Updated R-nomination Thread

#1
volinbham

volinbham

VN GURU
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
69,802
Likes
62,555
#1
Merge if necessary but the nomination thread(s) have gone all over the place.

A couple thoughts so far:

1) Romney kicking butt but still seen as questionable in gaining R support

2) Paul doing quite well but still seen as having no chance

These two points show how a media-fueled theme persists regardless of the emerging facts on the ground.

3) Perry should have quit after Iowa - maybe before

4) Huntsman should have quit - he's behind Stephen Colbert in SC polling!

5) Gingrich, Perry and to some extent Santorum are playing a dangerous game of attacking Romney for being a (gasp) capitalist. The attacks on Bain sound like they are coming from Michael Moore - not supposed fiscal conservative, free-market advocates.

6) Gingrich is in full-on scorched earth mode and should never be relevant again in R politics. It shows how petty and spiteful he really is. He's also screwing Santorum by splitting the SC conservative vote. Complete douche.
 
#2
#2
volinbham said:
Merge if necessary but the nomination thread(s) have gone all over the place.

5) Gingrich, Perry and to some extent Santorum are playing a dangerous game of attacking Romney for being a (gasp) capitalist. The attacks on Bain sound like they are coming from Michael Moore - not supposed fiscal conservative, free-market advocates.
Click to expand...

Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum are neither fiscal conservatives nor free-market advocates. They are pushing a social agenda and are only paying lip service to economic policy.
 
#3
#3
The NH turnout was remarkably low, on a day when the weather was terrific. Disturbingly low under the circumstances. Even Bill Kristol at Fox calls it "worrisome" for the GOP.

Get ready to here the phrase "enthusiasm gap" pretty much from Feb. 1 to election day.
 
#4
#4
Remarkably low?

Turnout in New Hampshire’s Republican race was lower than in 2008, with about 228,000 participating compared with about 239,000 four years ago.
Click to expand...

One half of one percent lower than 2008. It was predicted to be higher but it was clearly in line with 2008 as was Iowa (slightly higher).

Enthusiasm gap will apply - to Obama
 
#5
#5
I think Huntsman is campaigning for 2016 right now. He's the dark horse who comes out of nowhere, gaining national popularity. He's gotta be hoping Romney becomes "the guy who couldn't beat Obama" and the R nomination is Huntsman's for the taking in 4 years.
 
#6
#6
I've noticed LG's use of "remarkable" tends to result in exaggerated statements.
 
#7
#7
It was "remarkable" in at least two senses:

1) It was expected to be much higher because the weather was so much better than 2008.

2) Even FOX NEWS commentator Bill Kristol REMARKED about it.

In fact, during the day, a number of election officials and conservative bloggers expressed considerable dismay at the surprisingly low level of interest, politicking, signs, etc.

New Hampshire Voting Starts Slow But Record Turnout Predicted


ABC News’ Chris Good, Elizabeth Hartfield and Sarah Parnass report:
MANCHESTER, N.H. — Election officials predicted record turnout in today’s New Hampshire primary, but early indications from across the Granite State showed that voter turnout was low. That, of course, could change by the time the last ballots are cast by the 8 p.m. ET closing.
Things have picked up since light morning turnout, according to anecdotal reports from Twitter and local New Hampshire media outlets. The New Hampshire Union Leader reported slow and steady voting in Nashua early Tuesday evening, while the New Hampshire secretary of state’s office told ABC News it does not yet have turnout numbers to report.
New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner Tuesday morning predicted 250,000 residents would vote in the Republican primary, which allows undeclared voters to participate by registering as Republicans at the polls. That would break New Hampshire’s GOP-primary turnout record of just under 240,000, set in 2008.
In 2004, the last year in which only one party held a contested presidential primary in the Granite State, just under 220,000 voted in the Democratic contest–and 95,000 of them were registered as undeclared on primary day.
Anecdotes from Twitter Tuesday morning reflected low turnout across the state. Several New Hampshire residents tweeted about sparse attendance at polling places, and WMUR political analyst James Pindell noted that a source driving around the state rated turnout as “SLOW, SLOW, SLOW.”
Gardner cautioned against reading too much into early anecdotal reports, given that they don’t necessarily reflect historical comparisons. Gardner told ABC News Tuesday morning he expects strong turnout of GOP votes in the town of Bedford, in Hillsborough County in southern New Hampshire. Hillsborough is New Hampshire’s largest county; Mitt Romney carried it in 2008 with 35 percent of the vote.
“I just hope the turnout’s going to happen,” Manchester City Clerk Matt Nomand told the New Hampshire Union Leader, noting light morning turnout.
“After visiting four of Portsmouth five wards, interest seems pretty minimal in the NH Primary,” the Portsmouth Patch tweeted around noon.
ABC News’s Jonathan Karl captured the scene in Manchester’s Ward 1 polling place, noting record turnout–of news media–as Jon Huntsman paid a visit.
“Merrimack NH, Precinct 3. What’s wrong here? NO signs/supporters,” conservative New Hampshire blogger William Smith tweeted late Tuesday morning, along with a photo of the lonely polling place.
“Just 600 votes in Hampton by 9am; 10K+ on list. More Obama signs, volunteers than GOP. Zero for Newt or Santorum,” tweeted freelance journalist and former New Hampshire Union Leader Executive Editor Charlie Perkins.
Things have picked up a bit heading into the afternoon of voting, as WMUR reported a steady stream of voters filing unto polling places. At Webster Street School in Manchester, N.H., poll workers told WMUR that about 1,230 had voted there by noon.
The candidates themselves seem to be getting plenty of attention, as Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich were both mobbed at polling places in Manchester, N.H. Tuesday morning:
Huma Khan contributed to this report.
 
#9
#9
Not Bill Kristol - oh noes! It must be remarkable then. Romney is doomed; doomed I tell you.

This just in, Kristol is not a big Romney fan.

Expected 250,000 (which would be a record). Actually 228,000. Difference? Less than one percent lower than expected.

Remarkable indeed!
 
#10
#10
Weather? Bill Kristol?

With the statistics that volinbham reported, these people may be remarking about it, but they're off. The headline shouldn't be "Low Turnout Was Remarkable", the headline should be "Voter Turnout Decline Was Statistically Insignificant - but Some Idiots Find it Remarkable".
 
#11
#11
nbakerld said:
Weather? Bill Kristol?

With the statistics that volinbham reported, these people may be remarking about it, but they're off. The headline shouldn't be that "low turnout was remarkable", the headline should be "voter turnout decline was statistically insignificant - but some idiots find it remarkable".
Click to expand...

But Bill Kristol said...
 
#13
#13
volinbham said:
Not Bill Kristol - oh noes! It must be remarkable then. Romney is doomed; doomed I tell you.

This just in, Kristol is not a Romney fan.

Expected 250,000 (which would be a record). Actually 228,000. Difference? Less than one percent lower than expected.

Remarkable indeed!
Click to expand...


Expected in excess of 250,000 and some were even thinking a lot more than that.

I agree with you that Fox in general does not like Romney. I have noticed more than a few times their commentary being subtly critical of him. They seemed to love it when Perry first announced, but cooled super fast after about 2 debates.

Then they seemed to love Gingrich, and I noted some pretty harsh commentary on Fox's part about the Romney Super-Pac ads in Iowa going after him.

In fact, I was pretty shocked to see more than one of their commentators and Republican guests lamenting Citizens United as causing such a problem for Gingrich.

I can't tell if it is that Fox, institutionally, buys into the notion that Romney is not really conservative, that his Mormonism remains a problem for the Fox execs, or that they are worried a la Limbaugh and others that Romney is too bland and can't win.

If Romney is the nominee, they will get behind him. Hannity, Coulter, Malkin, Kristol, will all swallow their prior criticism and promote him, at least in juxtaposition to Obama.

But if, as happened with McCain in 2008, they sense towards the end that Romney isn't going to win, they will turn on Romney just as they turned on McCain and in post-election analysis tout the notion that the GOP had to make a hard right to win.
 
#15
#15
volinbham said:
Not Bill Kristol - oh noes! It must be remarkable then. Romney is doomed; doomed I tell you.

This just in, Kristol is not a big Romney fan.

Expected 250,000 (which would be a record). Actually 228,000. Difference? Less than one percent lower than expected.

Remarkable indeed!
Click to expand...

My math might be failing me again, but I think we are going for 10 percent there.
 
#17
#17
Sorry, you are right, it was just 250,000.

Manchester, New Hampshire (CNN) - New Hampshire may soon boast record vote totals in the first-in-the-nation primary.
New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan said the office expects record turnout in the Republican primary because of "undeclared" voters who can vote for a Democrat or Republican.

He predicted 250,000 votes will be cast for Republicans.
"We're hearing that the turnout is steady. There aren't lines that are backing up but people are just constantly moving through the polling places," Scanlan said. "It's certainly what we would expect during a presidential primary."




Weezy is also right. Its close to 9 % (8.8 to be more precise) less than expected. b'ham, not sure why how you come up with 22,000 being less than one percent of 250,000.

Maybe your calculator is infected a little by your wishful thinking?
 
#20
#20
I always find it interesting to see how things are reported as much as what is reported. In our local paper Romney's win in NH was on the front page, of course, and in the 5 paragraphs on the front page, every candidate was mentioned except for one. In fact, it took 2 more paragraphs on page 5a before Ron Paul's 2nd place finish came up. Not saying there is a conspiracy, but I find it interesting that the editors didn't make sure every candidate's name and percentage of votes made it on the front.
 
#21
#21
YorkVol said:
I always find it interesting to see how things are reported as much as what is reported. In our local paper Romney's win in NH was on the front page, of course, and in the 5 paragraphs on the front page, every candidate was mentioned except for one. In fact, it took 2 more paragraphs on page 5a before Ron Paul's 2nd place finish came up. Not saying there is a conspiracy, but I find it interesting that the editors didn't make sure every candidate's name and percentage of votes made it on the front.
Click to expand...

It's not a conspiracy at all, it's just journalists responding to their incentives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
Kinda what I was saying in the OP - the story is already written; regardless of the facts that come out.

Ron Paul is clearly in second place after the first 2 primaries.

It should be a major story - he is doing much better than expected.
 
#25
#25
volinbham said:
Kinda what I was saying in the OP - the story is already written; regardless of the facts that come out.

Ron Paul is clearly in second place after the first 2 primaries.

It should be a major story - he is doing much better than expected.
Click to expand...

Why should it be a major story? Both Iowa and NH were open to any voters of any party. SC will be much tougher because they have to be a registered R to vote.

He lost by about 40,000 votes and a good portion of his voters would never vote R they are dems.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top