Open thread: Stupor Tuesday; Update: Newt wins GA; Update: Romney wins VA, VT, MA; Update: Santorum wins OK, TN, ND; Update: Exit polls added; Update: Romney wins Ohio

posted at 6:26 pm on March 6, 2012 by Allahpundit

I wish I could take credit for that phrase but it belongs to Joseph Curl. We’re all very, very tired of this process, I know, but look on the “bright” side — if Romney rolls, this may well be the last night of election returns you need to follow until November. Yay, Mitt?

There are endless preview posts out there worth recommending but I’ll stick with two rather than inundate you. First, Guy Benson has a useful at-a-glance summary of which candidates are favored where, punctuated by the jump-ball states of Ohio and Tennessee. Whoever overperforms in those two will control the narrative tomorrow; if Romney wins both he’ll be touted as the de facto nominee, especially having now proved that he can win in the south. Second, refer to the charts in Nate Silver’s post for numerical benchmarks on how each candidate’s expected to do given current polling. Romney’s got a real shot at winning a majority of delegates tonight while Newt, because of his dominance in Georgia, could end up taking more delegates overall than Santorum. Any sharp deviations from those expectations may signal a new surge for one of them tomorrow or may even end a campaign. (If Gingrich somehow lost Georgia, which is unlikely in the extreme, he’s finished by his own admission.) As it is, 65 percent of Republican likely voters expect Romney will be the nominee compared to just 54 percent last week. The higher that number goes, the harder it is for Santorum and Gingrich to animate the base to stop him. In fact, no matter how Mitt does tonight, his campaign’s got a handy talking point for tomorrow: Realistically, it’s already too late for anyone else to win the nomination.

The bottom line here is that Romney has enough of a delegate advantage right now and especially coming out of today’s contests that it is very unlikely that anyone will catch him, much less catch him and get to 1144. The latter seems particularly far-fetched given the above scenarios. And that is a problem in this race. Well, a problem for Gingrich and Santorum anyway. If all either of them can take to voters is an argument that all they can do is prevent Romney from getting to 1144, then neither has a winning strategy. That sort of strategy has a half life; one that will grow less effective as, in this case, Romney approaches 1144. Complicating this scenario even further for Gingrich and Santorum is the fact that if neither can get to 1144 or even close to it, neither is all that likely to be the candidate to emerge as the nominee at any — unlikely though it may be — contested convention.

These contests today may not be decisive in terms of settling the nomination, but they very much represent a mental hurdle in this race. That Santorum and Gingrich cannot get to 1144 without vastly over-performing in the remaining contests (relative to how well they have done in the contests thus far) ushers in a new phase in the race.

The first polls close tonight at 7 p.m. ET in Virginia, Vermont, and Georgia — all three of which are likely to be called promptly at the top of the hour (the first two for Romney and the third for Newt). Things get interesting at 7:30, when Ohio starts to roll in, and then again at 8 when Tennessee starts counting. Here’s your handy Google Elections page to follow it all; lots of updates coming below, needless to say. While we wait, via Greg Hengler, here’s The One wishing Romney well at today’s presser. He seems pretty excited to face him. I wonder why.

Update: If you’re bored with the race, Democrats are lovin’ it.

The Republican nomination battle is rallying Democrats behind Barack Obama. Currently, 49% of Democrats say that as they learn more about the GOP candidates, their impression of Obama is getting better. Just 36% of Democrats expressed this view in December, before the Republican primaries began.

In contrast, there has been virtually no change in Republicans’ views of the GOP field during this period. Just 26% of Republicans say their impression of the GOP field has improved as they have learned more about the candidates. That is largely unchanged from December (30%).

Among indies, 10 percent say their views of the field has improved as the race has worn on — compared to 28 percent who say they’ve gotten worse. (In fairness, the numbers were nearly identical in December.)

Update: Tasty exit poll data from Ohio via Jake Tapper: Fully 53 percent say Romney has the best chance of beating Obama versus just 23 percent who say Santorum. But when asked which candidate best understands average Americans’ problems, Santorum wins 32/23.

Update: Romney tormentor Andrew Kaczynski of BuzzFeed digs up yet another example of Mitt pushing RomneyCare as a model for national health care, this time in a speech to House Republicans in 2009:

We should be first to propose a Republican plan to bring health insurance to all Americans, one based on market dynamics, free choice, and personal responsibility. I think what we did in Massachusetts is a good model to start from, but whatever direction we take, let’s not simply react to what the Democrats do. Their own plan would undoubtedly create a vast new system of costly entitlements and bureaucratic dictates, burdening the people and threatening the economy. Americans will be looking for a better alternative. Let’s give it to them.

Santorum went after Romney hard on Laura Ingraham’s show today for his dishonesty about using RomneyCare as a model, saying, “we are going to give away the most important issue in this election.” B-b-b-but, electability!

And since we’re rapidly approaching the moment when criticizing Romney will be treated as high treason on the right, go ahead and read this excellent Dan McLaughlin piece at Red State analyzing Mitt as a salesman for conservative policies while you still can. The bottom line: He’s not going to win any converts. If the GOP takes back the White House, it’ll be because Obama somehow blew it, not because Romney talked centrists into embracing moving right.

Update: Good lord. It really is Stupor Tuesday.

Update: It’s 7 p.m. and all’s well for Newt. He’s won Georgia. A mild surprise in Virginia and Vermont, though — Fox News says they’re both too close to call. Remember, only Ron Paul was on the Virginia ballot with Romney; right now Fox says he’s running a “strong second.” Hmmmm. Revisit this old post from January speculating that Paul would do much better head to head against Romney, if only as a protest vote against his inevitability, than people expected. Needless to say, if he shocked the world by knocking off Mitt in a key swing state like VA, it would shatter Romney’s narrative tomorrow about Republicans coming around to him as nominee.

Update: A splash of cold water from Dave Weigel: Apparently, Virginia exit polls show Romney winning … 63/37. Is that possible? Surely the networks wouldn’t say that race is too close to call.

Update: So much for “too close to call.” At 7:18, Fox and NBC both call Virginia for Romney. I’m curious to see the final margin.

Update: Ten minutes later, despite another fleeting challenge from Paul, Romney wins in his backyard of Vermont.

Update: CNN.com now has links posted on its front page to exit polls from Virginia, Georgia, Vermont — and Ohio. In Ohio, Romney and Santorum are dead even at 36 percent among men but Mitt wins women by three points. Not sure how that adds up to the four-point win that CNN is projecting (40/36), but there you go. The killer data bite:

This one’s fascinating too:

You would think older voters might gravitate to the more socially conservative Santorum, but nope. Unsurprisingly, electability was the most important quality to a plurality of voters (42 percent) and Romney wins that 53/27. On the question of who’s the true conservative, Santorum wins 50/13.

Update: Here’s the Romney vs. Paul Virginia exit poll. Not surprisingly, Paul wins younger voters, unmarrieds, and independents. Mitt wins most everyone else, and on the electability question, wins 84/16. Looks like he’s headed for 20-point or so win.

Update: It’s 8 p.m. and two more races are promptly called, Massachusetts for Romney and, surprisingly, Oklahoma for Santorum. Santorum was supposed to win there but it wasn’t a mortal lock. Stand by for exit polls.

Update: And here’s the Oklahoma exit poll now. Newt and Mitt each took roughly 25 percent of men and women and Santorum cleaned up with the rest. It’s worth clicking through and scrolling down to see how remarkably consistent he was across all sorts of demographics. In Ohio, he and Romney predictably split the vote among those without and with college degrees, but in Oklahoma, Santorum won both groups easily. The two notable areas in which Romney beat him are among those who said a candidate’s religious beliefs matter not much or not at all and, of course, on electability. White evangelicals made up 72 percent of the electorate; Santorum beat Romney 41/24 among them.

Update: Big news for Santorum given the grimness of those Ohio numbers: He’s on track to win Tennessee by four or five points according to their exit poll. Again he wins both college grads and non-grads, and again he crushes Romney among the heavy “white evangelical” majority (73 percent) of the electorate. Interesting:

As usual, Romney’s the runaway winner on electability and Santorum’s the runaway winner on who’s the true conservative.

Update: The Examiner’s Mark Tapscott flags this tasty tidbit from the Massachusetts exit poll. Yes, granted, Romney is cruising, but note the results in the first column here:

Fully half of Republican primary voters in Massachusetts say RomneyCare went too far.

Update: Assuming all the exit polls hold, what’s Newt’s argument for going forward with his campaign? He won South Carolina six weeks ago and tonight he won his home state, but he lost Florida badly and now, apparently, he’s set to lose Tennessee too. Santorum at least has appeal beyond a single region: He’s won in the midwest, he’s poised to win in the south, and thanks to Oklahoma, he’s got a win in the gateway to the southwest too. He won’t win the nomination but as a Not Romney he’s got wider reach than Gingrich seems to have.

Update: At 8:35 ET, NBC calls Tennessee for Santorum. Big win. And given how close the exits are in Ohio, he’s still got a shot there too.

Update: The mood of primary voters in one line, per this depressing WSJ piece: “We don’t have great choices, but it’s anyone but Obama for me.”

Update: Philip Klein looks at Romney’s take among evangelical voters tonight and finds … it ain’t good:

OHIO: Santorum 47%, Romney 31%

TENNESSEE: Santorum 40%, Romney 24%, Gingrich 24%

OKLAHOMA: Santorum 41%, Romney 24%, Gingrich 24%

Says Klein, “The bottom line: evangelicals are still soft on Romney, and where they make up a critical mass of the electorate, he loses.” Fair enough, but the south is a cinch to stay red no matter who the nominee is against O. Then again, when you put it this way, is does seem absurd, doesn’t it?

Update: Ohio’s the cliffhanger of the evening so let’s start paying attention. With a little more than 11 percent in, it’s Santorum who leads by nearly 2,000 votes.

Update: Santorum’s lead is now nearly 5,000 votes with nearly 14 percent in, but use Google’s election map and zoom in on the state to see the district-by-district voting. The urban areas like Cleveland and Cincinnati where Romney is typically strong have barely started reporting yet. He’ll pile up votes there once they start coming in.

Update: David Frum, Romney fan, isn’t happy with what he sees:

This is shaping up as a scary night for those who think that Mitt Romney is the only conceivable Republican nominee in 2012. The Republican Party does not agree. Not winning Georgia, Tennessee, Oklahoma … that’s troubling. There’s still no path for anybody else to the Republican nomination. But ouch, ouch, ouch, what a bumpy path for the guy it’s going to have to be.

I can give him a pass on Georgia because it’s Newt’s home state but Tennessee would have been a huge narrative-builder for Romney as proof that he can win in the south. (The real south, not Florida.) As it is, it’s just one reminder after another that deep red states don’t trust him.

Update: More than 26 percent reporting in Ohio now and Santorum leads by 13,000 votes. And yet … still no numbers from the cities. There’s going to be a big swing towards Romney once they come in. Only question is how big.

Update: Virginia is nearly entirely in now and, with 99.8 percent reporting, Ron Paul’s managed to take 40.6 percent from the presumptive nominee. (In my post in January, I said, “Wouldn’t surprise me at all if the margin is closer to 10-15 points than 30.”)

Update: Ben Domenech: “If you are struggling to beat *Rick Santorum* in Ohio, you are not a strong campaign.”

Update: Shortly after 10 p.m. ET, there’s been a surge in returns from Cuyahoga County, where Cleveland is located. With 40.8 percent reporting, Romney leads Santorum there 47/31, a margin of 7,000 votes. That’s a lot, but statewide Santorum still leads by more than 10,000; in fact, as of 20 minutes ago, Nate Silver gave him a 60-70 percent chance of holding on to win. That seems overly optimistic to me given that Hamilton County, which contains Cincinnati, has barely started reporting yet.

Update: And there’s another state for Santorum: With more than 50 percent reporting, CNN calls North Dakota for him. Go look at the Google Elections map. Middle America is getting purpler with each primary.

Update: More than 65 percent reporting now in Ohio and Santorum’s 15,000-vote lead is steady. Lots of Cuyahoga County is still out but Hamilton County is nearly 50 percent in and his lead there is only 4,000 votes. Is he really going to lose both of the jump-ball states on what was supposed to be coronation night?

John Fund wonders how a guy whose campaign is so well-armed can fare this badly:

He lost Oklahoma to Rick Santorum, despite the endorsement of the state’s most popular politician — populist U.S. senator Tom Coburn.

He won Virginia, where his only opponent was Ron Paul, by only 59 percent to 41 percent. He lost significant cities ranging from upper-crust Charlottesville to working-class Lynchburg.

Late-reporting urban areas may still give Romney a win in Ohio, but it is striking that he is struggling so much in a state where he carpet-bombed Rick Santorum the way he did. And in Ohio — unlike Michigan — there was no semi-organized effort among Democrats to embarrass him by casting votes for Santorum. Romney won among those voters who saw electability in November as their prime concern; his problem was that many voters had other priorities. Evangelicals continued to resist him, as did many blue-collar workers and the most conservative of voters.

Romney should consider himself very, very lucky that Santorum couldn’t organize well enough to get on the ballot in Virginia. If he had beaten Romney there too — and that’s entirely possible given that he would have swept up Paul’s protest vote plus some reluctant Paul-hating Romney voters — the headlines tomorrow about Mitt dropping not one but two crucial swing states would have been disastrous.

Update: Another chunk of Hamilton County just came back and put a dent in Santorum’s lead. He’s down to 7,000 votes statewide with still more than half of Cuyahoga to come.

Update: And just like that, Santorum’s lead is down to 2,000 votes. 77 percent of precincts have reported but still nothing new from Cuyahoga. Romney suddenly looks like he’s in good shape to win. And if Santorum does hold on, he might owe it to … Democrats:

According to exit polls, Democrats constituted 5 percent of the Ohio primary electorate, and 45 percent of them voted for Mr. Santorum. Just 25 percent voted for Mitt Romney.

That translates roughly into a 1 or 2 percentage point bump for Mr. Santorum.

Update: Comeback complete. According to CNN’s ticker, with 86 percent in, Romney now leads by less than 2,000 votes. Another chunk of Cuyahoga county came back and propelled him to the top. And 40 percent of the precincts there still have yet to report.

Update: More good news for Romney: NBC just projected that he’ll win the Idaho caucuses. 32 more delegates.

Update: With 88 percent in, Romney now leads by 5,000 votes. Scroll through CNN’s table of Ohio counties and you’ll see that the only ones where any significant number of votes are still to come in are Romney counties, capped of course by Cuyahoga. Realistically, there’s no way for Santorum to come back. I’d be surprised if we don’t get a call from the networks soon.

Update: I didn’t see it but Andrew Kaczynski says Erick Erickson acknowledged on CNN a few minutes ago that Romney will be the nominee.

Update: It’s a quarter to midnight on the east coast and there’s still no call in Ohio, but like I said above, it’s a done deal. It’s amusing as a political junkie to watch a few thousand votes in a few counties reshape an entire national narrative. Had Mitt dropped this state and Tennessee and Oklahoma, I thought we’d finally see the long-promised round of “panicked GOP establishment looks to replace Romney with white knight” stories that were on tap in case he lost Michigan to Santorum. As it is, there’ll be plenty of well deserved doomsaying tomorrow about Romney struggling to beat a bare-bones operation like Team Sweater Vest in a key battleground state despite a huge financial advantage, but it’ll all be tempered by the fact that (a) Romney did in fact win and (b) he continues to pile up delegates, to the point where Gingrich and Santorum are fighting on to no realistic end except possibly to deny him an outright majority, which won’t make much of a difference at the convention anyway. (Caveat: Team Santorum tells NBC that they’re going to start pressuring Newt to drop out, which is the last best hope of keeping things interesting.) Regardless of what happens in Ohio, though, the fundamentals of the race are clear enough: An awful lot of Republicans, especially in the south, clearly have no confidence in Romney, and Team Mitt just as clearly is unperturbed by the fact. All they need to do is get to 1,144 — if the only way is to carpet-bomb the opposition until they all seem as ideologically suspect as Romney is, so be it — and then the incantation of “Anybody but Obama” will work its magic to guarantee turnout in November. It’s a brute test of wills with conservatives and they’re winning. Barely, but still. In its own way, it’s really impressive.

Update: And there you go. At 12:33 ET, CNN finally calls Ohio for Romney.


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 15 16 17 18 19

Flora Duh on March 7, 2012 at 2:20 AM

hmmm. Recount?

Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:25 AM

hmmm. Recount?

Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:25 AM

Guess we’ll have to wait to see. I’m not waiting up to find out what it is.

Goodnight.

Flora Duh on March 7, 2012 at 2:25 AM

Well, for me Santorum is more like Obama. You can argue that state legislated mandates are the same as federal ones and I’ll disagree but accept your misguided opinion. I believe that both Obama and Santorum wish to have more government involvement in our lives though, just in different ways.

1984 in real life on March 7, 2012 at 2:09 AM

I agree with you that there is a difference between state and federal legislated mandates/takeovers/programs, etc..

However, up until recently, Romney was happy with Romneycare being implemented at a Federal level.

I can’t vote for Romney for these reasons:

1.) I see Romney as too much of a flip-flopper; too much of a say-whatever-it-takes-to-be-elected kind of guy. He seems to have no core values to me. He was one way before he was the other (on nearly any given point).

2.) I just can’t trust the guy who did Romneycare to take down Obamacare. To me, he has absolutely no credibility on this issue.

and 3.) Every single media person and liberal I know wants him to be the nominee. All of them. They have been pushing for him forever. This makes me question him all the more. If the media is all in the tank for him (as well as the RINO establishment), then I am against him. (This is not as big a point as the other two, but it definitely adds to the list- I am not completely contrarian.) (Remember that the media did the same thing for McCain, they loved him and wooed him and then ripped his head off as soon as he was the nominee; the same will happen to Romney in the exact same fashion.)

Reasons that I like Santorum over Romney:

IMHO, Santorum has changed some, but not as much as Romney. He seems genuine and much more steadfast in his beliefs. He also does not have the albatross of Romneycare hanging around his neck. He comes from a state where he is more likely, by definition, to be more conservative than Romney.

I just don’t see Santorum’s past where he has wanted to expand the government’s role over our lives the way that Romney has (or maybe he just wasn’t as successful at it, which may be another reason to vote for him- the lesser successful of the statists, if you want to look at it that way), in the way that you do.

Anyways, that is my two cents and you mileage may vary, but I just cannot bring myself to vote for Romney.

The way the system is gamed, though, I may have to soon start praying for a brokered convention. :/

Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, by the way. :) :) :)

Theophile on March 7, 2012 at 2:25 AM

Other than the left wing sites, I’ve found Hotair is one of the very very few sites that allow this kind of traffic. Many of the regulars hardly post anymore. You can’t have a blog and not moderate it. It turns to trash as we’ve seen since the open registration.

It’s the trolls and bots objective to disrupt the site, that should be a given. But it’s the mods that should put a stop to it.

The former is doing their job, but the latter? Nope!

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 2:01 AM

Since Michelle sold it, the ONLY thing that matters is generating hits. Quantity over quality.

LegendHasIt on March 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM

I don’t a agree with criminalizing homosexual acts, but I don’t see how that makes him a bigot. Also, he is correct that there is no privacy right, that protects homosexual acts, in the Constitution. I’m guessing that you have a personal stake in the issue. That would explain your intolerant rhetoric. Dick.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:11 AM

I don’t know alot of Americans who want government in the bedroom, in fact, I’d bet 0% of Americans who would agree with you here. I don’t want the TSA touching my junk at the airport AND at home.

This is why I can’t support Santorum.

1984 in real life on March 7, 2012 at 2:17 AM

You have a problem with overstating or understating numbers, don’t you? 0%? Really? you could have saved me some time and just said that it was his position on criminalizing homosexual behavior instead of making this about “social conservatism” in general. I’m a social conservative and I think criminalizing sexual behavior is absurd and intrusive. But that one issue doesn’t make him a theocrat, or a bigot or what other names some here are calling him. That kind of name calling poisons the well. We have to come together in the general and beat Obama.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM

Just so people know, Barack Obama had no qualifications and still beat Hillary Clinton.

Having a weak candidate like Santorum do well means little.

scotash on March 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM

Since Michelle sold it, the ONLY thing that matters is generating hits. Quantity over quality.

LegendHasIt on March 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM

What I really want to know is whether or not it’s a Salem thing. The fact that things changed around that time period makes me wonder if our bloggers aren’t being told to let things go for the sake of ad revenue. I do believe the 2 open registrations were Salem-mandated.

Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:27 AM

Well, nom de boom, I agree there’s a bad field. BUT bad as the field may be, the sort of thing Santorum is notorious for should never be front and centre in our political discourse, and HE makes it so. It is apalling, certain electoral doom, and it SHOULD be the kiss of death to a national poliician. That the guy got as far as he did is frankly due to the relative torpor of people like myself.

He’s a bigot, and its good he almost gone. Yay Mitt. Statist corporate shill thatyou atre, you’re a better man than Obama.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:28 AM

Voters want Mitt

bluegill on March 7, 2012 at 1:18 AM

The story of this whole primary is just how much they don’t want Mitt.

If Romney gets the nomination with this little enthusiasm, he’s almost certain to lose the general election.

The counties that voted for Mitt in Ohio will be voting for Obama in the general. The counties that voted for Santorum — well, you’d better hope they vote for Romney in the general.

The last two major wipeouts we had in the general election were Dole and McCain. Both of them had an easier time locking up the nomination than romney has had this year.

And while the razor-thin Santorum loss in Ohio hurts him, he picked up Tennessee, North Dakota, and Oklahoma, which are enough to keep him in the race. The electability argument for Romney is once again shown to be empty.

tom on March 7, 2012 at 2:29 AM

Yay Mitt. Statist corporate shill thatyou atre, you’re a better man than Obama.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:28 AM

You’ve got the makings of a really good bumper sticker there LOL.

I also noticed you misspelled center. Are you Canadian or just a stinking European? j/k :-)

Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:29 AM

I have posted 3-4 times and haven’t received an answer yet. You think that Democrats may stuff the ballots for Santorum. Others have said that a certain % of the Democratic vote went to Santorum.

However, I keep asking…Why was Romney leading and receiving so many votes from the Democratic/Union Strongholds in Ohio? I was watching those County votes come in and that is when he started leading over Santorum. Up until then, Santorum was leading. No one has an answer; what do you think?

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 1:24 AM

Fox News is so in for Romney they don’t even try to hide the fact any longer. From Rove slobbering all over the numbers in OH to pretty much everyone else. The only one with any core values was Brit Hume who correctly pointed out RomneyCare being the main issue for Romney going forward and the fact that even after outspending the filed in who knows how many multiples Romney was only barely able to beat Santorum and Newt. Hume correctly pointed out that so far Romney has failed to explain his support for RomneyCare and actually cannot all things considered. Main reason there is no way conservatives will turn out for Romney come general, same way McCain lost in 2008.

And since I do not believe in coincidences, but do believe in raw numbers, it was interesting to see the replay of IA vote tonight in OH, same delayed tactics stuffing and losing votes and voila, just razor thin victory that also somehow, oh the miracle!, provided the “required” just over the quarter percent margin of victory that will cancel out a recount. All of it in union controlled areas of the state while lying morons on TV were complaining that Santorum got 5% of the Democrats voting for him. How about those union guys in suburban areas of OH that went heavile for Romney? And how about all the RINOs in MA and VT states, they are same as liberal votes to me, there is no difference. I guess those are “good” votes that show Republicans turned out for Romney. What a crock of crap.

Done with Fox News, better to watch worm races on Animal Planet than being brainwashed into oblivion.

If this excuse for a human being is Republican nominee we are doomed, no doubt about it. And the real tragedy is that he will drag the entire ticket down with him in the process. 2008 deja vu…

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 2:34 AM

Mitt wins Alaska too

bwaaaa !!!! at the anti-Romney serial daters posting in the wee hours on hotgas…stay home you big babies

nparga23 on March 7, 2012 at 2:36 AM

What’s a serial dater?

Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:35 AM

One thing really strikes me in looking over the primary results so far: why is Ron Paul even running? He hasn’t won a single state, and only the delusional ever thought he would. All he’s accomplished is to pick up a few delegates here and there so that no one else can claim them. He’s a bit like a toad squatting on your steak: not interested in eating it, but making sure you don’t, either.

tom on March 7, 2012 at 2:35 AM

nvm I got it. Funny. Not really accurate, but still funny.

Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Mitt wins Alaska too

bwaaaa !!!! at the anti-Romney serial daters posting in the wee hours on hotgas…stay home you big babies

nparga23 on March 7, 2012 at 2:36 AM

etc. etc. in the Constitution.

No I didn’t touch it, because I think its irrelevant.

I take it that laws against having more than one wife (or husband),

Definite objective social ills associated with polygamy, extending to the children of such marriages, that the state has an interest in protecting and regulatng.

child brides,

Transgression of liberty of the child. See above.

sex with animals

One wonders if Malachi45 will now declare you to have a personal interest, here. But I digress. Its generally viewed as an indignity upon the animal, and there are reasonable laws against mistreatng animals. In any event, a sane politcian would not blabber about how necessary it was to prevent bestiality if asked. He’d say..”Uh, don’t we have more important things to talk about, that the government really SHOULD be paying attention to?” But no, people boinking goats, that’s a critical federal issue, requiringthe attention of a Senator……………

and such are also abhorrent to you since we do toss people who do these things in jail? And does that make the people against such things also bigots?

I think anyone who has the idea that these are important national issues has a screw loose. No offense.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:37 AM

better to watch worm races on Animal Planet than being brainwashed into oblivion.

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 2:34 AM

I know I shouldnt ask but since I dont watch animal planet do they really have a show with worm races? Cause after some of the crap I’ve seen on the history channel and others I really wouldnt be shocked.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 2:39 AM

Funny that Zensunni says we have more important things to talk about than deviant sex, but he’s the one obsessed with talking about Santorum and deviant sex.

BTW, does your moniker mean you are a Moooslim? I know Moooslims have a pretty tolerant way of dealing with homosexuals, no?

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:43 AM

you could have saved me some time and just said that it was his position on criminalizing homosexual behavior instead of making this about “social conservatism” in general. I’m a social conservative and I think criminalizing sexual behavior is absurd and intrusive. But that one issue doesn’t make him a theocrat, or a bigot

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM

Yes, actually, it does. I’m pretty sure that wanting to THROW PEOPLE IN JAIL for being gay qualifies as being a bigot. If you wanted to throw people in jail for being Jews I’m pretty sure you’d be a bigot.

So yes, he’s a bigot, and a looney bin. This country does not need some deranged religious nut in the white house. Santorum is a NUT CASE. Period. He can take his self-righteous religious beliefs and shove them up his puckered, holier-than-thou ass. He’s an embarrassment to the party and to conservatism.

Cordell on March 7, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Next the media will be saying Romney needs to win Alabama and Louisiana or he will be sunk. Meanwhile Newt Gingrich wins his second state and “rises like a vengeful phoenix” or some such nonsense.

It’s pretty obvious the media on both sides want anybody but Romney – because they know Romney is the only actual reformer in the race.

Swerve22 on March 7, 2012 at 2:45 AM

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 2:34 AM

I flipped my lid when I just saw that hack Chris Haan on Fox News. I sent FNC an email and told them they crossed the line. He is absolutely worthless. Trippi? Sure. Juan Williams? If they insist. But Haan is an absolute d-bag. Can’t handle it.

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 2:47 AM

Judgemental bigot Rick Sanctimonius Santorum in 2003 expressed support for banning private, consensual homosexual activity between adults. That is a bigoted stance if I’ve ever seen one.
bluegill on March 7, 2012 at 12:33 AM

Well, now that statement will definitely need proof. You don’t get to make those kind of accusations without it.

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 1:15 AM

It tried the exact same tactic last night. It posted multiple links to things Santorum had said that — somehow — completely failed to show where Santorum ever called for banning homosexual activity.

I doubt it can do any better tonight.

tom on March 7, 2012 at 2:47 AM

No, you are wrong. He was referring to laws against homosexual sex, not being homosexual. That is not the same as locking up people for being Jews, no matter how much you try and make it so.

And you’re pretty intolerant of other people disagreeing with you. In fact, I think you are an anti-Christian bigot.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

Isn’t having homosexual sex the thing that makes one a homosexual?

Somebody please break this down for me?

Swerve22 on March 7, 2012 at 2:49 AM

What’s a serial dater?
Nom de Boom on March 7, 2012 at 2:35 AM

I love Cracklin’ Oat Bran. Is that the same thing?

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

you could have saved me some time and just said that it was his position on criminalizing homosexual behavior instead of making this about “social conservatism” in general. I’m a social conservative and I think criminalizing sexual behavior is absurd and intrusive. But that one issue doesn’t make him a theocrat, or a bigot

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM

Yes, actually, it does. I’m pretty sure that wanting to THROW PEOPLE IN JAIL for being gay qualifies as being a bigot. If you wanted to throw people in jail for being Jews I’m pretty sure you’d be a bigot.

So yes, he’s a bigot, and a looney bin. This country does not need some deranged religious nut in the white house. Santorum is a NUT CASE. Period. He can take his self-righteous religious beliefs and shove them up his puckered, holier-than-thou ass. He’s an embarrassment to the party and to conservatism.

Cordell on March 7, 2012 at 2:44 AM

No, you are wrong. He was referring to laws against homosexual sex, not being homosexual. That is not the same as locking up people for being Jews, no matter how much you try and make it so.

And you’re pretty intolerant of other people disagreeing with you. In fact, I think you are an anti-Christian bigot.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

Next the media will be saying Romney needs to win Alabama and Louisiana or he will be sunk. Meanwhile Newt Gingrich wins his second state and “rises like a vengeful phoenix” or some such nonsense.

It’s pretty obvious the media on both sides want anybody but Romney – because they know Romney is the only actual reformer in the race.

Swerve22 on March 7, 2012 at 2:45 AM

Yeah, everyone is out to get poor Mitt Romney. The media, the Rothschilds, the establishment, the Illuminati, those guys form the X-Files…

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 1:24 AM

Not all unions voters are alike, just as not all unions are alike. Just look at how the union vote went in PA for Pat Toomey.

Paddington on March 7, 2012 at 2:51 AM

Romney finishes off tonight with a win in Alaska, gets some fawning media for a few days, Santorum wins Kansas on Saturday then either he or Newt take Alabama and Mississippi next Tuesday and then back to Missouri-but-for-real-this-time a week from Saturday. Romney’s momentum is shattered again, the media eats it up and we’re right back to an inconclusive, depressing slog for delegates that will go on at least to the next big group of states on April 24th when Pennsylvania, New York and the rest of the Northeast votes. That sound about right?

alchemist19 on March 7, 2012 at 2:54 AM

Funny that Zensunni says we have more important things to talk about than deviant sex, but he’s the one obsessed with talking about Santorum and deviant sex.

Well, not really. Noting that throwing people in jail for being gay isn’t exactly a shining example of “small government” isn’t obsessing about deviant sex. If I’m obsessive about anything, its the notion that people thought that a guy like Santorum is electable, because frankly, he’s pretty fringe on that notion.

BTW, does your moniker mean you are a Moooslim? I know Moooslims have a pretty tolerant way of dealing with homosexuals, no?

Google is your friend, Malachi45. Pretty much any search engine will do, in fact………….

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:56 AM

No, you are wrong. He was referring to laws against homosexual sex, not being homosexual. That is not the same as locking up people for being Jews, no matter how much you try and make it so.

And you’re pretty intolerant of other people disagreeing with you. In fact, I think you are an anti-Christian bigot.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

Isn’t having homosexual sex the thing that makes one a homosexual?

Somebody please break this down for me?

Swerve22 on March 7, 2012 at 2:49 AM

Depends on who you ask. There are people with gay inclinations that do not engage in gay sex.

Look, I don’t like being in the position of defending what i think to be a silly and intrusive view on gays like the one Santorum has. I think any laws regulating sex between consenting adults is absurd and statist. But I don’t think Santorum is a bigot because of his views. that’s all I’m saying. It is poisonous to the conversation to use that term.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:57 AM

Yeah, everyone is out to get poor Mitt Romney. The media, the Rothschilds, the establishment, the Illuminati, those guys form the X-Files…
Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

AND Colonel Sanders before he went teats up!!!!!!!!

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 2:57 AM

Look, I don’t like being in the position of defending what i think to be a silly and intrusive view on gays like the one Santorum has. I think any laws regulating sex between consenting adults is absurd and statist.

Well, then you have to ask why Santorum has such views. What’s the answer you get?

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:01 AM

I flipped my lid when I just saw that hack Chris Haan on Fox News. I sent FNC an email and told them they crossed the line. He is absolutely worthless. Trippi? Sure. Juan Williams? If they insist. But Haan is an absolute d-bag. Can’t handle it.

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 2:47 AM

I was stunned tonight seeing all the liberal idiots given so much time on Fox News. Balanced my ass! What conservative really cares about what WhoAnn Williams and Trippi think? Why should we?

I am absolutely sure now that phone tapping scandal was used by Hussein to step on Murdoch’s throat, ever since Fox News as well WSJ are getting more and more liberal in their views, guest lists and columns. NOT fair and balanced in any way. Oh well, it used to be a decent channel.

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 3:01 AM

Funny that Zensunni says we have more important things to talk about than deviant sex, but he’s the one obsessed with talking about Santorum and deviant sex.

Well, not really. Noting that throwing people in jail for being gay isn’t exactly a shining example of “small government” isn’t obsessing about deviant sex. If I’m obsessive about anything, its the notion that people thought that a guy like Santorum is electable, because frankly, he’s pretty fringe on that notion.

BTW, does your moniker mean you are a Moooslim? I know Moooslims have a pretty tolerant way of dealing with homosexuals, no?

Google is your friend, Malachi45. Pretty much any search engine will do, in fact………….

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:56 AM

Oh, so I was supposed to know that you took your name from a made up religion in a sci fi book rather than go to the logical conclusion that you were slamming together Zen and Sunni because you thought it was clever? Silly me.

And, yes you so seem obsessed with Santorum’s view on gays.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:03 AM

Isn’t having homosexual sex the thing that makes one a homosexual?

Somebody please break this down for me?

Swerve22 on March 7, 2012 at 2:49 AM

I have many friends that would say that you can be an alcoholic even if you have not had a drink in ten years. I am not sure if it is analogous, but I am guessing that under that logic, you could be a homosexual even if you had not ever engaged in a homosexual act. I guess that under logic, it is your desires, your passions that make you what you are as much as your acts.

(I am not necessarily saying that they are the same, or even analogous, but I am merely pointing out a line of reasoning which occurred to me.)

Theophile on March 7, 2012 at 3:04 AM

Oh, so I was supposed to know that you took your name from a made up religion in a sci fi book rather than go to the logical conclusion that you were slamming together Zen and Sunni because you thought it was clever?

No, but you could have looked it up before you asked a dumb question.

Silly me.

Well, yes.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Yeah, everyone is out to get poor Mitt Romney. The media, the Rothschilds, the establishment, the Illuminati, those guys form the X-Files…
Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 2:50 AM

AND Colonel Sanders before he went teats up!!!!!!!!

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 2:57 AM

The Pope with his wee beady eyes.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:05 AM

I am absolutely sure now that phone tapping scandal was used by Hussein to step on Murdoch’s throat, ever since Fox News as well WSJ are getting more and more liberal in their views, guest lists and columns. NOT fair and balanced in any way. Oh well, it used to be a decent channel.
riddick on March 7, 2012 at 3:01 AM

Hadn’t thought of that.

Could be.

Trippi is tolerable. He doesn’t flaunt his liberal bent. Juan is just clueless. Got smacked with liberal intolerance and still loves them. Talk about Stockholm syndrome.

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 3:07 AM

Look, I don’t like being in the position of defending what i think to be a silly and intrusive view on gays like the one Santorum has. I think any laws regulating sex between consenting adults is absurd and statist.

Well, then you have to ask why Santorum has such views. What’s the answer you get?

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:01 AM

I think it’s because he thinks it important to have a society that does not allow certain deviant behavior as being corrosive to the social fabric. Most people hold this view to some degree, whether it be about adult- child relations, polygamy, polyamory or gay behavior. It may seem absurd to some, but pretty mainstream to others. There is a significant part of the body politic that thinks homosexual behavior should be proscribed. I don’t.

I find Romney’s staist views more intrusive and more objectionable. i think all of our candidates except maybe Paul, are too statist. But he is too wacky on other stuff for me. I don’t object to criticizing Santorum for his position of gays; I object to the term bigot.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:08 AM

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Ah, Dune.

I haven’t gotten around to reading those as of yet, but they are on my list. I am finishing up the Harry Potter books (my wife got them for me for Christmas), waiting for the last Wheel of Time Book (January 2013!) and I have the Nightwatch/Daywatch/Twilightwatch/The Final Watch series all to finish before I have my slate ready for another series. LOL! :) :) :)

Theophile on March 7, 2012 at 3:08 AM

Not all unions voters are alike, just as not all unions are alike. Just look at how the union vote went in PA for Pat Toomey.

Paddington on March 7, 2012 at 2:51 AM

Fact is Romney won in heavily Democratic counties. Read it any way you like, but the last thing any RINO on TV should whine about is Democrats voting for Santorum. They showed their true faces tonight, and I mean Rove and Co. Although strange that the loud mouth double faced blond dumb ass was not on Fox News tonight, probably giving Romney a private “celebration” gift.

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 3:08 AM

The Pope with his wee beady eyes.
Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Greatness.

With that I am ofc to bed. Nite all.

CycloneCDB on March 7, 2012 at 3:11 AM

Yes, actually, it does. I’m pretty sure that wanting to THROW PEOPLE IN JAIL for being gay qualifies as being a bigot. If you wanted to throw people in jail for being Jews I’m pretty sure you’d be a bigot.

So yes, he’s a bigot, and a looney bin. This country does not need some deranged religious nut in the white house. Santorum is a NUT CASE. Period. He can take his self-righteous religious beliefs and shove them up his puckered, holier-than-thou ass. He’s an embarrassment to the party and to conservatism.

Cordell on March 7, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Since he never said any such thing, we can dispense with calling him a bigot. Since the rest of your whole comment is based on a falsehood, we can ignore it. Since you’ve been found a liar, we can ignore what you say anyway.

Now if only I could apply that algorithm to the whole site, Hot Air would be a lot better reading. Of course, there would also be a lot less to read…

tom on March 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Oh, so I was supposed to know that you took your name from a made up religion in a sci fi book rather than go to the logical conclusion that you were slamming together Zen and Sunni because you thought it was clever?

No, but you could have looked it up before you asked a dumb question.

Silly me.

Well, yes.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Wasn’t a dumb question. It also wasn’t an unreasonable assumption. If someone put CatholicShinto, I wouldn’t Google that either. I would just assume they were thinking themselves out of the box and cool.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Yes, actually, it does. I’m pretty sure that wanting to THROW PEOPLE IN JAIL for being gay qualifies as being a bigot. If you wanted to throw people in jail for being Jews I’m pretty sure you’d be a bigot.

So yes, he’s a bigot, and a looney bin. This country does not need some deranged religious nut in the white house. Santorum is a NUT CASE. Period. He can take his self-righteous religious beliefs and shove them up his puckered, holier-than-thou ass. He’s an embarrassment to the party and to conservatism.

Cordell on March 7, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Since he never said any such thing, we can dispense with calling him a bigot. Since the rest of your whole comment is based on a falsehood, we can ignore it. Since you’ve been found a liar, we can ignore what you say anyway.

Now if only I could apply that algorithm to the whole site, Hot Air would be a lot better reading. Of course, there would also be a lot less to read…

tom on March 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Okay, so now I am confused. I just assumed he did say that. I thought I saw a quote of that. He didn’t?

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:16 AM

Okay. My turn to go to bed.

Nite all.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:17 AM

Oh, so I was supposed to know that you took your name from a made up religion in a sci fi book rather than go to the logical conclusion that you were slamming together Zen and Sunni because you thought it was clever?

No, but you could have looked it up before you asked a dumb question.

Silly me.

Well, yes.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Wasn’t a dumb question. It also wasn’t an unreasonable assumption. If someone put CatholicShinto, I wouldn’t Google that either. I would just assume they were thinking themselves out of the box and cool.

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM

After all that, I got curious and looked up zensunni. A religion from the Dune books, that just happened to slam together the words Zen and Sunni to show it had elements of Zen Buddhism and Sunni Islam.

Sounds like your “ignorant” presumption was a pretty good guess.

tom on March 7, 2012 at 3:19 AM

Yes, actually, it does. I’m pretty sure that wanting to THROW PEOPLE IN JAIL for being gay qualifies as being a bigot. If you wanted to throw people in jail for being Jews I’m pretty sure you’d be a bigot.

So yes, he’s a bigot, and a looney bin. This country does not need some deranged religious nut in the white house. Santorum is a NUT CASE. Period. He can take his self-righteous religious beliefs and shove them up his puckered, holier-than-thou ass. He’s an embarrassment to the party and to conservatism.

Cordell on March 7, 2012 at 2:44 AM

Since he never said any such thing, we can dispense with calling him a bigot. Since the rest of your whole comment is based on a falsehood, we can ignore it. Since you’ve been found a liar, we can ignore what you say anyway.

Now if only I could apply that algorithm to the whole site, Hot Air would be a lot better reading. Of course, there would also be a lot less to read…

tom on March 7, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Okay, so now I am confused. I just assumed he did say that. I thought I saw a quote of that. He didn’t?

Malachi45 on March 7, 2012 at 3:16 AM

No, what he said was basically the same argument that often is made by commenters on Hot Air: that if states are unable to make any laws in that area, they really don’t have grounds to make laws against peeping toms, masturbation in public places, prostitution, etc. In short, he was arguing that SCOTUS was wrong to invent a right to privacy that restricted state and local governments from making those laws.

He didn’t call for laws banning homosexuality or contraceptives, and has publicly said that he has no interest in banning contraceptives, and wouldn’t think it would be a good idea even if he could.

Like so many other things, they start with a lie and repeat it over and over again until they get to that point where “everyone knows.”

tom on March 7, 2012 at 3:25 AM

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 2:34 AM

Thanks for replying. I’ll get back to you Wed. Too late for me here:-)

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 3:26 AM

It’s pretty obvious the media on both sides want anybody but Romney – because they know Romney is the only actual reformerpathological liar and flip-flopper in the race.
Swerve22 on March 7, 2012 at 2:45 AM

FIFY

Decoski on March 7, 2012 at 3:27 AM

I think anyone who has the idea that these are important national issues has a screw loose. No offense.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:37 AM

I didnt say they were. What I find funny is that “basic principles of individual liberty” dont mean anything to you unless its your own personal ox being gored. Then the people are bigots.

I have to wonder though, given the LDS stance on gays why you dont think its followers are bigots also?

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 3:28 AM

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 1:15 AM

It tried the exact same tactic last night. It posted multiple links to things Santorum had said that — somehow — completely failed to show where Santorum ever called for banning homosexual activity.

I doubt it can do any better tonight.

tom on March 7, 2012 at 2:47 AM

I know, just a troll/bot. All the same imo. That’s why they need removed, they don’t want any discourse, just post nonsense to disrupt the site.

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 3:30 AM

I think it’s because he thinks it important to have a society that does not allow certain deviant behavior as being corrosive to the social fabric. Most people hold this view to some degree, whether it be about adult- child relations, polygamy, polyamory or gay behavior. It may seem absurd to some, but pretty mainstream to others.

I don’t. I think its because gays give him the heebie-jeebies and everything else is post hoc justification. In fact, I think the proportion of people who support the criminalization of homosexual sex for the reason you just gave are a pretty small minority of those who would criminalise it, and I think the number of sensible people who would make it a poltical issue is even smaller. So it isn’t just about having such a view, its caring enough about it to to think its a political issue. Generally, abstract social theorising doesn’t motivate people that much. Having a weird on about gays does.

Its a matter of opinion on my part, and its an honest opinion. I think he’s a bigot.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:30 AM

I didnt say they were. What I find funny is that “basic principles of individual liberty” dont mean anything to you unless its your own personal ox being gored. Then the people are bigots.

Not following you here. Which of my personal oxes are being gored here?

I have to wonder though, given the LDS stance on gays why you dont think its followers are bigots also?

I think I made that clear: I don’t care if people think homosexual sex is a sin. really: that’s their business. Get up on your hind legs as a Senator and start talking about law, OK, that becomes my business if you are trying to get elected to the presidency, because you pretty much nuke any chances of getting the guy who isn’t 0bama elected if you run on that stance.

This isn’t rocket science.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:39 AM

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 1:24 AM

Not all unions voters are alike, just as not all unions are alike. Just look at how the union vote went in PA for Pat Toomey.

Paddington on March 7, 2012 at 2:51 AM

That may be. But those Counties are Democratic. I’m in Ohio and know the area pretty well. Followed a lot of Presidential races. To see so many of those Democratic area votes coming in at the exact same time that Romney’s numbers starting to increase is cause to wonder. I monitor the SOS live individual County votes coming in and could see the changes. I’ve never seen it before. We’ll see tomorrow what the break down was. Just curious.

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 3:42 AM

I Get up on your hind legs as a Senator and start talking about law,

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:39 AM

Do you have the quote where he said he was going to throw gays in jail?

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 3:47 AM

riddick on March 7, 2012 at 3:08 AM

Good to know I’m not alone in my suspicions. As I said, I was tracking the vote movements in those Counties and Romney and Santorums vote count. When those Dem County votes started to increase in totals, so did Romney’s. Santorums did not.

bluefox on March 7, 2012 at 3:48 AM

Do you have the quote where he said he was going to throw gays in jail?

He supported anti-sdomy laws here.

My turn: which of my personal oxen do yu think is being gored, here?

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:52 AM

I think I made that clear

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:39 AM

No you didnt make yourself clear. You call one a bigot then give the other a pass? You do know what the word means right?

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 3:55 AM

No you didnt make yourself clear. You call one a bigot then give the other a pass? You do know what the word means right?

Which national politician am I giving a pass for making this nonsense out to be an important issue?

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Which national politician am I giving a pass for making this nonsense out to be an important issue?

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Do you have the quote and do you know what the word bigot means?

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 3:59 AM

what is your holdup? He wants butt sex illegal. That’s not a winner in the general

DHChron on March 7, 2012 at 4:05 AM

I dont see where he is going to toss people in jail in that.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 4:06 AM

I dont see where he is going to toss people in jail in that.

Its an overstatement. You would only have been tossed in jail if you didn’t want to pay the fine.

PS: a bigot is someone obstinately attached to their opinions. As in: if gays give a politician the heebie-jeebies so much that he starts going on about bestiality to a reporter (even after you are reminded by the reporter that its all a bit….errr… weird), the politician is probably a bigot.

Now theres two questions you still haven’t answered:

a) Which national politician am I giving a pass for making this nonsense out to be an important issue?

b) Which of my persnal oxen are being gored here?

Inquiring minds, and all that….

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 4:16 AM

SANTORUM: I’ve been very clear about that. The right to privacy is a right that was created in a law that set forth a (ban on) rights to limit individual passions. And I don’t agree with that. So I would make the argument that with President, or Senator or Congressman or whoever Santorum, I would put it back to where it is, the democratic process. If New York doesn’t want sodomy laws, if the people of New York want abortion, fine. I mean, I wouldn’t agree with it, but that’s their right. But I don’t agree with the Supreme Court coming in.

This is what you have been going on about? This is him throwing gays in jail? Whatever, you need to read what he said again because you dont understand what he said or why.

As for the term bigot, you call Santorum one but you dont call Romney one even though the LDS teachings are about the same. Bigot is about someones held beliefs, not some perceived effort to act on them. If your going to call Santorum one then be honest and call Romney one also.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 4:21 AM

holy sh!t…it’s the straw man that just wouldn’t let go

DHChron on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 AM

Test, test. I had a post disappear into the ether, I think. :) :) :)

Theophile on March 7, 2012 at 4:57 AM

This election year is depressing. Maybe 2016 will be interesting, if voting is still allowed.

bobcalco on March 7, 2012 at 5:26 AM

Its an overstatement. You would only have been tossed in jail if you didn’t want to pay the fine.

Its your overstatemnts:

Well, not really. Noting that throwing people in jail for being gay isn’t exactly a shining example of “small government” isn’t obsessing about deviant sex. If I’m obsessive about anything, its the notion that people thought that a guy like Santorum is electable, because frankly, he’s pretty fringe on that notion.

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:56 AM

Of course you don’t People who don’t really care one way or the other are typically wildly in favor of throwing gays in jail…..No, generally its people who have a kink in their head who want to do that. Like Santorum. Clue here…

zensunni on March 7, 2012 at 2:16 AM

Your words.

a) Which national politician am I giving a pass for making this nonsense out to be an important issue?

Calling Santorum a bigot while not calling Romney one. Doesnt have anything to do making anything into an issue. Not that hard to grasp.

b) Which of my persnal oxen are being gored here?

See I thought you were being trying to be obtuse. You claim basic principles of individual liberty for homosexual sex but have no problem when those other things I had listed are outlawed. Your personal ox isnt being gored see so you dont have a problem with the others. Kind of a individual liberty for me but none for thee thing. Same kinda logic that has Stany being a bigot and Romney not.

As I said you need to read the link you posted cause its not about homosexual sex . You can change offending words to drugs or something else and its still the same point. Maybe you should change those words cause it seems to have blinded you to the point.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 5:27 AM

Test, test. I had a post disappear into the ether, I think. :) :) :)

Theophile on March 7, 2012 at 4:57 AM

Yeah things are acting funny here.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 5:28 AM

what is your holdup? He wants butt sex illegal. That’s not a winner in the general

DHChron on March 7, 2012 at 4:05 AM

Thats not what I was talking about. That hard to grasp?

holy sh!t…it’s the straw man that just wouldn’t let go

DHChron on March 7, 2012 at 4:25 AM

You mean the straw man of him wanting to throw gays in jail even though thats not what he was talking about? Yeah it just doesnt see to go away does it, even after the link is posted.

Sultanofsham on March 7, 2012 at 5:30 AM

Reading HotAir during the primaries is painful. Romney won tonight and no one admitted it. Santorum cannot win enough delegates to come out on top. It is over, but apparently everyone wants to ignore math. Like the FHQ article said, it is over…

ArkyDore on March 7, 2012 at 5:40 AM

A B O folks….A B O

cmsinaz on March 7, 2012 at 5:43 AM

He wants butt sex illegal.

DHChron on March 7, 2012 at 4:05 AM

Your fear and desperation makes me smile

Roy Rogers on March 7, 2012 at 6:05 AM

A B O folks….A B O

cmsinaz on March 7, 2012 at 5:43 AM

Yep. And A-B-O is spelled M-I-T-T. After yesterday it is official that Santo and Newt have no chance of amassing the delegates needed to challenge him. They should drop out because they cannot possible win. Outside of TX, maybe PA and divvying up sloppy seconds in the bible land that time forgot they don’t even have any prospects.

Santo will need to win about 65% of the remaining delegates to win. He’s hanging around 25% in the national polling averages and that’s not going to 65% over night. Newt has an deeper hole. As for Paul, well, it’s no country for old men (Who didn’t love Tommy Lee Jones in that film, but I digress).

Mitt has a mortal lock on the rest of New England, and all the other states starting with “New.” He also has CA, MD, DE, IL and UT in his pocket. The game is over and the sooner people recognize the obvious the sooner we can start the real battle for taking back our country!

MJBrutus on March 7, 2012 at 6:13 AM

The game is over and the sooner people recognize the obvious the sooner we can start the real battle for taking back our country!

MJBrutus on March 7, 2012 at 6:13 AM

yes indeedy…

Mitt better not back down against dear leader…the lsm has already called us racists, just ignore them and plow forward, go AFTER him big time

cmsinaz on March 7, 2012 at 6:18 AM

Okay ABR denizen. Repeat after me “President Romney”. Now say “President Obama Re-elected”

That’s all for today’s lesson.

Bradky on March 7, 2012 at 6:19 AM

Reading HotAir during the primaries is painful.

I agree. In the end Romney did well tonight, but you wouldn’t know that by reading HotAir. Come election time, we’re either going to be stuck with Santorum who won’t be able to win enough independents to beat Obama, or Romney who conservatives won’t vote for because conservative pundits can’t cut the guy some slack. Team Obama must be thrilled with the way conservatives are flushing this presidential election down the toilet.

MisterPundit on March 7, 2012 at 6:27 AM

Reading HotAir during the primaries is painful. Romney won tonight and no one admitted it. Santorum cannot win enough delegates to come out on top. It is over, but apparently everyone wants to ignore math. Like the FHQ article said, it is over…

ArkyDore on March 7, 2012 at 5:40 AM

Actually Allah pointed that out a couple of times on this very post.

I don’t expect the media or Santorum to admit its over because the longer this primary ‘goes on’ the more damage it does to the GOP. As for Santorum, he’s obviously just a delusional character to begin with. Maybe he’s depending on his god to carry him to victory.

Go RBNY on March 7, 2012 at 6:29 AM

MisterPundit on March 7, 2012 at 6:27 AM

The pundits and blogosphere are misleading when it comes to the voters. The “silent majority” Nixon spoke of and the “Reagan Democrats” are reasons the GOP won seven of the last 11 presidential contests.
No one likes the media telling them what to think – even if it is the conservative portion of the media.

Bradky on March 7, 2012 at 6:31 AM

Let me get this straight. Romney wins 6 of 10 states yesterday, including Ohio, and over 55% of the delegates and HA spin meisters are saying that it was a bad night for him!? And…many continue to say that Santorum had a decent showing and that he still has a shot at the nomination? REALLY? Considering that two weeks ago Santorum had double digit leads in several key states that Romney ended up winning, I would objectively conclude that Santorum has had a disastrous week and that Romney has had a pretty great one. Romney is now pulling away from the other candidates. So, we will likely see even more movement in his direction in the remaining contests, as the bandwagon effect strengthens. I realize that Santorum may stay the course and will continue to get delegates, because evangelicals apparently hate Mormons, but his ship will continue to take on water and sink. The math just doesn’t add up for him or Gingrich. It’s time for the evangelical crowd to get over their religious bigotry and work to get our guy over the finish line in November. We live in bad economic times that are unlikely to improve significantly before election day. It is a perfect environment for getting an incumbent like President Obama sent home. Isn’t that what most of us want?

NuclearPhysicist on March 7, 2012 at 6:47 AM

Considering that two weeks ago Santorum had double digit leads in several key states that Romney ended up winning, I would objectively conclude that Santorum has had a disastrous week and that Romney has had a pretty great one.

NuclearPhysicist on March 7, 2012 at 6:47 AM

If Romney doesn’t win every state with 100% of the vote then it’s obvious that conservatives are rejecting him.

Go RBNY on March 7, 2012 at 6:55 AM

Romney won his home state.

Santorum lost his home state.

Gingrich lost his home state.

Time for Rick and Newt to quit.

crash72 on March 7, 2012 at 6:55 AM

One other thing. Santorum didn’t lose those double digit leads because of negative ads by Romney. He lost the last debate by a mile and couldn’t stop inserting his foot in his mouth over and over again. Although I like Santorum, a candidate who is prone to shooting himself in the foot all the time doesn’t look like someone who would fare well against the Obama/MSM re-election machine.

NuclearPhysicist on March 7, 2012 at 6:57 AM

NuclearPhysicist on March 7, 2012 at 6:57 AM

Santo has been trying to be the Jesus candidate while at the same time complaining that the MSM keeps asking him about social issues when all he wants to talk about is his marvelous economic plan. The truth is that the only reason anyone knows his name these days is because of his pandering to the evangelicals in places like TN and OK. All he has is the religion card to play however much he tries to pretend that people who vote for him give a rip about anything else that comes from his mouth.

MJBrutus on March 7, 2012 at 7:04 AM

crash72 on March 7, 2012 at 6:55 AM

Gingrich WON Georgia.
Not that it matters anymore.

ABO !

pambi on March 7, 2012 at 7:06 AM

I knew Santorum would win my state of ND.
There’s a lot of Catholics & Lutherans here.
It’s what they do. Vote the line.
I, as I gagged, voted for Romney.
But I’ll tell you it gave me no pleasure & bile rose in my throat as I did it.
All of these candidates SUCK.

ABO !

pambi on March 7, 2012 at 7:06 AM

And as I knew would happen, so I, too, am on this bandwagon.
It’s the only hope I hope to help stave off total disaster for a little while.

Badger40 on March 7, 2012 at 7:14 AM

Captain Obvious on March 7, 2012 at 7:23 AM

I thought that taking one for the team was Santo’s shtick.

MJBrutus on March 7, 2012 at 7:22 AM

Newt, please: You have won your home state, you have shown that you can come back after relentless, personal attack. You come out of this primary process stronger than you entered it, not least for having the courage to challenge the “inevitable” spin. I honestly respect you for what you did in this campaign.

But now, please, give us the chance to rally behind one conservative. It could have been you; you would have deserved our votes as much as Rick Santorum. But time is running short, if we want to avoid Romney, and defeat Obamah with a true conservative – like you – you could do your country a great service, going out on the high of your Georgia win, and endorse Rick Santorum.

Don’t be a turtle, have the courage to be a conservative hero! We really need you on board.

Captain Obvious on March 7, 2012 at 7:23 AM

Government Mandates? 10,000 bucks. Pork Money for the Olympics? 10,000 bucks. Wall-Street Bailout? 10,000 bucks. Conservative Values? Priceless.

There are some things money can’t buy. For everything else, there’s Romney’s super-PAC.

Captain Obvious on March 7, 2012 at 7:27 AM

MJBrutus on March 7, 2012 at 7:22 AM

And your point is? Sometimes, taking one for the team is what leaders do. And let’s make no mistake, Newt would do much more than that if he endorsed Santorum.

Captain Obvious on March 7, 2012 at 7:28 AM

crash72 on March 7, 2012 at 6:55 AM

Gingrich WON Georgia.
Not that it matters anymore.

ABO !

pambi on March 7, 2012 at 7:06 AM


Gingrich is in second place
when it comes to delegate count after Romney. Gingrich is also number 2 in the popular vote after Romney.

Romney secured delegate count 136 projected delegates 178

Gingrich secured delegate count 77 projected delegates 49

Santorum secured delegate count 19 projected delegates 75

Paul secured delegate count 9 projected delegates 51

Romney popular vote to date 1,789,941

Gingrich popular vote to date 990,544

Santorum popular vote to date 959,225

Paul popular vote to date 480,699

Gingrich is looking to pick up more delegates and states in the up coming primaries because they are mostly southern states. There is one state that Mitt Romney will probably be competitive in and that’s Illinois but somehow I doubt seriously that Illinois will got RED in November.

Dr Evil on March 7, 2012 at 7:30 AM

Your fear and desperation makes me smile

Roy Rogers on March 7, 2012 at 6:05 AM

your french fries and burgers make me smile :)

doesn’t change Sant’z crusade against sodomy

DHChron on March 7, 2012 at 7:30 AM

The gop voters have spoken…….

………after $200 million spent Mitt Romney and his big gov loving ways are what the voters want apparently.

Alinsky treatment for Mr. Magic Underwear begins.

The gop is lovin them some Progressives!!!!!!

The Limited government Conservative Coolidge/Reagan wing has been defeated AGAIN by the Rockefeller/ Bush wing of the party.

Goodbye to more Individual liberty and freedom. Hello tyranny.

Bad choice voters.

PappyD61 on March 7, 2012 at 7:31 AM

And your point is?

Captain Obvious on March 7, 2012 at 7:28 AM

LOL! Just a gratuitous jab at your guy. That’s all :-)

MJBrutus on March 7, 2012 at 7:34 AM

Comment pages: 1 15 16 17 18 19