Iowa Results: Mitt Romney Wins Iowa by Just 8 Votes
Google has a caucus watch tool here that’s being updated as numbers come in. As things stand now, it’s Paul 24, Santorum 23 and Romney 23. In the second tier, it’s Gingrich – Perry – Bachmann. If she ends up there, and with no money in the campaign bank, it’s hard to see a rationale for her staying in.
Update 8:33 local time: Now it’s Paul-Santorum-Romney all tied at 23. In the second tier, Gingrich and Perry battle for fourth, with Gingrich ahead 13-10. And Hunstman has weighed in, saying that “nobody cares” about what happens in Iowa. If Huntsman ends up the nominee — which he won’t — he would have just kissed off Iowa in the general election.
Update 8:41: Here’s Fox News’ vote tracker, which is a bit easier to read than Google’s.
Update 8:54: That time stamp may serve as a time of death for the Michele Bachmann campaign. Out of money and now Fox News has projected that she will finish in sixth place. She only managed to beat Jon Huntsman, who didn’t even bother to campaign in Iowa at all.
Update 1:04: Fox just reported that after all the counting was finally done, Mitt Romney defeated Rick Santorum by 8 votes.
Ron Paul has captured the youth vote in Iowa–amazing–times have really changed
Is that a good thing? The youth vote gave us Obama, didn’t it?
The youth vote appears to have limited impact.
As I write, it’s Santorum 25%, Mittens 24%, The Ron 22%.
Maybe all the kiddies have gone to bed?
Yup, frothy mix has just snuck past magic underwear.
Your comment distills the Left’s entire political program going at least as far back as 2000–both in terms of subject matter and general level of sophistication–down to its essence.
So, same place as the overall? Someone on the Paul campaign needs to retake Statistics 101.
Yeah, when lefty Dems get to vote in Repub races it really is amazing what happens. Congrats Paulistinians. Your dear cult leader has had his day in the sun. You’ll see him fade back into obcurity now – where he belongs.
Bullshirt, Paul got the same 20% he been skating on since the beginning. Time to go home.
Iowa Caucasuses are really nothing more than a live poll. They are really, meaningless. Expensive. But meaningless.
“Huntsman has weighed in, saying that “nobody cares” about what happens in Iowa.”
I have no issues with Jon Huntsman not competing in Iowa. Paying that state attention is not the 12th commandment. But it does seem to me that a man who sounds like he is willing to basically dehumanize an entire state of three million people just because it is unable or unwilling to bestow some advantage on him is someone who would sell you or your mother down the river in a heart beat if you were between him and something he thought he needed.
I retract my previous, having read what Huntsman actually said. He’s right–folks in New Hampshire are not going to care too much about the Iowa vote, and in fact may vote otherwise just to be contrary.
Obviously, I have a huge hang up about politicos trying to delegitimization entire groups of folks, but it wasn’t at play here. Does explain why I do not and will not vote Democrat.
“saying that ‘nobody cares about what happens in Iowa.’”
- Having lived in Iowa myself, and gone to school there, I would say this sentiment is correct even as a general principle.
So, Basically no one is going to win, and Gingrich is still in the hunt after $10 million in attack ads is impressive, he will be bullet proof going forward. Mitt “Obamneycare” Romney still can’t break 25%, with all his money, organization, and attack ads, he is just another establishment loser.
Actions speak louder than words, and Romney’s actions are identical to Obama’s.
No, right now it looks like Santorum is gonna win.
But, since it’s not The Ron, the faithful Ronulans will declare that “no one” won it.
Of course, if The Ron does pull it out, then of course Iowa will become the bellwether of the next president!
Ronulans are so predictable.
Santorum surges from behind
I’d say that someone from Obama’s Office of The Director of Progressive Media and Online Response has joined us.
Ron will eventually pull out, and then Santorum will surge from behind
uh tee hee hee hee
uh tee hee hee hee
uh tee hee he–
no.
it didn’t work the first time you made the reference, it didn’t work the second time, and it didn’t work the third time. please, this is a forum for adults. take your scatological fascination to where it would be more suitable. i suggest nickelodeon.com, or perhaps daily kos.
“Scatological?” That’s a big word. Sounds like you might know a bit about it. Considering the current slate of GOP candidates I would argue that you’re an expert on scat.
yeah, cynical wonder, since i’m your intellectual superior, it’s probably to be expected that i’d use the occasional word someone on your level would need to look up.
Technically, they’re right. Romney got the most votes, but the projected delegate count was a three-way tie, with Romney, Santorum and Paul each receiving 6, the others splitting 7, and 3 remaining unpledged (3 party leaders are seated automatically as unpledged delegates unless penalized by the RNC or bound by state rules).
Pretty close to the mark.
Despite millions spent, Romney can’t get anybody new to vote for him.
After using his gazillions to torpedo Backman, Perry, Cain and Gingrich, voters simply moved down the list and pulled the lever for the guys who were their last choices 6 months ago. (note: B,P,C and G contributed to their own declines of course).
So the real message is that Romney can only win by default. Amazingly, he probably will. Or rather, his gazillions and his Ruling Class buds millions will buy the election.
Newt still has a small chance. I’m no longer optimistic because, if conservatives in Iowa can be persuaded by a slick campaign of distortion, can’t any normal voter? Obama would spend hundreds of millions. It’s logical to assume that Newt would be destroyed in the general election as well, if he somehow got that far.
Santorum has no chance. He is next in the periscope. If he can only come to parity with Mr. Gazillionaire in Iowa, when he had no negative ads run against him, and in a state where he lived for six sold months, and a state that is perfectly suited for his brand of social conservatism, it is very difficult to think that he will even maintain, no matter grow his support in less friendly environments, and with the torpedos hitting him every few seconds.
Our Republican Ruling Class Masters probably won’t bring out the big guns on Santorum unless he appears to be gaining national approval. Their calculation will be that his appeal is limited, and it probably is. Rick comes across as nearly as rigid an ideologue as Bachmann. Other than his Senate experience, there isn’t much difference between him and her. He is only one mistake away from the cliff the others have all fallen off.
The early spin from our masters will be that since he lost big in Pennsylvania in the last election, he isn’t electable. Then there will be the snide cuts from the far sidelines about his admirable, but unusual lifestyle. Those two things when combined with his natural table-pounding conservative adamancy will probably be enough to torpedo him without having to use the battleships they wheeled out against Newt.
Iowa is an open primary/caucus state. Dems and Indies are voting heavily for Paul. Figures!
Paul in 3rd. Santorum & Romney TWENTY votes apart after 90% counted. Amazing. Watching Perry on FOX, he looked spent. Only a matter of time before dropping out now, along with Bachman. Gingrich still has some $ and the motivation to take down Romney kamikaze style in NH and SC. Couldn’t work out better for conservatives who can now unify behind the other Rick. Only question is whether this all occurs before SC primary. Lets see how long it takes for my fellow Perry supporter Bryan to digest all this.
Santorum has been anointed as this cycle’s Huckabee by my fellow Iowan conservatives. Its his 15 minutes of fame as he will prove to be just as viable down the road as Huck. Personally, I was the sole vote (out of 54) for Perry in my precinct. So it goes.
Santorum = a new morning in America-onward Christian soldiers
Yup, a mixture of sexual lubricant and fecal matter has just won the Iowa Caucus. You go gurl!
It would now appear that Romney has squeezed out Santorum
Hey fudgepacker, I bet you could type better if you didn’t have that Kenyan sock puppet’s d1ck jammed halfway down your throat.
Typical leftard, mind is in the toilet.
Where he and his politics belong.
Typical leftist, head is stuck in the flusher.
Shows you how FEW people like Romney. Romney didn’t get a huge amount of votes even with this “win.” He remains constant at about 23% or 24% of the vote, just like the polls show. If there were fewer people in the Iowa caucus, I bet you Romney would have lost. Romney will probably win in New Hampshire, but let’s see how well he does in places like South Carolina and Florida. Romney may be too slick for his own good, and the people of Iowa proved it last night.
Impressive win for Romney considering only 4 months ago he could very well have finished 4th after Cain, Bachmann, and Perry. His campaign didn’t spend nearly enough money or time to win Iowa and yet after Cain’s dropping out (although Romney should be thanking his Super Pac for contributing to Gingrich’s demise), he managed to outlast Gingrich’s quick rise and fall, and everyone knew Paul wasn’t going to win although he certainly did better than I ever thought he could in Iowa; maybe New Hampshire but not Iwoa, o well. I guess Santorum just couldn’t quite get the evangelical vote completely coalesced around him like Huckabee did in 08′.
If Romney was selling me a car, I wouldn’t buy it, but, to be fair, if Santorum was the salesman, I’d want to see his father, instead. Can anyone actually think we need another political science major, never-done-a-single-thing-besides-politics beanbag to run the effing World?
I guess it’s inevitable. Hardly any Americans are actually competent at their jobs anymore. Maybe we no longer even know what competence looks like.
Now, THERE’S a chant for the OWS buttholes!
LOL! You need a blog.
IOWA RESULTS: “Romney just eeks out fatal embarassment of loss by only 8 votes.” THAT’S the news.
Iowans say “TAKE A HIKE!” to establishment GOP. heh.
Absolutely. Romney winning Iowa by 7 votes is a pyrrhic victory. Considering “our betters” in the media and the Republican Party establishment said Romney would be the nominee months ago, and that Santorum was at best a 2nd tier candidate, this is a well deserved boot to the groin to all of them.
Santorum/Rubio ’12
I think Iowa was focused on one major conservative value: family values.
The other values were there as vital but second tier values.
The economy was ‘there’ but, all the GOP have reasonably similar views about the economy. They have different foreign values; some comparable immigrant values; some comparable energy values etc. These other values were back-up support for the judgment by the electorate on this one major value.
I think that Ron Paul’s family values moved him into one of the top three but his foreign policy left him at the last of this set.
Romney’s weaker family values put him lower than Santorum but Santorum is economically weaker than Romney. That evened these two out – after all, 8 votes is statistically irrelevant.
It is interesting that Bachmann, who is heavily focused on family values (and as I’ve said – I’m fed up with her ’23 foster children’) finished effectively last. Last. Since all the GOP have somewhat similar economic values, that means that her foreign policy, her immigration and other policies were ignored or rejected.
Perry – strong family values, but, there are problems with his articulation of his policies: on immigration, on Congress, on foreign policy. He has interesting ideas on all of this but doesn’t explain them well.
Gingrich – well, we know all about his family values. The fact that he did as well as he did, in 4th place, shows that his other values on the economy, foreign, immigration etc – are accepted by many.
My own view is that there are five whom I’d consider still in the race: Romney, Santorum, Paul, Gingrich, Perry.
Santorum is a weak candidate. Ron Paul is a weak candidate. Gingrich is mesmerizing but weak because of his baggage and temper. Perry has strong policies and that includes on immigration and Congress but can’t articulate them.
That leaves Romney who is ‘less conservative’ but experienced. He needs a strong VP – whether it be Rubio or Christie – and that as a team will do very well.
Something else to note, and that is the ‘political image’ of Obama. That is, is we are voting on the political image of the GOP candidates, with regard to their values on the economy, foreign, immigration, health etc etc, then, what is Obama’s political image?
Note that Obama has no images from his past – other than the ones he has written by and for himself in his various narratives. There are no academic records, no association records, i.e., no past friends, colleagues, girlfriends. No academic articles, no edited papers. No policies apart from voting ‘present’ in the Senate. Nothing. Obama has managed to render himself as a unique-once-only Presence.
By this I mean that with Obama, you are expected to evaluate him only in Present Time. Now. Just as you Now interact with him. No past, no accountability. Nothing.
Indeed, if you do want to evaluate and explore, you are accused of ‘racism’. That is a powerful political tool of Obama – Don’t ask any questions about me. If you do, this shows you are racist.
Obama campaigned in 2008 as Not Bush. This time, he seems to be campaigning as Not Congress. In other words, he is yet again, divesting himself of any history, any attachments, and expected you to accept him only in Present Time. As he is now: charming, sighing that he is trying but ‘it’s hard’, and blaming Congress.
But wait. Congress is the Voice of the People. Obama is campaigning this time against the people of America. They his enemy. Not Bush. But Americans.
I think the GOP should articulate this tactic – both his Teflon nature where he rejects accountability, his isolation from accountability and any history of his actions – and – his blaming the American people, via their Congress, for his failures.
The GOP should define themselves as the Voice of and the Support for, the People.
It sounds good.
Until you realize that Congress’ approval rating is about 9%.
The only chance to beat the Liar is to reveal his past and to reveal the lies. It has to be a campaign of education.
It isn’t looking good, because it’s hard to imagine Romney doing that. He will hammer that Obama is a failure, but Obama will simply counter with his official government statistics, which by October will have 7% unemployment (perhaps in the 6′s), GDP up 3% for the year, inflation under control, and a 20 to 30% gain in the stock market. He will have charts that contrasts those numbers to December 2008.
Slam dunk.
That’s why Newt should be the candidate. He’s the only one who will take the Liar on and the only one with the verbal skill and passion to penetrate the fog of lies. We really do need Winston Churchill, and Newt is the only person close.
But – it’s been three years and no-one on the right has been able to uncover Obama’s past. No-one. So, how do you think that anyone, whether as Romney or Gingrich, would be able to do what no-one has accomplished?
As well, a major tactic used by Obama to prevent anyone finding out about his past – whether it be past friends, girlfriends, grades, ideology – is the accusation of racism. That is, if you don’t accept him ‘as is’ and want to find out the ‘ingredients’ so to speak, you are instantly and I mean instantly, accused of racism. You want to check his ingredients..ie his blood type, his birth location, his…You are a racist.
Moving through life as a free-agent without any connections whatsoever is a basic Obama lifestyle – and his major defense tactic against anyone trying to link him to anything or anyone – is: if you want to find out, you are a racist.
So- no, this strategy in the next election won’t work.
The reason for Obama doing this is because he lives, not within reality, but within a fictional narrative. Authored and controlled by Himself. So, he can’t have anyone else ‘writing’ about it. Only Himself.
Think – how the public has allowed Obama to get away with saying that, despite attending the ‘Rev’ Wright’s ‘church’ for 20 years and listening to his anti-American, anti-white, anti-capitalist rants, Obama got away with saying the never heard any of this. Got away with it.
Got away with no grade records, no accomplishments, no output as editor of the Harvard Law Review, no output in Senate etc, etc.
Now – will he get away with blaming his current output on Congress?
The tactic I suggest is:
1) Openly confront him with his tactic of blaming the American people. Repeat it, with examples, about how he disdains and shows contempt for Americans – his name-calling of them (lazy, ignorant, racist). His contempt for their elected officers (Congress).
2) Openly confront his data – and say it: ‘With all due respect, Mr. Obama, but your outline is fictional. I, XXX GOP nominee, live in the real world. Not a fictional world. The real data is: xx unemployment; xx loss of small and medium businesses; xx loss of homes; xx loss of ….etc.
I accept with your view about Gingrich and his ability to instantly stop Obama in his tracks and say: NO. The data is…. I accept your view of his affinity to Churchill in his articulate capacity.
But my concern about Gingrich is his baggage and whether the American people want a confrontational approach. Because Obama will react to that with vicious, malicious confrontation on his part. He’ll bring out the race tactic as his ‘scorched earth’ policy.
I wonder if the milder yet equally confrontational approach might be more successful. That is, to constantly (1) define and describe Obama as anti-American people with his contempt for Congress, and his divisionary tactics of class, ethnic and racial divisions; and (2) define and describe Obama as indeed being what he is – a creature distant from reality, living in a self-authored fictional world. Define the GOP candidate as pro-American and a realist.
BUT – don’t set up a confrontational GOP candidate because Obama will self-define himself as a victim of Racism and throw himself on the public as a victim.
Obama is our first (& hopefully last) affirmative-action POTUS. NTS, one cannot utilize the typical scorched-earth approach to him (IOW making personal assessments based on impression). What would be better, IMO, is just sticking to the facts, only discussing things he has done without Monday-morning quarterbacking editorializing. His dismal record stands out just by itself. A successful Pub candidate is going to merely shine the light on all the terrible things Obama has done & allow everybody to draw their own conclusions. Focus should be on the elements Virginia Bob has posted several times on this website (a very long lanudry list of Obama misdeeds).
Nobody has been able to reveal the past and record of the Liar because nobody tried in 2008 and pravda has covered everything up for the last three years, except for people who listen to Fox News who voted against him in 2008 anyway.
But the Republican presidential candidate can’t be locked away in a room. He will get to speak and he will get to speak on CBS, NBC, ACC and CNN. They can challenge him, and they can spin him, but they can’t shut him up. They would like to, but they can’t.
For three solid months, the Republican candidate will have a platform.
It’s the only chance to expose the lies.
Romney will try, but only about the economy, and he doesn’t have the skill and charisma to expose the lies when they are in the form of official gubamint statistics. Conservatives have no clue whatsoever what is going to happen in the next 10 months. The Liar RUNS the government. He OWNS the statistics. They are going to be SPECTACULAR compared to what they were in December 2008, and that is going to be the point of comparison. Unemployment, GDP, inflation, consumer confidence, the stock market…all will be improved from December 2008, and most will be dramatically better. Nobody understands that all of that is already in place. Plus the new statistic about poverty, which may not be the last. In September, a healthy SS increase will be announced. The medicare increase will be the lowest in years. Tax cuts will be promised by the light worker.
(Side note, Obama has rarely commented on the stock market, but he made a famous, now forgotten comment about March, 2009 that “now is probably a good time to buy”. The market is still well below the 2007 highs, but that isn’t what Pravda will be trumpeting. They will focus on the 70-90% improvement from Dec 2008, and they will hammer every day the widely accepted conventional wisdom that the stock market predicts the future of the economy. They have held off bragging about this for the xpress reason to save it for the last three months of the election cycle. Even if the market sinks this year, and it’s about 90% certain to go up since the private business manipulaters are all facist sympathizers of the administration and the foreign government manipulators all want Obama to be reelected, the Dow will still be far above Dec 2008. You are going to hear a lot about that soon.)
The flaw with your strategy of running as the representative of the people is already defunct. Obama is running AGAINST CONGRESS. That’s what he wants.
I am now also very concerned about Newt’s baggage, because Iowans bought the negative ads hook line and sinker. If $3 to $4 million in ads can do that in Iowa, with its population of 3 million people, in a relatively conservative primary, obviously, $300 or $400 million in ads will be very effective in the general capaign.
But unless Romney shows some willingness to campaign in a way that has a chance to penetrate the fog of lies, what is the real choice? McCain II or somebody who can and will take a different approach.
I’ve concluded that Romney will lose, because he has shown zero inclination to do what it will take to penetrate the fog of lies about the Liar in Chief. That’s why the establishment loves him, and why they hate Newt with a blind passion.
How many Republican Grande’s have lost their sinecures under Obama? A few. Very few. Probably no more than lose them in the normal course of events. They aren’t about to rock the boat.
Only Newt will.
proreason – I understand your suggested tactic, which is:
1)IF we outline the FULL Description of Obama, THEN, people will reject him.
Are you certain of this IF-THEN proposition?
2) Of course, I ask HOW we are going to find out a full description of Obama. And to say that so far, no-one has tried to find out, can’t be accurate. Whether it’s Trump or Beck or Malkin, and others, people have tried to find out and gotten, effectively, no-where. How is one going to find old friends, colleagues, grades, records?
Again, this Describe Obama Fully and You’ll Reject Him tactic only works if such a claim is valid.
3)Obama has lived his whole life within a self-authored narrative. He’ll continue the narrative, but this time, use his safety-tactic of setting himself up as a victim of your ‘nosiness’ and your deep-seated racism. Using racism is a key, a basic, tactic of Obama. He’ll divert the campaign into one of racism and himself as victim.
4) I stand by, so far, my suggestion of setting up a campaign of:
a) Reality versus Fiction. Describe Obama as he is now, as someone living within a fictional world. Constantly point out that his narrative is fictional and ‘the real facts are…’
b) Anti-American. Describe Obama as rejecting the Legislative branch of government, with his ever-increasing open contempt for Congress and his ever-increasing governance by executive fiat, which is anti-constitutional.
Describe yourself, the GOP nominee, as someone who has his feet on the ground, not within a fictional narrative, and as someone who insists on the power of the people within their Congress. Therefore, Obama’s strategy of blaming the people (say this) ie Congress, is to self-define himself as The Teflon Man (say this).
Keep it calm.
Remember, Obama is a vicious and malicious and manipulative person, a pathological liar, and he’ll attack and divert the campaign into one of racial hatred and his being a victim.
Keep it calm. Stick to the facts and to the constant, daily description of Obama as ‘living in a fictional world’ while the people of America live in the real factual world and want their leaders to be the same.
Isolate Obama. Isolate him in his fictional world. Keep referring to Obama as isolate and ‘safe’ in his fictional world. Alienated from the People. Alienated from Facts. Isolate Obama…After all, that’s already a tactic of Obama, to isolate himself from reality in his fictional world. Say it.
I like much of what you say. I just don’t think Romney will do it or wants to do it.
I also think it is far too suble a tactic to be effective against opponents who are professional and deadly con artists, abetted by a criminal media that will view the election as the most event in their lives.
But they can’t keep the Republican candidate off TV.
The only hope is to take advantage of it. We need the candidate who will bludgeon Obama with a blitzkrieg every time he gets the chance. McCain already tried the mannerly stuff.
Lets talk about unemployment a little bit.
Smart conservatives know that unemployment is only 8.6% because millions have dropped out of the workforce, because the feds have increased do-nothing civil service jobs by hundreds of thousands, and because unemployed people turning 18 without a job aren’t counted. Real unemployment is over 11%, even using the bogus gubamint basis…if you adjust for just those factors.
But normal voter don’t know that and Romney won’t be able to educate them because they won’t listen to him.
But it won’t be 8.6% in Nov 2012, it will be a lot lower. Why?
- another 1 to 3 million workers will drop out of the workforce
- the feds will hire another 100,000
- administration cronies like GE and Apple will hire hundreds of thousands more
If that isn’t enough to drive the number well below 8%, then they will adjust the definition.
So the magic bullet of unemployment isn’t going to be a magic bullet in Nov 2012. Whatever it takes, the marxists will have a storyline that shows dramatic improvement in employment compared to the low point that was caused by, of course, Bush and the Republican. I suspect the number will be under 7%, but it will certainly not be above 7.9%. The Bush peak will be cast as 11.6%, even though that came under Obama. Pravda will explain why it’s Bush’s fault.
So “he’s a failure” isn’t going to work. It’s going to have to be more brutal than that, and the candidate is going to have to be able to explain in a sentence or two, with a lot of credibility, that the numbers are LIES.
It better be Newt doing the explaining.
You still haven’t explained WHAT brutal facts about Obama that Gingrich or whoever, is supposed to reveal!!
I’m saying: deal with the CURRENT Obama, and keep describing (not his past) but his PRESENT nature as living in a fictional world.
When he outlines unemployment figures and boasts about how low they are, counter with:
With all due respect but your figures are fictional. Americans live within reality; that’s why we’re exceptional. The facts about unemployment are that it’s at least 11% and higher in some areas. You are fudging facts; you aren’t counting those who’ve given up, those who’ve…..etc..
Keep describing Obama as living, isolated, in a fictional world.
The 2008 and 2012 campaign cannot be compared. Obama was campaigning to an electorate tired of one particular reality: of war, of being hated, of terrorism. Obama’s campaign wasn’t about the economy. It was pure fiction, a narrative that he was offering to the people – about oceans ceasing to rise and a utopian realm of no problems, no risks, no….
This campaign is about reality but a very different reality, not an emotional one (war, terrorism) but a hard reality of no jobs and economic losses. Obama tried to blame this reality on Bush. On the ATM machines. On the Japanese tsunami.
That is, Obama has no narrative to counter this economic reality than more fiction. He’s said his stimulus worked; it didn’t; he’ll say that unemployment figures are down; they aren’t.
This time, you can confront the fiction and tell him the facts.
Don’t let him divert the campaign into one where he feels that his fictional past is under attack. He’ll divert the campaign to racism and himself as victim.
Stick to the facts; counter every misinformation by saying that Obama’s outline is fictional and the GOP face reality and facts…and provide the facts..and outline how the GOP will deal with facts.
Have a policy of Facts Versus Fiction. America prefers Facts.
You’re kidding, right?
What is obvious to you is hardly obvious to people who never hear it.
You can’t debate this thug calmly about policy. He simply lies and makes stuff up. He laughs off anything about his past and waits for the media to call the accuser racist. If you say he operates in a dream world, he will wheel out the government statistics. And he never gets shook up…he’s trained all of his life to be bemused at anything that is said about him.
Sure, they will smear Newt with tons of garbage. They will no matter what any candidate says.
You can’t let them set the rules. You have to go after him and ignore the charges of racism. The only thing the republicans have in their favor is they can’t keep the candidate off TV. The candidate has to go nuclear with information about the criminal.
No, proreason, I’m very serious; I’m not kidding.
I’m not suggesting a debate. I fully agree that Obama is incapable of dealing with the truth, with reality; that he’s a pathological liar.
You say – Go after him.
HOW? With what? You don’t outline this. Please do so.
I’m saying: Don’t bother with digging up his past – which you have suggested is necessary. I’m saying that it’s impossible and he’ll define you as racist for the attempt.
I’m saying that when Obama goes on TV with his fictional outline of how great everything is, you, the GOP, go on TV with the reality.
AND do it in a way that again and again and again, defines Obama as living in a fictional world.
That is, my tactic is for the GOP to define Obama. But, not as a liar, not as someone hiding his past. Just describe WHAT he is doing NOW..as fictional. That’s all. Leave it to others to vilify and declare his fiction as lies, as manipulative, as cynical, as contemptuous.
What you, the GOP nominee do, is to show yourself as someone living directly connected to reality. While Obama lives in a fictional world. Allow the electorate to choose between Fact and Fiction. Don’t put them into the evaluative task of repudiating Obama as an Evil Man (yes, Obama is indeed that)..but don’t put the electorate into this role. It’s too hard to do when they’ll be accused of racism is they do and when they’ll also have to reject themselves if they voted for him last time.
Just set up a scenario of a choice between Fact and Fiction. And explain how Americans have always preferred Fact over Fiction and it is this hard-nosed realism that has made America exceptional.
Make it a positive step for Americans to NOT CHOOSE Obama. Don’t set it up as a negative step.
Do you see what I’m trying to, not very well, explain?
The Churchill angle accounts for Gingrich’s appeal to my mind. He really is the only one with the guts to go after Obama’s jugular. Any of the rest of them will just nibble at his heels. But the odds are stacked against Gingrich due to the fact that he too often sticks his foot in his mouth. There is also the fact that he won’t get enough endorsements. Further, his campaign apparatus is too short on funds & organization.
yes.
But he will be able to get on television in September and October 2012. They can’t keep him off and they won’t be able to shut him up.
Romney himself and the Republican Grandes will shut Romney up…if that is even necessary.
At this point, unless Romney has a mysterious transformation, only Newt can beat Obama.
I see your point, proreason, but I have my problems with your assumptions. You have two assumptions:
1) IF people know the full description of Obama (his past)THEN they’ll reject him.
Is this a valid hypothesis?
2) It is possible to find out a full description of Obama.
Is this possible – and in time for this year’s campaign? And without tainting the seeker(s)/speakers of this description?
2) My suggestion, again, is very different. I’m suggesting that the electorate should be allowed to keep their view of Obama as he has outlined it in his own narrative – that ‘nice guy with the smile and wave’. Don’t vilify him because Obama will deal with that by his major tactic of racism – and the campaign will get sidetracked and people will come to Obama’s defense.
Instead, DESCRIBE him, not within his past, but NOW. As someone living in a fictional world.
Counter all his speeches – all of them, by the: ‘With all due respect, but your outline is fictional. The American people don’t want to live within a fictional but a real world. We have the courage to deal with reality; that’s why America and Americans are exceptional. We are not, as you, Mr. Obama, have called us: lazy, ignorant or red-necks. We deal with facts – and the facts about your speech are……
Describe him constantly, as someone living in a fictional world.
Describe Americans as people who prefer to and can, live in the real world.
This is the contrast I suggest.
Not your contrast which is of an Evil Past (which has yet to be described) and an Obama cover-up of this past.
Describe him as weakening the powers of the people, with his contempt for Congress and his governance by Executive Fiat. That is, don’t bother with his past; describe his CURRENT behavior.
Tell him: The GOP support the power of the people, via their elected Congress. You reject it, with your contempt of Congress by, for example, insisting that they pass your stimulus and health care bills without reading them. But we, the people, are the legislature; we, the people, make the laws. The GOP respect this right and will enable Congress, not to abdicate its duty as you have insisted, but carry out its duty.
Don’t underestimage Obama’s viciousness – I’m sure you don’t. My point is that all his life, Obama has operated in a reactive vicious fashion to any danger to his fictional narrative. He’ll do the same if someone, be it Gingrich or other, tries to unearth the truth. Instead, simply describe his CURRENT actions as fictional.
He will have the government statistics in his favor.
They have schemed for three years to be able to do so.
Just like the CBO declared that Obamacare will save a trillion dollars, they will have dozens of rock-solid statistics that will disprove your fictional world scenario with the official data. Obama will laugh it off, and the media will “fact check” all of his data and debunk the dream world theorists.
Civility and reason won’t work. Essentially, yours and the ruling class’s approaches are based on an economy and world situation that is so blatantly horrific that even stupid voters won’t be able to ignore it, and will be persuaded by reason and data. It’s also the Rush Limbaugh theory.
If that happens, Rush is right, daffy duck could get elected so we should pick Sarah Palin to really shake up Washington.
My view is that the state of the economy is going to be painted by different artists in September and October. I appear to be the only person who can even imagine that they will be able to redefine reality, but I think it’s virtually a sure thing. It will take a unique voice to break through the fog. And that’s a long shot.
Again, I see your point, proreason, but attacking Obama will only move him into defining YOU as racist.
That is, if your group describes Obama as a person, ie, as a pathological liar, a manipulative person, a socialist, anti-American etc..then, the Obama side will divert the campaign into defining you as a racist. And the electorate will, to prove THEY are not racists, side with Obama.
My suggestion is to prevent this method by defining Obama’s world as fictional. And the GOP AND the American electorate as living in the real factual world. Ask the people to choose, not between Obama vs racism but between Fact and Fiction.
As for your suggestion that the data will all be cooked, I think that they’ve been trying to do this and have been debunked every time. How will the fall be any different? Won’t new comments from Obama be debunked?
You say that the Democrats WILL go ‘on their record of accomplishments’ – and the pundits have been saying that Obama can’t campaign on his accomplishments because the economy is disastrous.
So- there are several variables in our scenarios with uncertain data bases: you say that no-one will debunk Obama’s misinformation (lies) and that the economy will improve.
I’m saying that I don’t know if it will improve that much and – I’m saying, don’t ask the electorate to choose between Being For Obama vs Being A Racist. Instead, ask them to choose between Fact and Fiction. And define Americans as being strong enough to focus on Facts.
Toss up, I suppose.
Eight votes, huh? ACORN and the SEIU in a large city can fake one hundred thousand times that number.
– it was good to see CNN and MSNBC panelists disturb to see their narrative upset last night.
Considering he was supposed to already have the nomination sewn up tight, for Romney to prevail by 8 votes over a man who was teetering in disaster 2 weeks ago is hardly deserving of the term “victory.”
It’s almost a “self-esteem prize.”