paloy and despises everyone in fly-over country.

Sorry this is so long. That’s not good, but I’m a newbie and I’ve been reading without being able to do anything but yell at my monitor for sooooo long…

Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM

i would say i opened a can of rabid prolifers.
no, let it go.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 AM

WTF?
I’m no ‘rabid’ pro-lifer.
I just think you’re pretty amazingly awful for saying you’d kill a person with Down’s syndrome.
Jeebus! So many people with Down’s function VERY WELL in society.
Remember that actor on TV some years ago on that prime time evening TV show? He had Down’s.
You have said you would kill a man like him, and others, so that they would not be born into this world.
How do you expect anyone to react to such savagery?!

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 10:38 AM

It’s pretty hard to actually want IMPOSSIBLE to respond to any other things you have to say here on HA with such ‘morals’ as you have displayed.

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Fify…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM

mankai on January 4, 2012 at 10:13 AM

I don’t know if I believe Goldwater created Reagan but he sure used him and then threw him away when he picked Ford over Reagan in 1976. When all is said and done, he was a “party” guy.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Fify…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Thanks! You’re right, of course.

I don’t know if I believe Goldwater created Reagan but he sure used him and then threw him away when he picked Ford over Reagan in 1976. When all is said and done, he was a “party” guy.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Well said.
Seems like they pretty much ALL are in the end.

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Oh, and can you imagine a President who won’t even be able to UNDERSTAND an Irish Priest drinking joke? There will be no wine, no beer summits and no coffee at the White House and a lot of sanctimony about how not indulging makes Romney morally superior.
Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Ha! They had an election nite party for him last night in Atlanta at……..hold on for this………..an Irish Pub called “Fado”.

This rumor you’re trying to start is utter nonsense. When Romney was at Harvard he spent time with classmates who drank everything from coffee to spirits. He is not an intolerant person and does not impose his personal views/habits on others. That’s one of the things about his character I really like about him – and greatly admire about his father, George and Mother Lenore, who raised him that way.

Try reading the series of articles the Boston Globe assembled about him – assuming you have any interest in learning the truth.

Buy Danish on January 4, 2012 at 10:54 AM

h, and can you imagine a President who won’t even be able to UNDERSTAND an Irish Priest drinking joke? There will be no wine, no beer summits and no coffee at the White House and a lot of sanctimony about how not indulging makes Romney morally superior.
Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM

That looks like the ugly head of jealousy to me.
There are plenty of things politically to not like about Romney.
His character is certainly NOT one of them.
He is a wonderful husband & father.
Why attack him for such things?

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 11:01 AM

can we move on. I dont want to be a champion of this “cause”. its not something i care deeply about. I already hurted people that actually have childreen with disabilities.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:10 AM

So much for your “courage.”

Conservative4Ever on January 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Bottom line: there are no viable candidates to the right of Romney. This will still be the case down the road. Romney will be our nominee.

writeblock on January 4, 2012 at 9:15 AM

B.S.

Conservative4Ever on January 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 11:01 AM

That is quite a batch of noobs that got in during last open registration, I have much to learn about many of them…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 11:05 AM

i would say i opened a can of rabid prolifers.
no, let it go.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 9:37 AM

nathor, you made the most provocative of pro-eugenics statements in the face of a predominantly anti-eugenics crowd.

You should go to the local chapter of the Black Panthers in Philly, start shouting the “N” word at them and see what happens.

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM

i am moving on.

nathor on January 4, 2012 at 10:25 AM

That is certainly consistent with your stated moral code of “do the right thing, or things that don’t make me feel guilty, unless it makes things, like, hard and stuff”.

But take heart: if I adopted your brand of logic, I wouldn’t want to waste time defending me either.

The Schaef on January 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

You should go to the local chapter of the Black Panthers in Philly, start shouting the “N” word at them and see what happens.

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM

LMAO! That would be a treat to watch!

That is quite a batch of noobs that got in during last open registration, I have much to learn about many of them…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 11:05 AM

It certainly is some cheap entertainment.

The Schaef on January 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

ZING!

Badger40 on January 4, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Sorry this is so long. That’s not good, but I’m a newbie and I’ve been reading without being able to do anything but yell at my monitor for sooooo long…

Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM

No worries, it was a good and thoughtful post. Esp. this part:

I live in Maryland where one of the richest counties in the country can’t fill its potholes because it’s welcomed the illegals Virginia is busy ejecting.

Do you happen to live in the People’s Republic of Montgomery County? I work with them extensively, and they are more than welcome to the illegals from Loudoun and Fairfax counties, LOL!

disa on January 4, 2012 at 11:14 AM

I’m too slow to go back and read everything I missed.

What became of the hawkdriver/cdeven saga?

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Bachmann out.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Hmmm, interesting. Santorum, a devoutly religious man is ducky but Gov. Romney, a devoutly religious man is weird. Could it be that you find one’s religion more palatable than the other? I can’t imagine discounting Gov. Romeny as a candidate because of what he doesn’t drink or the history of his religion that he has nothing to do with.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:27 AM

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:22 AM

THERE you are! Maybe I can get a response from a “contestant.”

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM

csd pretended that hawk apologized and “graciously” accepted said nonexistent apology. Kind of the perfect bow to wrap on a big giant package of paranoia and delusion. Hawk was embarrassed that the thread had become about him and worked hard to change the subject.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:32 AM

I stayed up last night and listened to the last two speeches, and hoorah for Santorum. I was one of those who has been impressed with him from the start but believed I was alone. When I voted in the various polls, I always put him as a second choice after Newt who would make a great President and actually be able to change Washington because he really does know where the bodies are buried.

+1 portia

Very well said and exactly how I feel.

Love me some Newt. Not just because he knows process and how to get things done, but because he actually starts the dialogue. I can’t stand hearing Barry say; “lets have a national discussion about…” because I know he is disingenious. But with Newt, you can actually picture factions comming together for real discourse.

That being said, I am very happy about Santorum’s recent surge. I like him alot and he is genuine. Young, energetic, conservative and handsome, he will be a formidable candidate if he shows he has staying power.

I am very excited to see this play out. Not only am I a political junkie, but I like the horserace.

Mudhog on January 4, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Thank you Cindy M, for the update.

“Chainsaw Love” is something to behold.

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:37 AM

csd pretended that hawk apologized and “graciously” accepted said nonexistent apology. Kind of the perfect bow to wrap on a big giant package of paranoia and delusion. Hawk was embarrassed that the thread had become about him and worked hard to change the subject.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:32 AM

I forget- tell me again: Are we sponsored by Procter & Gamble or Borax?

M240H on January 4, 2012 at 11:38 AM

THERE you are! Maybe I can get a response from a “contestant.”

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Hawk apologized and I accepted. I’m not sure if he apologized for stalking my son or for lying about stalking my son. But I do know that the folks he approached at the 160th didn’t appreciate him showing up there. I explained to him that he shouldn’t do it again.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM

M240H on January 4, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Borax, that stuff is a miracle and under utilized.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Please, folks, don’t let this unadulterated garbage get started again while hawk’s not here. Please ignore.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM

OK, very good . . . maybe.

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Amen. It deserves the Ban Hammer.

kingsjester on January 4, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

I started it, my fault.

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:49 AM

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

The response from:

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM

amounts to:

a heaping ladleful of Mr. Ed

excretions

M240H on January 4, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Please, folks, don’t let this unadulterated garbage get started again while hawk’s not here. Please ignore.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Whoopsie. I’ll stop right there.

M240H on January 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Hawk apologized and I accepted. I’m not sure if he apologized for stalking my son or for lying about stalking my son. But I do know that the folks he approached at the 160th didn’t appreciate him showing up there. I explained to him that he shouldn’t do it again.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Why do you lie? I apologized for nothing.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Round II.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Why do you lie? I apologized for nothing.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 11:54 AM

It’s real easy stalker…..since you think you have nothing to apologize for, go back to the 160th and try again.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:58 AM

It’s real easy stalker…..since you think you have nothing to apologize for, go back to the 160th and try again.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:58 AM

pathological liar

You said I apologized.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:00 PM

THERE you are! Maybe I can get a response from a “contestant.”

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

He’s lying. He’s never stopped lying.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Why do you lie? I apologized for nothing.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 11:54 AM

It’s real easy stalker…..since you think you have nothing to apologize for, go back to the 160th and try again.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:58 AM

You admit lying. That’s good. But why do you do it?

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:02 PM

It’s real easy stalker…..since you think you have nothing to apologize for, go back to the 160th and try again.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 11:58 AM

You can’t even name the three primary CONUS locations for SOAR. Stop lying.

M240H on January 4, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:55 AM

I APOLOGIZE (for real) TO ALL PARTIES INVOLVED FOR BRINGING IT UP AGAIN!

If you two get yourselves banned, I’ll probably be included. : (

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Yeah. It’s tough when you have to Google SOAR and CONUS first.

M240H on January 4, 2012 at 12:06 PM

McCain endorses Romney! Well, that should just about finish Romney. Personally, I think I’d prefer an endorsement from Jimmy “Mr. Peanut” Carter.

uncle_fweddy on January 4, 2012 at 12:06 PM

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I’m not getting banned. I told the boy to stop his lies and I’m through with it. Let the thread return to a topic not about csdevens.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:10 PM

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Not to worry, everything will be fine.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 12:13 PM

You said I apologized.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Okay, so you’re proud of stalking my son.

Seriously Hawk, its’ baffling why you went through the machinations that you did when you first LIED about admitting that you stalked my son, then when I proved you to be a liar by providing the link to your admission, you said it was okay that you did check up on my son because you work with the 160th, then as the night progressed, you tried the old sour grapes defense by saying you was only joshin’ all along. You have changed your story so many times, it’s no wonder you have painted yourself into a corner.

Nope dude, your own comments prove that you did in fact stalk my son. I thought you were an officer? If so, that is not conduct becoming dude.

And it’s a simply apology. And like I said, I don’t care what you apologize for. If you lied about stalking my son, causing me distress, then an honorable person would apologize. Unless of course your intention was to use information given in faith like a despicable troll would as a way to win a simple disagreement.

But, the balls in your court. I know what you are and you know it. You and I both know what reaction you got from the guys at the 160th.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:18 PM

McCain endorses Romney! Well, that should just about finish Romney. Personally, I think I’d prefer an endorsement from Jimmy “Mr. Peanut” Carter.

uncle_fweddy on January 4, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Didn’t Carter already endorse someone in the GOP field?

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:19 PM

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I wouldn’t worry about it. There are several posters here who are always trying to bait hawk. He just won’t put up with their BS and stands his ground…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 12:20 PM

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:18 PM

I am beginning to get the idea that you just like talking about yourself.

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 12:20 PM

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:18 PM

I am beginning to get the idea that you just like talking about yourself.

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 12:20 PM

You are onto something here….

Conservative4Ever on January 4, 2012 at 12:22 PM

If you two get yourselves banned, I’ll probably be included. : (

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Don’t sweat it.

First, it’s an open thread and much more leeway is given. And he’s tired of trying to defend his indefensible behavior and I’ve made my point. He wont EVER stalk anyone ever again. OR, he’ll be extra careful about what he says. Either way, he’ll be a better person.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

A ‘classy lady’ wouldn’t have spouted the ‘Garadsil causes retardation’ crap she did with no evidence to back it up. Her ‘evidence was ‘well some woman came up to me before the debate and claimed that it happened to her child and rather than investigate I accepted her claim as fact’. Class-no. Trash-yes.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 3, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Bachmann was right to slam Perry over the HPV vaccine order. You can’t force innocent little girls to take a government injection. You need to educate yourself about aluminum used in vaccines associated with Alzheimer’s disease. As usual, you miss the big picture to focus in on one single point ad naseum. I wish there was a block feature at Hotair.

apocalypse on January 4, 2012 at 12:25 PM

CROSS-POSTED

Well here is how I see it…The Narcissist in Chief is the enemy and must be removed at all costs…that being said…you have to put yourself in the mind of your opponent and think like they do…so you know the chicago thuggery politics is going to come out hot and heavy starting somewhere between April and June…so if you were the sitting President what would you use against the GOP candidates…

Romney: “The legislation that the former governor passed was in great measure the “template” upon which we founded our own healthcare” We find it difficult to believe he would renounce his support of an idea that is benifitting millions of our fellow Americans as we speak” THIS in and of itself ensures that the Democrats win the Presidency in 2012!

Paul: “We find it unimaginable that the Congressmen would cause America to shirk her duties as leader of the free world by becoming reclusive and not participating in world affairs. Additionally how he could sabotage the future of our children and country with crazy talk of eliminating the department of Education proves he is nisguided at best and heinously mean at worst” Though Paul is right and I support his idea of eliminating whole departments you can see how easily this is spun!

Santorum: “It is unconscionable that the former Senator would consider placing the lives of young women across this country in grave jeopardy by his incessent desire to eliminate the choice of reproductive healthcare”. This will energize only the basest and hard core of the leftists but will not play as bad with the independents.

Gingrich: “We all know that the former speaker was “steeped” in the most vile and feckless portions of the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae debacle that we have worked so tirelessly to rebound from. Did we mention that he and he alone nearly brought this nation to her knees because of his partisan stonewalling that lead to a shutdown of the government where our military and seniors were almost not paid their just compensation. How many millions of people would his draconian policies affect today if I were not here as the only alternative to him?”

Say what you will when these scenarios would actually play out the order of being able to diffuse, recover, and build a new dialog shows that the strength for deconstructing the lefts narrative Starts with Newt, then goes to Santorum, then Paul and finally to the man who CANNOT win against Obama…Romney. If Romney ends up as the Nominee you might as well not vote because Romneycare is a TRUE Achilles heel that the others do not have in such a pronounced way!!!!

RedLizard64 on January 4, 2012 at 12:25 PM

But, the balls in your court.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:18 PM

No, the ball is in your court to stop elevating this nonsense to something it isn’t.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:26 PM

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Give out your personal information, have someone use it in a despicable manner, and see how it makes you feel.

Hell, go ask the mods how they would feel if anyone threatened to show up at the place of business where their family member worked.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Strong men love nothing more than a strong woman.

AllahsNippleHair on January 4, 2012 at 12:09 AM

I agree. :-)

apocalypse on January 4, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Well, there is hope for you yet, but you got ALT’s hair in a knot.

AllahsNippleHair on January 4, 2012 at 12:20 AM

They missed the sarcasm and the boat it would seem.

apocalypse on January 4, 2012 at 12:29 PM

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I’m telling you again to stop using this thread to perpetuate your lies.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:30 PM

No, the ball is in your court to stop elevating this nonsense to something it isn’t.

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Your ego just wont allow you to stop will it. That is the reason you showed up at the 160th to “win” a simple difference of opinion.

You do remember this was only about the effects of an RPG on a Chinook right? But to win the argument, you went to (or claimed to) check up on my son. So, you elevated a simple disagreement into involving my son at the worst, or at the least, telling despicable lies to win said simple disagreement.

BUT, you and I know exactly what you did. And the 160th didn’t appreciate it.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Thanks for the reassurance everyone.

listens2glenn on January 4, 2012 at 12:35 PM

But to win the argument, you went to (or claimed to) check up on my son. And the 160th didn’t appreciate it.

??????????????????

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 12:36 PM

There were 117 “other” votes in Iowa…can anyone find out who they were for? I would be interested in knowing if they were for Donald Trump, Sarah Palin etc.

RedLizard64 on January 4, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Guys, can you please stop hijacking this thread and taking it down the rabbit hole of who is lying about whom and who is stalking whom? We’d like to get back to the REAL subject of this thread: arguing with nathor about his indefensible moral code as it applies to abortion.

The Schaef on January 4, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Your ego just wont allow you to stop will it. That is the reason you showed up at the 160th to “win” a simple difference of opinion.

You don’t just show up at the 160th. Any meetings I had with any of them was when I was invited to eat lunch with ones I know.

You do remember this was only about the effects of an RPG on a Chinook right?

Something you can’t seem to get over being wrong about

But to win the argument, you went to (or claimed to) check up on my son. So, you elevated a simple disagreement into involving my son at the worst, or at the least, telling despicable lies to win said simple disagreement.

Nope. I left a barb in a comment thread that no “rational” person would take seriously unless they had a lunatics axe to grind. Get over yourself.

BUT, you and I know exactly what you did. And the 160th didn’t appreciate it.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:31 PM

You’re lying again, because the only thing a 160th member might be upset with me over is picking up the check. Three pages of this nonsense while folks are trying to get on with the topics.

Last warning. Next comment from you about this affair goes to a moderator. I’m not afraid to let them sort it out, are you?

hawkdriver on January 4, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Hmmm, interesting. Santorum, a devoutly religious man is ducky but Gov. Romney, a devoutly religious man is weird. Could it be that you find one’s religion more palatable than the other? I can’t imagine discounting Gov. Romeny as a candidate because of what he doesn’t drink or the history of his religion that he has nothing to do with.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 11:27 AM

And are you making the odd argument that all beliefs are equal? And yes, indeed, I find HUGE differences in palatability among religions. Romney didn’t create his church, but he’s been an adult for a long, long time and I can only assume he believes what he’s religious about, which, BTW, includes deep, deep reverence for the founders of his faith.

I’m not getting into the weeds, but you can be assured, Obamabots will. I will support Romney if he’s the nominee, but as I mentioned yesterday, I’d much rather explain Newt’s association with Fanny than Mitt’s oath to cut his own throat.

The Irish Priest drinking comment was rather a bad throw-away line but I notice the other thing I’ve warned about. The Mormons jumped on that while ignoring the substantive portion of my comments about science. Global Warming is the tool by which Obama will take us and our economy down. Credibility here is in fact important to the debate.

BTW, Goldwater was a good man whose honor and integrity was never questioned even by his foes. He was a good friend of Ronald Reagan’s and in 1976, the Republican Party was destined for the trash heep. We had just gone through Watergate; Ford was the sitting President; and splitting the Party would have doomed the Party. 1976 was not 1980, and Reagan would not have been elected. I can’t think of even one Republican who could have prevailed in the face of Ford’s pardon, which was one of the most selfless acts of any politician. His concern was this country, as was Goldwater’s, as was Reagan’s.

Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 12:38 PM

The Schaef on January 4, 2012 at 12:37 PM

But nathor left thereby cutting down on any possible fun.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 12:40 PM

And he’s tired of trying to defend his indefensible behavior and I’ve made my point. He wont EVER stalk anyone ever again. OR, he’ll be extra careful about what he says. Either way, he’ll be a better person.

csdeven on January 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Congratulations sir. You’ve vanquished the dreaded hawkdriver – he’l never hurt anyone again. You’ve saved not just hotair, but the entire internet. You are a hero. Not the hero we deserved, but the hero we needed. Nothing less than a knight, shining.

RINO in Name Only on January 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM

PERRY IS STAYING IN THE RACE.
BACHMANN OUT.

avagreen on January 4, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Portia46 on January 4, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I’m interested in the differences of acceptable religion preferences as to how it will work into the political campaign. On a personal level I have understand that you might have a problem with it. Like Newt’s multiple marriages is a deal breaker for a lot of people. While I am sure that Goldwater cared about the country I am no a devotee and find his behavior to Reagan and the folks, who later became National Review, in 1976 appalling.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Comment pages: 1 31 32 33 34