Open thread: The last debate

posted at 7:47 pm on February 22, 2012 by Allahpundit

8 p.m. ET on CNN. There’s another debate tentatively scheduled for March 19 on PBS, but if Romney holds on in Michigan and then does well on Super Tuesday, he’ll have no incentive to participate and PBS will have no incentive to air it without him. So this is, in all likelihood, it: The last chance for Santorum to make the case against RomneyCare, the last chance for Romney to convince Republican voters that they’re better off with him for whatever reason, and the last chance for Gingrich to manufacture a poll bounce by grandstanding with the moderators. John King, his old nemesis, is back tonight, but a Gingrich campaign source says they’re eyeing this as an opportunity for him to seem “statesmanlike” while Romney and Santorum maul each other. Other Gingrich advisors tell the NYT that he needs to attack. Who’ll show, Good Newt or Bad Newt? Either way, Gingrich will have to focus on Santorum to try to reposition himself as the conservative alternative to Romney. You know who that benefits?

Two subplots tonight. One: Are Romney and Ron Paul quietly coordinating against Santorum and Gingrich? And if so, what’s Paul getting from Romney to do that? Go read Matt Lewis for an unlikely but irresistible theory on that. Two: How much time will be spent picking through Santorum’s rhetoric on contraception and other cultural hot buttons? His campaign team gently reminded the media today that most Americans share his belief in Satan, but it’s not the theological material that’s most problematic for him. The NYT notices a trend I’ve mentioned before:

The latest poll, conducted in Arizona by NBC News/Marist and released Wednesday, showed that women support Mr. Romney over Mr. Santourm 46 percent to 23 percent. In addition, Mr. Romney has an eight percentage point lead among men.

Some Democrats and others have criticized recent remarks by Mr. Santorum about barring women from combat roles in the military, and his personal disapproval of birth control. The latest polls may be showing the first signs that Mr. Santorum is alienating women — including Republicans — with some of his views.

A separate poll in Michigan by NBC News/Marist showed far less of a gender gap between the front-runners, but there was still a slight divide. Men were evenly split between the two top candidates, but 39 percent of women went for Mr. Romney to 33 percent for Mr. Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator.

Nationally, Santorum’s numbers with women have vastly improved so I don’t know how to explain the gender gap in Michigan and, especially, Arizona. Can’t wait to see whether Romney tries to exploit it, though. Does he dare challenge Sweater Vest from the left on cultural issues given how skeptical the base already is about Mitt’s conservative bona fides?

Here’s the Hot Air/Townhall widget for livetweeting during the debate. Exit quotation from Haley Barbour: “It is not accurate to say that a hotly contested convention is necessarily bad. I am not saying it is necessarily good, but I don’t think it is accurate to say it is necessarily bad. Let’s just see.”

Update: Here’s CNN.com’s livefeed in case you’re stuck without a TV.



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 20 21 22

Well, I and my entire extended family support Newt, would vote for Rick, but would never support Romney, not ever, none of us.

So, there….

JeffVader on February 23, 2012 at 3:27 AM

So if Romney is the nominee, you all will support Obama, then? Because that is the ONLY alternative to supporting the nominee.

So you are willing to sentence the country to more Obama to express your dislike of Romney? Willing to give Comrade Barry 1-3 more SCOTUS Justices and 200-300 lower federal judges to appoint to life terms?

The stifling regulations? The feckless foreign policy? What a bunch of self-important asses you are!

Your great-grandchildren will seek out your graves to urinate on them.

Adjoran on February 23, 2012 at 4:43 AM

You Establishment Republicans have spit in the face of us tea partiers. You have kicked our shins, you have poked us in the eyeballs, and you have kicked us in the crotch. Now you want us to vote for your conman candidate. Figure the odds, a$$hole!

Ceteris Paribus on February 23, 2012 at 4:58 AM

You Establishment Republicans have spit in the face of us tea partiers. You have kicked our shins, you have poked us in the eyeballs, and you have kicked us in the crotch. Now you want us to vote for your conman candidate. Figure the odds, a$$hole!

Ceteris Paribus on February 23, 2012 at 4:58 AM

Here’s some spit in the eyes of the tea partiers.
Rick Santorum opposes the tea party and fiscal conservatism.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 5:32 AM

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 5:32 AM

Your post is logical and contains an informative link about Santorum’s anti-libertarianism. The difference is that it doesn’t accuse tea partiers of being: “self-important asses” or having our great-grandchildren seeking out “your graves to urinate on them”.

Ceteris Paribus on February 23, 2012 at 5:50 AM

JeffVader on February 23, 2012 at 3:27 AM

So you are willing to sentence the country to more Obama to express your dislike of Romney? Willing to give Comrade Barry 1-3 more SCOTUS Justices and 200-300 lower federal judges to appoint to life terms?
Your great-grandchildren will seek out your graves to urinate on them.
Adjoran on February 23, 2012 at 4:43 AM

There is no stronger supporter of Rick Santorum (or Sarah Palin, but she didn’t run)) than myself. And I’ve been trying to say the same thing that Adjoran just said.
A second term for BHO would be MUCH worse than having Mitt Romney in the Oval Office.
EVEN IF WE KEPT THE HOUSE, AND WON A MAJORITY IN THE SENATE.

listens2glenn on February 23, 2012 at 5:54 AM

listens2glenn on February 23, 2012 at 5:54 AM

In reference to people who refuse to vote for Romney, Adjoran said that: “Your great-grandchildren will seek out your graves to urinate on them.”
In response, I would quote from the Declaration of Independence, but I’m pretty sure you already know the section I want to cite.

Ceteris Paribus on February 23, 2012 at 6:16 AM

Did you all sleep well last night? Any of you happen to catch the presidential debate?

Let me give you a brief recap of the debate: my man Mitt Romney was MAGNIFICENT!

I suggest you all watch the debate online. Romney was extremely strong and made Rick Santorum look so bad in comparison.

President Mitt Romney has an EXCELLENT ring to it. What a needed change that will be.

bluegill on February 23, 2012 at 7:01 AM

bluegill on February 23, 2012 at 7:01 AM

Romney would be ABO – that is all.

OldEnglish on February 23, 2012 at 7:10 AM

Where is the coverage of Mitt’s recent tax proposal! While he said in his plan months ago that he would lower marginal rates on income taxes by eliminating loopholes and deductions, he now is getting more specific.

Romney has proposed a 20% reduction in the marginal income tax rate!!! This is BIG news that needs to be aired!

MJBrutus on February 23, 2012 at 7:12 AM

Romney won, everybody else lost.

Terrye on February 23, 2012 at 7:14 AM

Hear is his announcement in the WSJ!

MJBrutus on February 23, 2012 at 7:16 AM

Romney has proposed a 20% reduction in the marginal income tax rate!!! This is BIG news that needs to be aired!
MJBrutus on February 23, 2012 at 7:12 AM

Ed covered it as an addendum to a post about Santorum being up in Oklahoma.

Buy Danish on February 23, 2012 at 7:39 AM

Romney was banal, bland, boring, predictable…He proved he could never beat Obama

Only Newt spoke with the intelligence and statesmanship required to beat Obama.

Funny watching morning shows try to cover for Romney and Santorum…they are desperate to keep the Establishment in power…they are afraid of Newt

georgealbert on February 23, 2012 at 7:42 AM

Boy, it’s breathtaking how the republican establishment is in overdrive pushing Romney AGAIN! It’s obvious with their reporting that Santorum could have done no right no matter how well he did. And they all did ok. But Fox News has Donald Trump, Romney’s debate coach, Chris Christie plastering the airwaves with their thoughts about who won. No-brainer there. And, of course, the same “IT’S OVER” song and dance if Romney wins in Michigan and Arizona. There are still plenty of states left and plenty of us who want to vote for our candidates of choice not theirs. It’s not a done deal yet and Rick Santorum, IMHO, is still the most trust-worthy, courageous, and conservative of the lot.

mozalf on February 23, 2012 at 7:55 AM

Romney is a smug smarmy skunk who will only add his name to the previous list of liberal republican losers – Dole & McCain. No way I vote for that jackass if he becomes the nominee.

Paul made some Faustian bargain with Willard, the tag-team effort on Santorum was unmistakeable, Paul even making expressions to Willard during the debate, he seemed terribly excited to try to pull Santorum down. But as usual that psychotic little twerp revealed his insane nature by ranting against the US and basically one-upping the idiocy of the Obama Regime when it comes to foreign policy and national defense.

Santorum, despite the Mitt/Ron tag-team, handled himself well, was the only one who admited making mistakes and learning lessons and his manning up was in stark contrast to Mitt’s doubling-down on over-the-top rhetoric and thinly-veiled self-congratulatory back-slapping.

Newt managed to stay above the fray and appeared to get several solid points in, I would have to think for the objective observer, he may have won the debate.

But Willard is up by 16 as of this morning in AZ so the Ruling Class idiots appear to have the script well in hand and the death march to GOP oblivion continues unabated.

;(

insidiator on February 23, 2012 at 7:59 AM

Newt handed it to the mainstream media again last night, with the comment on Obama’s vote for infanticide. Actually, Newt could do another 1/2 hour infomercial just about all the questions the media DIDN’T

bflat879 on February 23, 2012 at 8:12 AM

to finish a though ask Obama in 2008. I doubt there’s anyone in the country that doesn’t know that, and only conservatives actually care, but it’s a cloud hanging over the head of all our illustrious free press.

bflat879 on February 23, 2012 at 8:13 AM

georgealbert on February 23, 2012 at 7:42 AM

hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Yeah, Neutron Newt, the only admitted corrupt liar, serial adulterer, and erratic #1 space cadet that has done nothing except work and peddle influence in Washington FOR HIS ENTIRE LIFE, is less “Establishment” than Mitt Romney, who is the only candidate that has NEVER worked or peddled influence in Washington and has worked in the private sector most of his life.

Bwahahahahahahaha!!!!!

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 8:25 AM

So if Romney is the nominee, you all will support Obama, then? Because that is the ONLY alternative to supporting the nominee.

So you are willing to sentence the country to more Obama to express your dislike of Romney? Willing to give Comrade Barry 1-3 more SCOTUS Justices and 200-300 lower federal judges to appoint to life terms?

The stifling regulations? The feckless foreign policy? What a bunch of self-important asses you are!

Your great-grandchildren will seek out your graves to urinate on them.

Adjoran on February 23, 2012 at 4:43 AM

There will be other candidates on the ballot, not just R and D

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Ed covered it as an addendum to a post about Santorum being up in Oklahoma.

Buy Danish on February 23, 2012 at 7:39 AM

To be fair to Ed, having a dedicated thread for Romney’s tax plan to be discussed would only result in nonsensical rantings from the Romney haters who having been asking what Romney’s plan is for two months. They would then say stuff like, “Yeah, but what about SS?”. These are the same people that were saying they could support him if he had a more conservative tax plan. Now, not so much.

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 8:30 AM

That “Republican Establishment” meme is just priceless. The anti-establishment guys are apparently a former Speaker of the House and a Bush era go-along-to-get-along guy. Ridiculous. You just can’t get ANY MORE “establishment” than those two has-beens in their heyday.

Murf76 on February 23, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Newt handed it to the mainstream media again last night, with the comment on Obama’s vote for infanticide. Actually, Newt could do another 1/2 hour infomercial just about all the questions the media DIDN’T

bflat879 on February 23, 2012 at 8:12 AM

I don’t get why Neutron Newt keeps this up….does he think the media is going to be on the primary ballot? His schtick is old and it wont help him.

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 8:32 AM

If you can’t see the difference between Obama and the four Republicans running for president, you might as well be one because you produce the same result as they do.

scotash on February 23, 2012 at 2:31 AM

Correction: there is no difference between Obama and three of the candidates. There is a very real ideological difference between Obama and Paul.

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Adjoran obviously is part of the GOP’s establishment ruling class, because it is inconceivable to him/her that the problem is in the GOP. If the GOP nominates a doomed candidate, I fail to see how that is anyones fault but the idiots who nominated the failure. This false premise that Romney can beat Obama needs to be discarded as BS, because it makes the automatic assumption that the others cannot. Thus, in the minds of the Mittheads, they are fully covered – if Mitt loses the nomination, it is the fault of extreme right-wing fanatics in the party, if he wins the nomination but loses to Obama, it is the fault of right-wing fanatics, either way it is the fault of right-wing fanatics. This has been the crutch the ruling class hacks in the GOP have been leaning on since Reagan left office. Destroy their assumptions, destroy their cover, flush them out or watch the GOP implode. I for one refuse to play the establishments game. If the nation goes sideways, better Obama is left holding the bag, capturing the Senate and holding the House is more important than fighting a lost cause for the White House if all the GOP has to offer is a liberal northeast big government republican.

insidiator on February 23, 2012 at 8:40 AM

I support Santorum because he is the one who is against and has never supported Obamacare, the bailouts, cap and trade and illegal immigration. He supports entitlement reform, has a flat tax plan and a plan to bring back American jobs. Rick also understood the threat from Iran long before anyone else.

I didn’t know that the most important issues in 2012 are Arlen Specter in 2004 and NCLB.

fight like a girl on February 23, 2012 at 8:40 AM

Didn’t watch, didn’t care, since I assumed (correctly, as it turns out) that democrat outlet CNN wouldn’t bring up a timely subject like gas prices, doubtless because it would embarrass their Messiah.

n0doz on February 23, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Voting third party, writing in a has-been candidate’s name, or abstaining from voting IS a vote for barack. Whomever the GOP nominee is I will vote for him to try to clean the trash out of the White House.

DuctTapeMyBrain on February 23, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Santorum’s major challenge heading into the debate was to prove not only that he is appealing to the Republican base in a primary, but that he was also electable in a general election.

Santorum failed to make the case: on the futures trading website Intrade, his odds of becoming the Republican nominee plummeted from the start of the debate to the end.

At the time of publication, shares in that outcome were selling at 56 cents a piece, an 80 cent drop over the course of the day. In fairness, betters had not expressed much confidence to begin with; at the start of the debate, he had a 11 percent chance.

By contrast, Intrade gives Romney a 70.4 percent chance of becoming the nominee.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/22/santorum-earns-poor-marks-for-debate-performance/#ixzz1nDGUw9tv

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 8:55 AM

In 2008, Romney was enthusiastically supported not only by Limbaugh and Levin, but also by Sean Hannity, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage and many others who now seem to view Romney as a closet liberal. This is especially baffling because there is no liberal candidate in the Republican primary this year.

Just four years ago, one Republican candidate for president was avowedly pro-abortion (Rudy Giuliani). One had opposed Clinton’s impeachment and tort reform (Fred Thompson). One supported amnesty for illegals, restrictions on core First Amendment speech, federal laws to combat nonexistent global warming, and opposed Guantanamo and the Bush tax cuts (“tax cuts for the rich!”) and called waterboarding “torture.”

That last one was our nominee: John McCain.

This year, every Republican candidate for president opposes abortion, promises to repeal Obamacare, opposes raising taxes, and on and on. Only one candidate is strong on illegal immigration, which is second only to repealing Obamacare as the most important issue facing the nation.

That’s the alleged liberal, Mitt Romney.

Conservatives scratch their heads wondering how the NFM can convince millions of unemployed and underemployed Americans paying $3.57 for a gallon of gas that the economy is improving simply by repeatedly saying so.

But then a large minority of those same conservatives are completely convinced that Romney is an Establishment candidate simply because they have heard that repeated so often.

As we say to dunderhead liberals: What we’re looking for here is facts, not chants or epithets.

But instead of popping Champagne corks over our final triumph over Rockefeller Republicanism, some conservatives are still fighting old wars, rather like an old cold warrior prattling about the Soviet Union after the rest of us have moved onto the war on terrorism.

This strange new version of right-wing populism comes down to reveling in the feeling that you are being dissed, hoodwinked or manipulated by the Establishment (most of which happens to oppose Romney) the same way liberals want to believe that “the rich,” the “right-wing media” and Wall Street Republicans (there are three) are victimizing them.

It’s as if scoring points in intra-Republican squabbles is more important than beating Obama. Instead of talking about the candidates’ positions — which would be confusing inasmuch as Romney is the most conservative of the four remaining candidates — the only issue seems to be whether “They” are showing respect for “Us.”

Striking a pose as the only true fighter for real Americans may be fun, but this is no way to win elections. This is Sharron Angle on a national level.

Just read the whole thing. It’s good; and it’s true.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-02-22.html

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 8:59 AM

“Voting for the debt ceiling five different times without voting for compensating cuts…Voting to fund Planned Parenthood, voting to expand the Department of Education. During his term in the Senate spending grew by some 80% of the federal government.”

That’s the record of the so-called “conservative,” Rick Santorum.

As Ron Paul puts it–quite correctly–FACTS ARE FACTS, SENATOR SANTORUM:

“If you voted for Planned Parenthood, like the senator has, you voted for birth control pills,” said Ron Paul. “And you literally, because funds are fungible, you literally vote for abortions because Planned Parenthood gets the money … they have the money left over to do abortion.”

But I think this is the TAKE AWAY POINT FROM THIS DEBATE: Santorum Is George W. Bush’s Guy. Is the GOP prepared now to put forward G.W. Bush’s Man against Obama? That’s called “shooting yourself in the foot!”

Santorum’s biggest blunder on this front came in how he described his vote for Bush’s expansion of the federal role in education, saying “It was against the principles I believed in. But when you’re part of a team, sometimes you take one for the team, for the leader.” This gets at the heart of the problem with Santorum, which I wrote about the day he announced he was running for president — he was the quintessential Bush era Republican. As the number three Republican in the Senate, he was a loyal soldier and went along with Bush’s big government policies, from NCLB to the Medicare prescription drug law. The very problem with the Bush era was precisely that too many Republicans decided to be team players rather than push back against the president when he was violating conservative principles. It’s this very “team player” mentality that the Tea Party movement, in part, was created to combat. Santorum spent the early part of his debate touting his opposition to the Wall Street bailout, but his argument tonight about taking one for the team leaves little doubt that he would have voted for the bailout had he still been in the Senate in 2008. It was much easier for him to sit back and criticize the policy when he was out of office. Santorum’s comment about his unwillingness to stand up for his principles when they clashed with Bush on NCLB was especially ironic, because it came moments after he used the word “courage” when he was asked to describe himself with one word.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/santorum-stumbles-arizona-debate/390381

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 9:07 AM

There is no stronger supporter of Rick Santorum (or Sarah Palin, but she didn’t run)) than myself. And I’ve been trying to say the same thing that Adjoran just said.
A second term for BHO would be MUCH worse than having Mitt Romney in the Oval Office.
EVEN IF WE KEPT THE HOUSE, AND WON A MAJORITY IN THE SENATE.

listens2glenn on February 23, 2012 at 5:54 AM

You just don’t get, do you – you just don’t get it. Of course it will be worse for the next 4 years, but to allow the republican establishment to continue to push liberal lites, like Romney, down our throats will continue with the destruction of conservatism – as has been the case for the past 4 decades. Conservatives need to either form a third party or reclaim the republican party – and they aren’t going to begin this process by supporting Romney. Santorum? He’s just not Romney. He just anti establishment.

noeastern on February 23, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Your post is logical and contains an informative link about Santorum’s anti-libertarianism. The difference is that it doesn’t accuse tea partiers of being: “self-important asses” or having our great-grandchildren seeking out “your graves to urinate on them”.

Ceteris Paribus on February 23, 2012 at 5:50 AM

I haven’t drank my customary pot of morning coffee yet. I’m sill about a half hour, 45 minutes away from grave urination posts.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Ed covered it as an addendum to a post about Santorum being up in Oklahoma.

Buy Danish on February 23, 2012 at 7:39 AM

None that are viable.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Ed covered it as an addendum to a post about Santorum being up in Oklahoma.

Buy Danish on February 23, 2012 at 7:39 AM

None that are viable.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Doah!, that was supposed to be an answer to:

There will be other candidates on the ballot, not just R and D

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 8:27 AM

I did mention I haven’t’ had my coffee yet.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Santorum’s whole campaign has been based on the assertion that he is the “convictions” candidate; he has the “courage” of his “convictions.”

Well, that’s over.

Last night Rick Santorum admitted he didn’t have the “courage” of his “convictions” on NUMEROUS votes because he “voted against his principles.”

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Just read the whole thing. It’s good; and it’s true.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-02-22.html

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Ann Coulter supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. Why in heaven’s name would I trust her judgment in this election?

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 9:40 AM

OK – now is the time to review. We have seen Newt and Rick as frontrunners and have seen their records examined a bit more closely. There is not one PERFECT conservative in this race. Understanding this, the next logical step would be a candidate that can beat Obama. Romney has shown, thru long term polling, that he has the best chance of doing so. The problem with GOP candidates is that the media and the left are usually successful at painting them as “scary right-wingers” The only thing they can hold up against Romney is his view on immigration which is supported by the majority of americans. This is why the Obama campaign simply salivates at a Santorum or Gingrich nomination and why, even now in Michigan, they are running anti-Mitt ads hoping for a Santorum victory. Right-minded folks – please, wake up, we need to win and Romney has the absolute best chance of doing so

BabysCatz on February 23, 2012 at 9:43 AM

I didn’t know that the most important issues in 2012 are Arlen Specter in 2004 and NCLB.

fight like a girl on February 23, 2012 at 8:40 AM

They’re not.

The biggest issue is go-along-to-get-along yes men who exploded the size of the US Government in order to be “part of the team”, but now come along with so pious a tone that now they’ve seen the light, and are the only ones with the “courage” to dial back the gigantic government expansion that they helped create.

Forgive me my skepticism, you big-spending, sweatervest-sporting, ChurchLady-imitating, right-to-work-opposing, queer-bashing, Satan-blaming closet case.

JohnGalt23 on February 23, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Last night, Romney demonstrated that he doesn’t understand how laws are made. Am I the only one who heard him say “I don’t understand a word you said?” Since I understood exactly what Santorum was saying, that doesn’t say much for Mitt.

And was I the only one who found his “I’ll answer the question I want to answer” both offensive and spoiled brat arrogant? We’ve had 3 years of a President who takes narcicism to a whole new level, and I really don’t want 4 more years of Louie the XI.

Actually I kept debate points and both Santorum and Gingrich outperformed the trained seal, talking points spouting Romney, who continues to have a loose connection to the truth.

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 10:00 AM

None that are viable.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 9:15 AM

I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 10:07 AM

I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 10:07 AM

See #5.

vi·a·ble   [vahy-uh-buhl]
adjective
1.capable of living.
2.Physiology .
a.physically fitted to live.
b.(of a fetus) having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.
3.Botany . able to live and grow.
4.vivid; real; stimulating, as to the intellect, imagination, or senses: a period of history that few teachers can make viable for students.
5.practicable; workable: a viable alternative.

There will be a GOP candidate and Obama. One of these 2 will be president. No one else.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Ann Coulter supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. -Portia46

Prove that please.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Voting third party, writing in a has-been candidate’s name, or abstaining from voting IS a vote for barack. Whomever the GOP nominee is I will vote for him to try to clean the trash out of the White House.

DuctTapeMyBrain on February 23, 2012 at 8:44 AM

This. Any self-proclaimed “conservative” who does that is a fool. Plain and simple. If you can’t vote for someone who doesn’t agree with you on each and every issue, and do one of those 3 things, you are quite frankly not a conservative.

To help elect a candidate who you agree with on almost nothing to prevent a guy who you agree with on 90% of the issues from being president arguably demonstrates that there should be IQ requirements for all.

It is sickening to read how “conservatives” are saying they wont vote for Romney if he is the nominee.

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus – Romney wins Va by a landslide by hook or by crook. Merit based electors for Romney! Not! Now if only the competition can be artificially reduced in all other states this might get locked up by July. Oh the establishment is just so right all the time.

Fuquay Steve on February 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM

It’s kind of fun watching Karl Rove sweat whenever it becomes obvious that Romney isn’t catching on with voters. Brit Hume on Fox always looks and sounds like he’s ready to cry whenever he has to comment on Romney not doing well. And watching Ann Coulter and Donald Trump trying to out-shrill each other is freakish but funny. And the rumors of a Rand Paul VP for Romney is like a bad deja vu a la Sarah Palin trying to prop up a weak candidate. The definition of insanity: “try to do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.”

mozalf on February 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM

This sums up Santorum’s candidacy now:


“Santorum is into full mode explaining about how he didn’t really say what he said and even if he did, it was taken out of context or he didn’t mean it or it isn’t something he would act on as president even though he talks about it all the time (until now).”

– A blog comment apropos of Rick Santorum

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Voting third party, writing in a has-been candidate’s name, or abstaining from voting IS a vote for barack. Whomever the GOP nominee is I will vote for him to try to clean the trash out of the White House.

DuctTapeMyBrain on February 23, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Such a tired, intellectually vapid argument.

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Ann Coulter supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. Why in heaven’s name would I trust her judgment in this election?

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Get your head out of your ass, Portia46; that’a lie. Ann Coulter supported ROMNEY in the last election, just as Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and most other conservatives did.

Conservatives STILL support Mitt Romney:

http://www.whyromney.com/praise_new.php

In case you missed it, on Hannity & Colmes last night, controversial pundit Ann Coulter — who supports Mitt Romney for president — said she would back Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, over Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

“She’s more conservative that he is,” she said. “She will be stronger on the war on terrorism…I will campaign for her if it’s McCain.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/02/coulter-i-will/

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus – Romney wins Va by a landslide by hook or by crook. Merit based electors for Romney! Not! Now if only the competition can be artificially reduced in all other states this might get locked up by July. Oh the establishment is just so right all the time.

Fuquay Steve on February 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Too clever by half.

But it does prove that Romney is a far better CANDIDATE than Santorum, since Santorum won’t even be ON the ballot in Virginia; he couldn’t get enough signatures to QUALIFY. Same with Indiana, I believe.

That says a whole lot about Rick Santorum, and it’s not good.

If you can’t qualify to get on every state’s ballot, you’re not prepared to be president.

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Too clever by half.

But it does prove that Romney is a far better CANDIDATE than Santorum, since Santorum won’t even be ON the ballot in Virginia; he couldn’t get enough signatures to QUALIFY. Same with Indiana, I believe.

That says a whole lot about Rick Santorum, and it’s not good.

If you can’t qualify to get on every state’s ballot, you’re not prepared to be president.

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

If by “better” you mean “rich as Croesus”, yeah sure Romney can buy his way to the top. That’s why we support Rick Santorum because he’s more grassroots and not a country club republican. It’s unfortunate he couldn’t afford to have paid minions running around getting signature, etc. But it’s more than obvious that he and Newt Gingrich, who isn’t on there either, are more than qualified to be on the ballots in all states. Virginia is a disgrace and makes me ashamed to be a republican!

mozalf on February 23, 2012 at 11:47 AM

I thought Santorum did great last night, as did Newt. I think Romney was good last night, but he was a little off his game and didn’t do what he needed to do to change things up.

I don’t think the debate will change anything, which is not good for Romney. Might help Newt a little, but probably not because RIck also did well.

I think it will be things happening outside the debate this week that might change things for Newt or Romney.

Rick did fine, so the debate won’t be what changes things.

Elisa on February 23, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Such a tired, intellectually vapid argument.

Dante on February 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM

One that you couldn’t refute, evidentially.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Did you all sleep well last night? Any of you happen to catch the presidential debate?

Let me give you a brief recap of the debate: my man Mitt Romney was MAGNIFICENT!

I suggest you all watch the debate online. Romney was extremely strong and made Rick Santorum look so bad in comparison.

President Mitt Romney has an EXCELLENT ring to it. What a needed change that will be.

bluegill on February 23, 2012 at 7:01 AM

Why yes, I did and was again amazed at how shallow Mitt’s understanding and knowledge are. He didn’t understand how authorization and appropriation bills work. He had NO CLUE that there was a law granting the President a line-item veto which was subsequently struck down by the Supreme Court.

Romney has all these magnificent “plans” and derides the legislative process–show no understanding of what most of us learned by the time we were in the 8th grade. Newt pointed out his blatent, stupid contraditions and hypocrasies. He IS the author of Romneycare, thus the author of Obamacare.

His mind is not nimble; he has no charm, no sense of humor; his didactic, endlessly repeatative talking points are without depth.

He’s a disaster and because of the noted flaws, it’s becoming increasingly evident that he’s the third weakest candidate in the field.

There is a reason why all those people who worked their butts off for the 2010 election are now talking about staying home if Romney is the nominee…you, bluebell, are probably responsible for a good 25 of those “no vote” people.

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Ann Coulter supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. Why in heaven’s name would I trust her judgment in this election?

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 9:40 AM
Get your head out of your ass, Portia46; that’a lie. Ann Coulter supported ROMNEY in the last election, just as Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and most other conservatives did.

Conservatives STILL support Mitt Romney:

http://www.whyromney.com/praise_new.php

In case you missed it, on Hannity & Colmes last night, controversial pundit Ann Coulter — who supports Mitt Romney for president — said she would back Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, over Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

“She’s more conservative that he is,” she said. “She will be stronger on the war on terrorism…I will campaign for her if it’s McCain.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/02/coulter-i-will/

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:02 AM

You Mormons have such a charmingly vile way with words—not very creative, but certainly vile.

Thank you for posting the quote. As noted in your quote, Ann Coulter DID support Hillary Clinton in the last election since Mitt lost the primary. Didn’t I say that?

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 3:59 PM

Ann Coulter supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. -Portia46
Prove that please.

V7_Sport on February 23, 2012 at 10:16 AM

There are pages and pages but this one on Hannity is my fav:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5GIONLMssc

Portia46 on February 23, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 20 21 22