Arizona and Michigan Primaries

[Tarheel]

With the Arizona and Michigan Primaries going on today I thought that I'd wade back into politics and see where things stand; the numbers for Romney are looking better on the 'day of' but not great.  I think that he's going to win the Arizona Primary which will be good for him in that it's a winner-take-all for the 29 delegates of that state.  On the other hand, Mitt's native state of Michigan looks to be a problem.  He and Santorum are only separated by 1.3% in the most recent polls; and it's a hybrid primary state in that some voting districts award delegates proportionally to the votes.  Of course, with Ron Paul running a weak third he'll pick up some delegates in Michigan too.  Gingrich is so low I doubt he'll get any support there (and he'll get none from Arizona by the way).

Michigan will get ugly for Romney tonight but Arizona will put a cherry and Cool Hwip on top of his political shit sammich.  Just my prediction.

A week from today is Super Tuesday, 6 March; big day for Georgia and, as I've opined in other threads, maybe a big day for Gingrich again (third time is a charm).  I think he's going to win Georgia and maybe Tennessee.  He probably could have won Virginia if he'd gotten on the ballot there.


On a sidenote, what is the deal with all of these gay threads (not that there's anything wrong with that)?  Even in the political forum!  Surely I'm not the only one noticing it?

[Townhallsavoy]

On a sidenote, what is the deal with all of these gay threads (not that there's anything wrong with that)?  Even in the political forum!  Surely I'm not the only one noticing it?

Because we are the brainwashed. 

Want to get involved in an election?  Want to educate yourself? 

Learn the following stances from each candidate:

- Abortion
- Gay marriage
- Religious stance

Then make your decision. 

We are the superfluous generation.

[Tarheel]

Because we are the brainwashed. 

Want to get involved in an election?  Want to educate yourself? 

Learn the following stances from each candidate:

- Abortion
- Gay marriage
- Religious stance

Then make your decision. 

We are the superfluous generation.

I know you're being facetious to an extent; that's what the MSM wants us to examine with each Republican candidate.  The ONE himself has been openly against gay marriage in the past but that doesn't matter; he's for infanticide but that doesn't matter; and who the hell knows what kind of religion he is...after listening to the America-hating sputum and vitriol from the unmentionable Rev. Jeremiah Wright for 20 plus years; I think that would make anyone want to say that the Muslim call to prayer is one of the most beautiful sounds in the world too.  But I digress.

[Townhallsavoy]

I know you're being facetious to an extent; that's what the MSM wants us to examine with each Republican candidate.  The ONE himself has been openly against gay marriage in the past but that doesn't matter; he's for infanticide but that doesn't matter; and who the hell knows what kind of religion he is...after listening to the America-hating sputum and vitriol from the unmentionable Rev. Jeremiah Wright for 20 plus years; I think that would make anyone want to say that the Muslim call to prayer is one of the most beautiful sounds in the world too.  But I digress.

I'm not being facetious.  Not to an extent.  Not at all. 

I tried to get involved in the gubernatorial election a few years ago.  I was floored when every candidate's website flaunted their stance on "traditional southern christian values" and was blatant in their stance on abortion.  I had to actually click links to find their platforms for improving the state economy and education.  And those stances weren't very transparent.  A lot of fluff to fill a webpage.  Abortion?  Directly stated. 

I've encountered numerous people in recent weeks that outrightly state that Obama is for gay marriage and for abortion.  My own mother said something like - "This country is in big trouble with Obama.  He's not a real Christian!" 

A coworker doesn't like Mitt Romney because she thinks he's a liberal with healthcare.  But that's not where she was going with her opinion.  "A healthcare liberal supports abortion."  That's where she was going.

[GH2001]

I'm not being facetious.  Not to an extent.  Not at all. 

I tried to get involved in the gubernatorial election a few years ago.  I was floored when every candidate's website flaunted their stance on "traditional southern christian values" and was blatant in their stance on abortion.  I had to actually click links to find their platforms for improving the state economy and education.  And those stances weren't very transparent.  A lot of fluff to fill a webpage.  Abortion?  Directly stated. 

I've encountered numerous people in recent weeks that outrightly state that Obama is for gay marriage and for abortion.  My own mother said something like - "This country is in big trouble with Obama.  He's not a real Christian!" 

A coworker doesn't like Mitt Romney because she thinks he's a liberal with healthcare.  But that's not where she was going with her opinion.  "A healthcare liberal supports abortion."  That's where she was going.

Abortion is a more serious issue than the other 2 to me. I look at it as taking a life. That's just my stance. The other two I could really careless about.

Southern politicians have always put their social stances front and center - this is nothing new. Its smart for the most part. Look at the electorate - you're in the Bible belt.

[GarMan]

Abortion is a more serious issue than the other 2 to me. I look at it as taking a life. That's just my stance. The other two I could really careless about.

Southern politicians have always put their social stances front and center - this is nothing new. Its smart for the most part. Look at the electorate - you're in the Bible belt. 

Yeah...  I can see that, but these three items tend to be more cut-and-dry than the other issues.  You can't necessarily oversimplify an economic plan to a black-and-white issue...  Wait, what? 

[GH2001]

Yeah...  I can see that, but these three items tend to be more cut-and-dry than the other issues.  You can't necessarily oversimplify an economic plan to a black-and-white issue...  Wait, what?

We gotta spread the wealth GarMan. Its change you can believe in.

[Tarheel]

I'm not being facetious.  Not to an extent.  Not at all. 

I tried to get involved in the gubernatorial election a few years ago.  I was floored when every candidate's website flaunted their stance on "traditional southern christian values" and was blatant in their stance on abortion.  I had to actually click links to find their platforms for improving the state economy and education.  And those stances weren't very transparent.  A lot of fluff to fill a webpage.  Abortion?  Directly stated. 

I've encountered numerous people in recent weeks that outrightly state that Obama is for gay marriage and for abortion.  My own mother said something like - "This country is in big trouble with Obama.  He's not a real Christian!" 

A coworker doesn't like Mitt Romney because she thinks he's a liberal with healthcare.  But that's not where she was going with her opinion.  "A healthcare liberal supports abortion."  That's where she was going.

Fair enough; I mis-read your post.

These issues are important to a lot of provincial southerners (no offense to your mom; I have folk in my family who also say the same things).

These issues are not on my high priority list which is why I'm aloof in my attitude about them; I've written on this forum more than once that we've got bigger problems to contend with before the social issues (add marijuana legalization to that social list by the way).

Unfortunately, the social issues cater to the lowest common denominators of the electorate's collective mind-set on both sides.  What a shame.

[Townhallsavoy]

Fair enough; I mis-read your post.

These issues are important to a lot of provincial southerners (no offense to your mom; I have folk in my family who also say the same things).

These issues are not on my high priority list which is why I'm aloof in my attitude about them; I've written on this forum more than once that we've got bigger problems to contend with before the social issues (add marijuana legalization to that social list by the way).

Unfortunately, the social issues cater to the lowest common denominators of the electorate's collective mind-set on both sides.  What a shame.

The true shame is that the lowest common denominator just so happens to be the majority of voters. 

[GH2001]

The true shame is that the lowest common denominator just so happens to be the majority of voters.

On both sides. See 2008 election.

[GarMan]

The true shame is that the lowest common denominator just so happens to be the majority of voters. 

Thanks to 50+ years of a declining public education system...  But, as long as they have self respect... 

[Tarheel]

Well it was a good day for Mitt politically although had it not been for the early voters in Michigan he probably would have lost that state.  While he does get all 29 delegates from Arizona he only gets 14 delegates from his native state; Santorum leaves Michigan with 12 delegates; Gingrich and Paul receive no delegates from either primary.

On to Super Tuesday.

[GH2001]

Barring an upset somewhere BIG, this is Mitt's to lose now. Ive accepted it. It sucks, but oh well. Newt will get the Dixie states. Santorum will do well in the midwest and Romney will take all else including the big prizes - Texas, Cali, and NY. Even if he doesnt take Texas, he will have such a big lead by then that it won't matter much since the TX primary is so far away.

Here's looking at you Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal, Duncan Hunter Jr, Allen West - for the next 1-2 elections if Romney fails in November.