Skip

Revenge of the Anti-Romney
January 3, 2012 10:56 PM   Subscribe

After interminable months of campaigning, debates, and roller-coaster polling, the first official vote of the 2012 presidential race is in -- and boy, is it a doozy. Ames straw poll winner Michele Bachmann placed second-to-last, while former juggernaut Rick Perry performed so badly he's canceled upcoming events and is said to be on the verge of dropping out. Meanwhile, perennial laughingstock Rick Santorum, consolidating the support hemorrhaging from Perry, Bachmann, and an ad-blitzed Newt Gingrich, rocketed past the youth- and independent-backed Ron Paul and, with 99% of the vote counted, is separated from Mitt Romney by four votes out of ~120,000 -- by far the closest result in caucus history. As the shaken field contemplates the path ahead through Romney firewall New Hampshire, conservative South Carolina, Florida, Super Tuesday, and beyond, President Obama staged a quiet redux of his own dramatic caucus win four years ago, a dry run for the looming general election. And as for powerhouse Buddy Roemer? Don't worry -- his team is ready to do battle with evil.
posted by Rhaomi (277 comments total) 11 users marked this as a favorite

 
Romney claiming he won by 14.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:01 PM on January 3, 2012


Karl Rove om Fox just reported his RNC sources say Romney takes it by 14 votes. The final vote tally was missingin the last precinct, but both campaigns agreed on the count.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:02 PM on January 3, 2012




Are we still pretending that Republicans are having a primary?

There need to be least two non-joke candidates for that to happen.
posted by andoatnp at 11:10 PM on January 3, 2012 [8 favorites]


I miss the days when the winner was determined to be whoever brought the most rum.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:12 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


My God, my God, there's (almost) nothing scarier than a future in which Rick Santorum could actually lead this country.
posted by newdaddy at 11:12 PM on January 3, 2012 [26 favorites]


Exactly what the Big Media wants - a horse race! TV/Radio/Internet commercials - ad rates climbing - it's like manna from heaven!! Just listen to everyone talk about the various "qualities" of each candidate; of the loaded words used to describe supporters (e.g. "energized", etc.). Yup - get the electorate all juiced up! Frame arguments about "making things better".

Cut to large individual and institutional contributors, smoking cigars and partying. they will wait until after the general election, and then make inroads via the access they have bought to the White House and Congress, no matter the winner.
posted by Vibrissae at 11:16 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


Aww, Herman Cain got only 58 votes. Even No Preference did better, and I heard that guy is a dick.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:17 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


Don't blame me - I voted No Preference.
posted by elwoodwiles at 11:18 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


To be fair, Lube and Feces is a much more realistic slogan than Hope and Change.
posted by Behemoth at 11:19 PM on January 3, 2012 [38 favorites]


Lube and Feces is a much more realistic slogan

Lube was on the 'do not fund' list, so having it provided will make your time interacting with FedGov less painful.
posted by rough ashlar at 11:23 PM on January 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


Vote Lube/Feces 2012?
posted by no regrets, coyote at 11:26 PM on January 3, 2012


I really want to see headlines tomorrow that read "Santorum Surges From Behind"
posted by kingv at 11:29 PM on January 3, 2012 [42 favorites]


Aww, Herman Cain got only 58 votes. Even No Preference did better, and I heard that guy is a dick.

Yes, but No Preference keeps his hands to himself. Nothing to see here. Romney is the candidate and he will give Jimmy Obama a run for his money.
posted by three blind mice at 11:29 PM on January 3, 2012


Like I said in another thread, a gap of four votes is not only bullshit, it's an insult to the intelligence.

In totalitarian regimes, the leaders 'win' by a margin of 99%. In corporatist republics, the leaders 'win' by a margin of less than 1%.
posted by clarknova at 11:30 PM on January 3, 2012 [8 favorites]


Romney waxes lyrical after win.

That guy sure knows all the lyrics to that song.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:33 PM on January 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


I really want to see headlines tomorrow that read "Santorum Surges From Behind"

"Hard Iowa Caucus Struggle Ends With Santorum #2"
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:35 PM on January 3, 2012 [35 favorites]


I wouldn' call that a win. Romney did better in 2008, and he didn't even try.
posted by empath at 11:36 PM on January 3, 2012


So the message that more than 75% of Iowa Republicans sent to the national GOP was "we will vote for this motley array of unelectable assclowns before we will vote for Mitt Romney."

OK, take out Ron Paul's bit -- his supporters were actually voting FOR him, not AGAINST Mitt.

And if Santorum can ooze through New Hampshire (ew!) and make it to South Carolina, he can pick up even more attention there and in Florida.

Brokered convention! Whee!

When do the primaries start to matter, though, in terms of allocating convention delegates? I know the GOP jiggered their rules this time around, so that all delegates after such-and-such a date would be locked in, but I don't know what that date is. And I am too lazy to look it up at a quarter to two in the morning.

But it seems like the big winner tonight is President Obama.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 11:36 PM on January 3, 2012 [5 favorites]


As someone said, we'll have to wait for NH for the great headline: "Romney Licks Santorum!" Based on Clinton County being 97% counted with Romney down by 4 votes, the 14 net votes and win makes sense. LOL Cain got 58 votes--gotta love those loyal mistresses.
posted by whatgorilla at 11:36 PM on January 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


Romer was hilarious on Twitter--at one point stating he had enough votes to start a bowling leauge and later point out that Cain was beating him.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:37 PM on January 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


Romney waxes lyrical after win.

If it's not Pokemon-based, I'm not interested.
posted by jcreigh at 11:37 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


Brokered convention! Whee!

Saw some analyses that said it was highly unlikely due to delegate rules.

Damn.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:38 PM on January 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


My headline: Santorum bubbles up from bottom to finish just under Romney.
posted by empath at 11:38 PM on January 3, 2012 [7 favorites]


Romney wins by eight votes.
posted by Rhaomi at 11:39 PM on January 3, 2012


Ron Paul gloating to Huntsman is good for a laugh.
posted by Talez at 11:39 PM on January 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


I wouldn' call that a win. Romney did better in 2008, and he didn't even try.

Err what? He spent millions more and invested a lot more time in 2008 and lost. He barely tried this time and came out on top. A win is a win, he got more votes than the other guy.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:40 PM on January 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


Matt Taibbi: Iowa: The Meaningless Sideshow Begins
posted by homunculus at 11:40 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


kingv: "I really want to see headlines tomorrow that read "Santorum Surges From Behind""

As of this posting, NYT is going with Out of Santorum’s Lean Operation, a Muscular Result.
posted by Apropos of Something at 11:41 PM on January 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


"Romney's domination marred by Santorum"
posted by jeffburdges at 11:41 PM on January 3, 2012 [6 favorites]


More astonishingly, CNN's John King just noted that Romney received precisely six votes less today than he did in the 2008 caucus.


Romney 2012: 30,015

Romney 2008: 30,021


I'm starting to think The Whelk's "sad robot" description of Romney is eerily accurate. He gets out the vote to a tolerance of 0.006 millivotes!
posted by Rhaomi at 11:44 PM on January 3, 2012 [29 favorites]


That guy sure knows all the lyrics to that song.

Yeah, that song and Who let the dogs out.
posted by mediated self at 11:45 PM on January 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


It certainly sounds like Perry and Bachmann are out in the next few days. The big question will be, how many of those two candidates' supporters will break to Gingrich over Romney? And can Ron Paul maintain a level of support that's somewhere around 10 to 15 percent?

I don't think Santorum has a chance in any other state besides Iowa. This is either going to become a Gingrich-Romney shootout with Paul picking up his scraps, or Romney may start to accumulate all the delegates, especially if he picks up a cascade of endorsements.

I know that some CW says that a drawn out nomination process would be good for the GOP, in terms of voter registration and exercising the ground game, a la the 2008 Democratic slugfest, but I think that the negatives for the GOP (exposing more of the electorate to their fundamental ugliness, having to one-up each other on conservative pet issues that will come back to haunt them for the general election) would outweigh the positives in that case.
posted by ofthestrait at 11:47 PM on January 3, 2012


Err what? He spent millions more and invested a lot more time in 2008 and lost. He barely tried this time and came out on top. A win is a win, he got more votes than the other guy.

"The other guy" got 75% of the vote, being 'anybody but romney'. Huckabee got a convincing win in Iowa, last time. Romney just teetered across the finish line with the exact same number he's been polling since the campaign started. He has a hard ceiling at around 22-25% of the vote. Evangelicals apparently are willing to vote for a pair of Catholics over a Mormon. The votes from Perry and Bachman are going to be split between Gingrich and Santorum as the campaign goes on. I don't think Romney gets any of them. Paul might pick up a bit from them dropping out, even, but those votes won't go to Romney.
posted by empath at 11:48 PM on January 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


In the short term at least I would expect the Santorum to pick up the Perry/Bachmann folks. Similar social conservative + not-Romney appeal.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:49 PM on January 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


Rhaomi: "More astonishingly, CNN's John King just noted that Romney received precisely six votes less today than he did in the 2008 caucus."

As funny a coincidence as this is, it's worth recognizing that any difference between Romney and Santorum (arguably, even Paul) is within the margin of error for a normal election, let alone a caucus where some precincts don't even bother keeping the ballots.

I mean, listen, I'm from Iowa, I've grown up around the caucuses, all that. The caucuses aren't an election, they're a non-binding parlor game to decide who gets a relatively small number of delegates at a political convention. Any significance we give them beyond that is entirely on us.
posted by Apropos of Something at 11:51 PM on January 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


"The other guy" got 75% of the vote, being 'anybody but romney'.

Okay, and Huck lost to the other guy 66-34. It happens in fields of 9 people. Romney was not supposed to win Iowa, he was aiming to make his splash in New Hampshire. Any win is a good win in Iowa given his strategy. If he was going hard in Iowa like he did in 2008 it might be a different story.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 11:53 PM on January 3, 2012


I really want to see headlines tomorrow that read "Santorum Surges From Behind"

'Santorum Blows Wad On Last-Second Ads; Spreads Campaign to Back-Country Iowans'
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:53 PM on January 3, 2012 [6 favorites]


Romney won by 8 votes, but scored 6 votes fewer than four years ago.

At the end of the day, it is 11 delegates to Romney and Santorum and 3 to Ron Paul and 0 to the rest of them. Since there are 2,286 delegates to be won over the entire process, we are now slightly more than 1% of the way there.
posted by andreaazure at 11:55 PM on January 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


"The Santorum Surprise"
posted by jeffburdges at 11:57 PM on January 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


Okay, and Huck lost to the other guy 66-34. It happens in fields of 9 people. Romney was not supposed to win Iowa, he was aiming to make his splash in New Hampshire. Any win is a good win in Iowa given his strategy.

He happened to be the guy in the lead when the 'not romney' candidate was in flux. A couple of weeks ago, it'd have been Gingrich, next week, Santorum probably would have crushed him. Go ahead and look at the polls over the last few months. Romney is basically a straight line, everyone else has been bouncing around like crazy. After Romney wins NH (which will make no news, as everyone has always expected it) and Gingrich wins SC, there's going to be a lot more clarity in the race. I think it's going to be Gingrich and Romney down the home stretch.
posted by empath at 11:57 PM on January 3, 2012


Empath, I've looked at the polls, have you?

In Iowa, Romney Tops List for Second Choice Support.

Romney is the top second choice for a lot of the folks who supported the other candidates, plenty of folks are not "anybody but Romney" they are "Romney is not quite my favorite."

He won the same support as last time with less money and effort and is about to trounce the field in New Hampshire. He is going to be the nominee.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:02 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Since there are 2,286 delegates to be won over the entire process, we are now slightly more than 1% of the way there.

Looking at the NYT numbers, McCain placed fourth or fifth (if I remember correctly) in 2008. No one is out who the establishment hasn't already decided is on the way out.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:02 AM on January 4, 2012


As far as I can tell, Romney cinched the nomination tonight. Gingrich? Santorum? They're not even on a lot of the ballots going forward. Romney's the only one who actually knows how to run a campaign -- the technical stuff, like knowing when to turn the signatures in. The rest of 'em, aside from Paul, are just promoting their books.

Santorum is a nobody; he can't even win a race in his home state, let alone nationally. The only reason he got any votes at all in Iowa is because he was the last, i.e., the least attractive, of the not-Romneys who have each had their turn.
posted by Fnarf at 12:03 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


I do not agree with the politics of Santorum or Paul. But they both have something that neither Romney or Gingrich have: authenticity. Every single thing Paul says, I believe he says it from his heart. The same is true for Santorum. Romney speaks from his head. And Gingrich speaks from another place.

Paul and Santorum are who they are. Romney and Gingrich are who they think you want them to be. If you chop out everyone below 4th place, you basically have a meaningful four-way race going into NH and SC. There is a real chance that Romney does not win the Granite State, and even if he does, that's "expected." Same thing for Gingrich and SC.

FWIW I would love to see a debate between Ron Paul and Barack Obama. Even the 2012 model of Obama. That debate would be great for our country. (That said: I don't see Ron Paul winning the nomination and certainly not the presidency.)
posted by andreaazure at 12:04 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]




I wonder if it's gonna become a talking point that Santorum and his wife had an abortion.
posted by kafziel at 12:06 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


And Gingrich speaks from another place.

CNN says this was not the closest caucus of all time. Obama beat Hillary by 7 votes in the 2008 Guam caucus. :P
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:07 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


"Romney Cannot Hold It In; The Santorum Surprise"
posted by jeffburdges at 12:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


I wonder if it's gonna become a talking point that Santorum and his wife had an abortion.

Do you have a link to a mainstream source on that?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:14 AM on January 4, 2012


Do you have a link to a mainstream source on that?

How about Daily Kos?
posted by BitterOldPunk at 12:18 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


Mitt Romney beats an unelectable candidate by only eight votes in a state Obama won in 2008.

DUDE.

Plenty of fist-bumping going on tonight at the White House.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:21 AM on January 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


The Senator's Dilemma
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:22 AM on January 4, 2012


Do you have a link to a mainstream source on that?

How about Daily Kos?


I was thinking not something left-blogger.

The Senator's Dilemma

The Santorums decided against aborting their baby. For Rick and Karen Santorum, the birth of their premature son, Gabriel Michael, on October 11, 1996, confirmed their beliefs about partial-birth abortion; the idea that the state might condone violence against this tiny but undeniably human creature seemed impossibly barbaric. Their baby died 2 hours after birth.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:25 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


I vote for "Romney Squeezes Out Santorum."
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:26 AM on January 4, 2012 [25 favorites]


The Daily Show: Indecision 2012 - Romspringa - Rick Santorum's Surge
posted by homunculus at 12:27 AM on January 4, 2012


Whether Romney won by 4, 8, 14, or thousands of votes is completely irrelevant because "winning" doesn't matter. It's not a winner take all system. Delegates are now assigned proportionally at a later state convention, so it's quite possible that Santorum will get as many delegates from Iowa as Romney does.

Winning Iowa is like winning the first ten minutes of a football game; it has little to no absolute bearing on the final outcome of the whole game.
posted by twoleftfeet at 12:33 AM on January 4, 2012


"Rick Santorum Paints Iowa Brown"

Fox News colors Santorum's districts brown (imgur).

Just fyi the "Santorum surges from behind in Iowa" article headlining our previous Santorum thread was run by philly.com which hosts the Philadelphia Inquirer where Rick Santorum used to work. lol

Also, we need more hyperlinks from "Rick Santorum" to spreadingsantorum.com because currently googling "Rick Santorum" yields his Iowa campaign first.

posted by jeffburdges at 12:34 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


I still don't understand why Huntsman is being ignored. He is the only viable alternative to Romney, ie the only other sane one.
posted by fshgrl at 12:34 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


The Santorums decided against aborting their baby

The Santorums forced delivery at 20 weeks, when a fetus has virtually no chance of survival out of the womb (the youngest surviving only at approximately 22 weeks). Given the odds, forcing delivery at 20 weeks is an abortion procedure, even if the Santorums would prefer not to call it that.

Which brings up the debacle of Rick's extremist views on abortion. He has continually argued against the option of abortion for any reason, such as in cases of rape or incest.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:34 AM on January 4, 2012 [28 favorites]


Plenty of fist-bumping going on tonight at the White House.

Definitely: Despite, or perhaps because of, the wild voter mood swings that produced a revolving cast of front-runners, the caucuses failed to generate the big increase in voter turnout that many Republicans were expecting. Only slightly more Republicans turned out as in 2008. A clear, cold night was no barrier for Iowa residents. GOP leaders had expected that enthusiasm among party activists would mean increased turnout, like the huge vote that Democrats generated in 2008. But the lack of a compelling social conservative to excite the Christian conservatives who dominate the caucuses, and a late-starting push by Romney, who played down his Iowa campaign until the last six weeks, may have been contributing factors.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:36 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


It doesn't count as an abortion because it's not some slutty 17 year old girl that deserves it.
posted by amuseDetachment at 12:36 AM on January 4, 2012 [12 favorites]


BP, do you have a mainstream source that says it was an abortion?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:36 AM on January 4, 2012




Did you see Gingrich's concession speech? He basically endorsed Santorum and is staying in the race for the sole purpose of sabotaging Romney's campaign.

Santorum did have the benefit of being the last not Romney standing, but he made a great showing given that he had no money. Nobody expects him to win New Hampshire, so any decent showing he makes there will only give him more momentum. I think that ultimately Romney will get it, but it won't be Romney vs Gingrich. It will be Romney Vs Santorum with Gingrich hitting Romney with both barrels, and lots of money flowing into Santorum's coffers. It should be very interesting to watch.
posted by willnot at 12:39 AM on January 4, 2012


BP, do you have a mainstream source that says it was an abortion?

I could keep looking, I guess, but it would basically come down to a decision about terminology. It was a forced delivery at 20 weeks. If that's not an abortion, at best, it might be called a medical Hail Mary. Like a doctor pulling organs out of a cancer patient at random, and the patient is crossing his fingers, that kind of Hail Mary.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:41 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Did you see Gingrich's concession speech? He basically endorsed Santorum and is staying in the race for the sole purpose of sabotaging Romney's campaign.

That's not how I read it. He thinks that Santorum can't win so it can't hurt to praise him. He was mostly just trashing Ron Paul and Romney using Santorum as a convenient hammer. (btw, Santorum spent just $30,000 on ads in Iowa).
posted by empath at 12:42 AM on January 4, 2012


Well, hey, maybe we should just redefine abortion as "emergency forced delivery" the way the right redefined global warming as "climate change." Who could possibly object to an emergency forced delivery?"
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:44 AM on January 4, 2012 [10 favorites]


I still don't understand why Huntsman is being ignored.

By the logic of the Republican process so far, Huntsman will be the nominee. He's the only one who hasn't had a chance to be at the top, so he's the only one left who can come from behind to take everything. Watch New Hampshire.
posted by twoleftfeet at 12:45 AM on January 4, 2012


Like a doctor pulling organs out of a cancer patient at random, and the patient is crossing his fingers, that kind of Hail Mary.

I should not be laughing at this image.
posted by dirigibleman at 12:45 AM on January 4, 2012 [8 favorites]


How many people voted out of a population of ±3 million (of over 300 million) in a meaningless popularity contest that was really just a media event? Bah, humbug.
posted by Cranberry at 12:46 AM on January 4, 2012


furiousxgeorge: the original mainstream source appears to be this New Yorker article.

Here's a blog that quotes the Phialadelphia Inquirer as follows (plus several other mainstream sources but not links):

The antibiotics brought Karen’s fever down. The doctor suggested a drug to accelerate her labor. “The cramps were labor, and she was going to get into more active labor,” Santorum said. “Karen said, `We’re not inducing labor, that’s an abortion. No way. That isn’t going to happen. I don’t care what happens.’ ”

As her fever subsided, Karen – a former neonatal intensive-care nurse – asked for something to stop the labor. Her doctors refused, Santorum recalled, citing malpractice concerns. Santorum said her labor proceeded without having to induce an abortion.

Karen, a soft-spoken red-haired 37-year-old, said that “ultimately” she would have agreed to intervention for the sake of her other children.

“If the physician came to me and said if we don’t deliver your baby in one hour you will be dead, yeah, I would have to do it,” she said. “But for me, it was at the very end. I would never make a decision like that until all other means had been thoroughly exhausted.”

The fetus was delivered at 20 weeks, at least a month shy of what most doctors consider viability.

posted by msalt at 12:47 AM on January 4, 2012 [10 favorites]


Well, you know, pretty sure they'd consider it an abortion if it were anybody else's tragedy.
posted by Artw at 12:50 AM on January 4, 2012 [18 favorites]


Yeah, we saw the New Yorker thing above, you can see my quote from it. Both of those don't seem to claim it was an abortion.

I'd also add that the political guides and sources I've found show that Santorum does make exception for mortal danger to the mother.

Fox: And Santorum, along with Paul, signed the Personhood USA pledge which declares opposition to abortion in all cases except when the life of the mother is in danger. Even in that instance, the pledge says "every effort should be made to save the baby's life as well; leaving the death of an innocent child as an unintended tragedy rather than an intentional killing."

National Journal: During his failed reelection campaign against Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., in 2006, Santorum expressed support for allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest or to protect the life of the mother.

I'm just saying this is kind of a muddy issue to attack him on when there are so many other things to attack where the truth is clearer.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:52 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


So, can this be called a three-way loss yet?!

Basically, the GOP didn't inspire more Iowa voters to vote than in the last election they lost... and a lot of the new voters were young voters, Independents, Libertarians, and Centrists who might stay home or break towards a third party/independent candidate in the general election anyway... or even choose Obama over the GOP establishment candidate.

Romney has basically established himself as *the* candidate for everyone to target with attack ads, or in the debates. Ron Paul gets to try doing to Romney what he did to Gingrich so effectively... and there's so much fodder to choose from!

A history of supporting $50 state-funded abortions and transgender education for kindergarteners won't go over very well in the South, I suspect.
posted by markkraft at 1:00 AM on January 4, 2012


Well, he did just change his position to not allow abortion for rape and incest victimes, but yeah I hear you. The reality is, though, a significant percentage of his fan base probably would consider this an abortion and hold it against him.

Say more about the other things to attack him on. Any direct ethical criticisms, other than just extreme views (e.g. against contraception, or any sex by military people ever)? He tipped off Ensign about the upcoming adultery revelations, as a Fox news employee, and he stuck the state of Pennsylvania with a very questionable $73,000 for online school for his kids, but I haven't seen much else.
posted by msalt at 1:01 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


(referring to Santorum, of course)
posted by msalt at 1:02 AM on January 4, 2012


I'm just saying this is kind of a muddy issue to attack him on when there are so many other things to attack where the truth is clearer.

I've never had kids, but if I was in his shoes, even if Rick Santorum is a scumbag among scumbags, I'd think losing a pregnancy in that manner would be a pretty rough hand to be dealt.

That said, I'd have thought someone going through that experience and living with such privilege as to be able to make a medical decision — a choice not everyone gets to have — and one that saves his wife's life, would have learned to be a bit more empathic, himself, and more understanding when it comes to the privacy and dignity that other people deserve when having to face similar choices.

How someone changes (or doesn't change) when going through major life-changing experiences like that makes me wonder openly what kind of leader that person would be, what kinds of decisions he would make, etc. It's all part and parcel, to me.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:04 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


Santorum opposes all abortions and all exceptions (including calling the mother's health exception "phony"). He's only down with laws that allow the exceptions because they "move the ball forward" (his words) towards banning abortion entirely.
posted by katemonster at 1:11 AM on January 4, 2012 [5 favorites]


For a moment I thought all of this Santorum hullabaloo would finally knock this out of the top Google search result.

Fortunately, all is still right in the world.
posted by Defenestrator at 1:20 AM on January 4, 2012


Don't worry, if it ever does fall out of first people will make sure Rick Santorum goes back right where he should.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:22 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


I could keep looking, I guess, but it would basically come down to a decision about terminology. It was a forced delivery at 20 weeks. If that's not an abortion, at best, it might be called a medical Hail Mary. Like a doctor pulling organs out of a cancer patient at random, and the patient is crossing his fingers, that kind of Hail Mary.

It's basically the exact definition of a partial-birth abortion.

This isn't MSM, but let's face it, the MSM isn't gonna call a spade a spade here.
posted by kafziel at 1:27 AM on January 4, 2012


And can Ron Paul maintain a level of support that's somewhere around 10 to 15 percent?

If Paul goes independent* - taking that kind of percentage with him should make him a spoiler like Ross Perot was back in the day.

I wonder how much money in his pocket would keep him out as an independent?

*defined as not Republican/Democrat in the only one dime obverse/reverse system
posted by rough ashlar at 1:37 AM on January 4, 2012


No it is not basically the exact definition of a partial birth abortion, because that is a specific surgical procedure which was not what the doctors were asking to do. Now, the results may be the same - the fetus doesn't survive, but noting the difference between actively aborting the fetus and allowing nature to take its course once there is no other option but to force delivery is a rational way for someone who has a Catholic view on these issues to see it.

In addition, the mainstream sources don't seem to say they even induced labor despite Santorum's wife saying in hindsight she would do so.

You want to call him a hypocrite on pro-life issues? Easy, he supports the death penalty and war. Leave his dead child out of it.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:43 AM on January 4, 2012 [13 favorites]


That debate would be great for our country.

The only way it would be great is if people would sit down, think about what was said, pick a path, and then the elected officials would ACT on such a 'soul search'.

Other than the sitting part - it seems like too much to hope for.
posted by rough ashlar at 1:45 AM on January 4, 2012


The Man They Plan to Marry:
If there is anything that you should keep in mind as we wait for Iowans to make their choice in the Republican nomination contest, it’s that Mitt Romney will be the nominee. The only question is how it happens, and that depends on tomorrow’s outcome in Iowa.

Given the far-right conservatism of the GOP base, this doesn’t seem like it should be true...

But the truth is that—outside of a few issues, like immigration— Republicans aren’t actually evaluating the candidates on the basis of fealty to a particular agenda. Take Iowa, for instance; aside from their opposition to the Obama administration, the leading candidates—Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum—share little in common. Romney is a candidate of the Republican establishment, Paul is an avatar of paleo-libertarians, and Santorum is running as a representative of the religious right. If Republicans were focused solely on ideology, this wouldn’t happen...
posted by TheophileEscargot at 1:45 AM on January 4, 2012


towards banning abortion entirely.

Perhaps the people who feel passion about keeping abortion should try for a constitutional amendment now VS waiting for Roe VS Wade to be overturned?
posted by rough ashlar at 1:52 AM on January 4, 2012


It seems to be a bit of a derail in a post about election results to argue over whether that procedure was an abortion. Maybe make a separate post where you can discuss every candidate's position on abortion and what would likely happen to abortion law if they were elected?
posted by pracowity at 2:15 AM on January 4, 2012


How about, "Romney Leaves Iowa With Santorum On His Backside?"
posted by mreleganza at 2:25 AM on January 4, 2012 [10 favorites]


"Santorum spurt ties up Romney"
posted by jeffburdges at 2:36 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Leave his dead child out of it.

If he would leave his dead child out of it too, it would be easier. Instead he trots the story (@1:00) out regularly (top video, @14:30) to get votes. If Santorum refused to speak about it and kept it a personal issue, people might set it aside. As it is, he is willing to use it as a regular part of his stump speech. It is going to get brought up in discussion.
posted by lampshade at 3:02 AM on January 4, 2012 [26 favorites]


I once saw Santorum on a bed at the baths. TRUE FACT! This was back before they closed the baths due to AIDS.
posted by Goofyy at 3:06 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


"Santorum Spewed Out of Romney's Butt and Got All Over the Bedsheets!"
posted by item at 3:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [14 favorites]


His wife wrote a book about it.

Attacking him on this isn't a winning political strategy IMO.
posted by Ad hominem at 3:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Also check out who the Forward is by, Mother Teresa.

Maybe just leave this one alone.
posted by Ad hominem at 3:10 AM on January 4, 2012


What about the part I heard, that they took their dead baby home for their other children to play with. Is that fair game? It seems rather creepy to me.

And I'd like to suggest the word "rick" as a new adjective. Like Mr. Santorum, it runs. It means very liquid/runny. "The Santorum was very Rick", or "Rick Santorum was all over the bed.".
posted by Goofyy at 3:15 AM on January 4, 2012


If he would leave his dead child out of it too, it would be easier. Instead he trots the story (@1:00) out regularly (top video, @14:30) to get votes. If Santorum refused to speak about it and kept it a personal issue, people might set it aside. As it is, he is willing to use it as a regular part of his stump speech. It is going to get brought up in discussion.

Guys, you haven't even gotten me a mainstream source that says the labor was induced yet. The source that has been linked for the original claim says labor was caused by the infection.

You are putting the cart before the horse, try and source that first and then we can hash out if it is as okay for you to use his personal tragedy as a political attack as it is for him to use it to explain how it informs his views.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:18 AM on January 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


This derail makes Mittbot Romneytron happy, that's for sure.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:22 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


These Santorum headlines are the best dogwhistle jokes ever. People who don't know what it means are laughing because it's Santorum. And people who do are laughing because it's Santorum.
posted by iamkimiam at 3:24 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


I miss 2008, where interviews with Obama supporters made me smile gently. As opposed to folks who voted GOP yesterday. I don't know who those people are -- some strange offshoot of homo sapiens. They have strange ways of thinking and behaving.
posted by angrycat at 3:28 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


What about Marvin E Quasniki?
posted by matt_arnold at 3:47 AM on January 4, 2012 [5 favorites]


The Obama campaign is painting this as a victory for Tea Party extremists. They warn that while Romney is considered the front runner, 70 percent voted for someone else, and that in order to win he will have to support an extreme right agenda.

From a fundraising e-mail signed by campaign manager Jim Messina: "No matter who the Republicans nominate, we'll be running against someone who has embraced that agenda in order to win -- vowing to let Wall Street write its own rules, end Medicare as we know it, roll back gay rights, leave the troops in Iraq indefinitely, restrict a woman's right to choose, and gut Social Security to pay for more tax cuts for millionaires and corporations."

They also note that superpacs spent almost $13 million on attack ads, and eventually will turn those attacks on Obama. If there were 120,000 votes total, that's more than $100 a vote - just on attack ads.
posted by tommyD at 3:53 AM on January 4, 2012


"Romney barely contains Santorum explosion"
posted by Saxon Kane at 4:07 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


source that first and then we can hash out if it is as okay for you to use his personal tragedy as a political attack

Don't need to hash it. It has already been done. By Santorum himself. He uses his personal tragedy as political attack object against people who don't agree with his views. Views that are not based in science, but religion. There is also your source.

I would love to think that if he stopped doing that, this issue would flutter away. But it won't. After so many years of him slinging his story, it will always be there. Santorum brought this type of attack on himself by mixing religious views with politics.
posted by lampshade at 4:14 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


What about the part I heard, that they took their dead baby home for their other children to play with. Is that fair game? It seems rather creepy to me.

Even if Santorum had an actual chance at getting the nomination (he doesn't) and you felt his chances somehow were relevant to whether you found the story was important or not (they aren't), no. It is not fair game. Their baby died. You are asking "how can I mock their dead baby? What is a good dead baby angle?" There are voices of wisdom in all our heads and this is a good time to listen to yours. Back off.

I wouldn't call that a win. Romney did better in 2008, and he didn't even try.

Romney literally spent almost one hundred times as much per vote as Santorum, but it dragged him across the line in Iowa, which a while earlier he was angling to just ignore completely. Anti-Romney people are claiming that proves he's weak; in reality it just proves he has the necessary resources to compete in hostile territory.

There is absolutely no way Santorum will topple Romney in New Hampshire. Romney winning Iowa, even by 8 votes, locks it.

Romney is the Republican nominee. It's time for a few dozen television personalities and Washington news reporters to join the rest of the country in having known this for months.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:14 AM on January 4, 2012 [13 favorites]


The crazies are already decrying Ron Paul's "suspicious" third place as "the biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia primary”. I...I just don't know what to say.
posted by daniel_charms at 4:17 AM on January 4, 2012


Santorum brought this type of attack on himself by mixing religious views with politics.

No, he did not, unless you have an actual fact based attack. Obama talked a lot about where he came from, but the attack that suggested he did not come from America is not valid on that basis. Kerry and McCain talked about their military service but that did not justify the various lies leveled at them.

The most damning attack you can make here is at his wife who claimed later she would induce labor if she had to, and it faces the problem of both being insensitive to a parent and being leveled at a spouse rather than the candidate.

I think the media should press him on the question of choice, because it defines his candidacy and his overreach on these issues is a fatal flaw in his chances, but that can be done without the personal attacks.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:26 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


Yes, he is bringing it on himself. And he is doing it without facts. He is doing it using moral imperative based on whatever his religious views are.

Many people consider his abortion views as attacks on their personal views about choice. And as the whole issue is inherently personal, having attacks become "personal attacks" is inevitable. It is impossible to separate.

Pressing him on the question of choice is pointless. We already know the answer.

If there is to be an honest debate on other issues, he needs to stop infusing the campaign with the abortion rhetoric at every turn. We get it. We know what his views are. Until then, any Santorum discussion is going to be just what you and I are doing...blathering on about a too often argued point that never will have a resolution and wastes bandwidth.

If he stops, maybe then others will stop. And pigs might fly if either happen.

I've said my piece...I'm out.
posted by lampshade at 4:51 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


"There is absolutely no way Santorum will topple Romney in New Hampshire. Romney winning Iowa, even by 8 votes, locks it. Romney is the Republican nominee. "

Except, of course, there are still six days left before the vote... and, as we have seen in Iowa, one solid attack ad can kill a campaign within 48 hours.

If I were Newt, I would spend every last cent he has left to make sure that Romney is seen as the flip-floppy joke that he is. I'm sure Paul is thinking the same thing.

The ultimate truth is that these are, by and large, some pretty weak candidates. It doesn't take an awful lot to really boost their negatives.
posted by markkraft at 4:51 AM on January 4, 2012


Winning Iowa is like winning the first ten minutes of a football game; it has little to no absolute bearing on the final outcome of the whole game.
posted by twoleftfeet a


Unless the starting quarterback is sacked so hard in those first 10 minutes that he winds up lying in a puddle of his own vomit. By the opposing side's third-string blocker no less.

I know most mefites don't read the right wing blogs, a nasty little habit I picked up in 2004, but those folks hate Mitt Romney. They are poisoning the well for him day by day. Romney will win it, but in bloody (santorumy?) fashion that will cause him to move so far right to take either Florida or Texas that the ads will write themselves. He's going to have to promise to strap the first bomb he drops on Iran to a copy of the President's birth certificate, and permit abortions only for families that own their own assault rifles.

Bwahahahahah.
posted by spitbull at 5:11 AM on January 4, 2012 [5 favorites]


The Santorum Slide
posted by jeffburdges at 5:11 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Inform the clueless: What has Romney done this week to knock himself down in the polls? Some kind of scandal or humiliation please?

Generally sounding like a sad robot


"The Electric Monk was a labour-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video recorder. Dishwashers washed tedious dishes for you, thus saving you the bother of washing them yourself, video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electric Monks believed things for you, thus saving you what was becoming an increasingly onerous task, that of believing all the things the world expected you to believe.

Unfortunately this Electric Monk had developed a fault, and had started to believe all kinds of things, more or less at random. It was even beginning to believe things they'd have difficulty believing in Salt Lake City." (Douglas Adams, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency)
posted by malusmoriendumest at 5:14 AM on January 4, 2012 [13 favorites]


If there was one significant lesson from the race thus far, it seems to be that nobody is going to fault you for going negative... Paul, Romney, and their surrogates certainly did a number on Gingrich, with no discernable harm to themselves.

You've still got to hit hard and fast, and make it stick, though... but from what I've seen, the ads that mentioned Romney negatively were weak and not focused specifically on him, frankly. He has yet to show he's not extremely vulnerable to such an attack.
posted by markkraft at 5:14 AM on January 4, 2012


I'm surprised Perry is dropping out, but maybe he's out of money to spend. I still wonder if a big twist will come.
posted by cashman at 5:29 AM on January 4, 2012


I'm wondering why Paul spent so much money trashing Gingrich but not Romney.

Maybe (hope?) Paul's goal is actually to ensure that Romney gets the nomination so he can make a viable 3rd party run and grab disaffected Republicans and Democrats.
posted by empath at 5:31 AM on January 4, 2012


Rick

Rick

RICK

You got Santorum all over my Iowa, Rick.
posted by dejah420 at 5:43 AM on January 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


Even if Romney wins every contest from here on out, the media will keep saying "maybe Santorum has a chance" or "could Palin win a brokered convention."

It's the same reason sports writers suggested that Peyton Manning should be a candidate for NFL MVP this year. When there's an outcome that's obvious to most people, the media can't come out and say it, because it's hard to fill up space saying what everyone already knows. Instead, they have to obfuscate and speculate.
posted by drezdn at 5:47 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


Santorum Between Romney And Paul In Tight Three Way
posted by azpenguin at 5:51 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


So, is the "anyone but Romney" attitude exclusively a result of him not being an immovable, fire-breathing reactionary conservative in the eyes of the base? Or, is there still the unspoken "yeah, but he's a mormon" thing working in there?
posted by Thorzdad at 5:52 AM on January 4, 2012


The strategy for Ron Paul is exceptionally important in who wins this race. In many ways, he has the most options.

The nature of his support -- fervently loyal -- and the grassroots way he conducts his campaign basically means that he's not going anywhere, and will be around for the entire race. Santorum? Not as guaranteed, in that regard. Paul could literally burn through the vast majority of his money in a state, and do significant grassroots fundraising in short order to be viable again elsewhere. Romney's got big pockets, and big PACs. Santorum though? They're mostly astroturf. If they blow their wad, they're in real trouble... because corporate money only tends to flow to potential winners.

Santorum might get a little boost from performing better than expected, but he's still way behind Romney. His advantage is that he's not as vulnerable, even though he's not as electable in the general election. He's ideologically popular.

The question I would ask, really, is what does Ron Paul want. Does he want/expect to win the nomination? Would he expect to be VP or want a cabinet position? If so, he might pull his punches with Romney.

How is the mainstream GOP going to co-opt him and his grassroots supporters that they so badly need? Can they do so, or is Paul going to go independent? If so, then Romney could find himself in real trouble. But for Paul, the question really is both if and when he should go after Romney. Too soon, and he could find himself facing Santorum, who appeals to many of the same voters.

In many ways, Ron Paul is the Republican version of Kucinich. He runs these races, in part, because they give him a national presence, basically guaranteeing him huge fundraising advantages over potential local challengers, and a permanent career in politics. It *always* pays off for Paul to run for POTUS... but in this case, he's actually got a shot at winning, no matter how remote... or at least, not being marginalized by the GOP establishment.

The question, really, is whether he'll take it seriously and really unload on Romney, or whether he will pull his punches, as he did in his Iowa campaign ads against him, while trying to whittle away at the other candidates, one at a time, hoping to pick up the anyone-but-Romney vote.
posted by markkraft at 5:53 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


You know how it's super funny the first time your niece or nephew says a bad word, and everyone laughs because it usually just comes right out of nowhere, and the kid so obviously doesn't know what they're saying. And then, because it got such a big response the first time, the kid'll say the word again, pausing long enough to make sure his or her audience heard, and then again and again, and each time it gets progressively less funny, and all the aunts and uncles start glancing nervously around, wondering if the parents are gonna step in, or if they themselves should maybe put the brakes on, or what. And then, long after it's ceased to be any kind of amusing, and parental/avuncular discipline has been applied and the kid is still saying the bad word expecting to get big laughs, is when everyone starts looking sidelong at one another as if to say "Whose fault? How did it ever come to this?"

Yeah, the Santorum headline jokes are kinda like that.
posted by logicpunk at 5:58 AM on January 4, 2012 [11 favorites]


One contest down, and I'm already sick of the Santorum jokes. Bravo.
posted by smackfu at 5:59 AM on January 4, 2012 [8 favorites]


"Santorum jokes spread thin by detractors."
posted by liza at 6:03 AM on January 4, 2012 [11 favorites]


"Headline writers overdosing on Santorum."




Would he expect to be VP or want a cabinet position? If so, he might pull his punches with Romney.

Ron Paul will never be in anyones cabinet.
posted by empath at 6:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


It strikes me that Gingrich is sort of the inverse John Edwards of this cycle in that we already know he's done despicable things with respect to his cancer stricken wife.

I do hope the GOP keeps the debates as frequent as they have been. I can only imagine the chaos now that every campaign that stands a chance of being involved has gone full bore negative.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:11 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Behemoth: "To be fair, Lube and Feces is a much more realistic slogan than Hope and Change."

As my ex said her dad used to say "Wish in one hand, shit in the other, see which fills up first."
posted by symbioid at 6:27 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Buddy Roemer may have come in last, but his Tweets won him the "most entertaining candidate" battle by a landslide.
posted by delfin at 6:30 AM on January 4, 2012


FWIW the whole "Romney barely even tried/spent money" argument doesn't really apply, thanks to SuperPACs. A lot of money was spent on his behalf, almost all with his support. I don't know if I would be celebrating if I was Obama's re-election team right now. Yes, it guarantees nastiness from Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul; but it also proves that Romney has the financial backing of a million Swift Boaters. Unless Obama's team has already been assured they have matching funding sources (which is entirely possible from either SuperPACs or small donors, or both), I would be very worried about the Koch Bros et al. Of course, there could be some more damning economic news about Romney (ex., tax returns show $10m+ annual income with lower tax rates, running sweatshops in N Korea, etc), but I wouldn't bet on it.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:36 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


jeffburdges: "The Santorum Slide"

Oh gawd. I almost horked.

posted by notsnot at 6:39 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


Letterman had a good one last night in his monologue. Something like "a report came out that said that 40% of Iowa voters were still undecided. 40% undecided??! There were 3 dozen goddamned debates! How can you still be undecided?!? [makes dullard face]"

This is why we can't have nice things. The entire process is held hostage by a bunch of idiots who say, in essence, "I have zero intelligence or memory. Whoever is the last candidate to speak gets my vote."
posted by gjc at 6:44 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Something like "a report came out that said that 40% of Iowa voters were still undecided. 40% undecided??! There were 3 dozen goddamned debates! How can you still be undecided?!? [makes dullard face]"

To be fair to Iowans, their choices all suck.
posted by empath at 6:48 AM on January 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


One contest down, and I'm already sick of the Santorum jokes.

Pshaw. Just like Jello, there's always room for Santorum jokes.

Besides, this morning's headline out of Iowa should be: Romney pulls out win in Iowa, but Santorum stains his victory.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:51 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


Plus these people have mastered the art of not answering questions, and talking in circles. It is hard to get anything out of them that resembles an actual response to anything besides the most basic of questions. A lot of people just don't have the time to engage for long periods, trying to figure out what's what.
posted by cashman at 6:51 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


If I had to choose between being hit in the face with a hammer, kicked in the spleen or kneed in the balls, I'd be undecided too.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 6:53 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


"Romney wades stubbornly through rising tide of Santorum"
posted by clockzero at 7:06 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


Lead article on the Google news page? A Santorum profile from the BBC.

"Rick Santorum is the name on everyone's lips..."

Oh, internet, I love you.
posted by Capt. Renault at 7:15 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


One contest down, and I'm already sick of the Santorum jokes.

Annoyed People Choking On Flood Of Santorum
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 7:16 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


"Rick Santorum is the name on everyone's lips after pushing Mitt Romney to the narrowest of victories in the Iowa caucus. So what does he stand for and could he last the distance? A mere nine votes prevented Rick Santorum from pulling off an improbable victory in Iowa."

Oh BBC, how I admire thee.
posted by panaceanot at 7:20 AM on January 4, 2012


Ron Paul will never be in anyones cabinet.

I don't know about that.
posted by pracowity at 7:27 AM on January 4, 2012


I am going to miss Rick Perry. He was pretty lovable for a robot that suffered off by one errors with terrible exception handling.
posted by mccarty.tim at 7:29 AM on January 4, 2012 [10 favorites]




What is so sad about this whole affair is not that some faith-based idiot is doing "well" but how dismal the entire field is.

This is the best they can do?

So much for the grand vision of the two-party system.

Between business-as-usual CEO Obama and faith-based-scientism Repubs, the future ain't looking too bright for our shining jewel of the West.
posted by clvrmnky at 7:42 AM on January 4, 2012


You know, this is after watching the excellent Chris Hedges post, but I wonder if Paul, Santorum, and Gingrich appeal because of the narrative of a fading empire. Paul is like, the only way to fend off the Vandals is to pull back the borders. Santorum is like, God wants the empire to continue. And Gingrich is like, yeah, we're goin' down, but we're going to aggressively fuck up the world some more first.

And Romney doesn't fit into the narrative, because as per The Whelk, he sounds like a robot struggling with depression. Kind of like Obama when he's professorial.
posted by angrycat at 7:44 AM on January 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


Q: Is there any indication that Ron Paul is going to halt the chemtrailing activity when he gets elected?

A: No, Ron Paul would not attempt to stop chemtrail spraying because the 13 Illuminated families, the Rockefellers especially, and their Illuminated satanists in the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, Homeland Security, etc., etc., are running the show and not the President. Ron Paul knows that and he knows that he would be killed quickly if he attempted to stop their chemtrail poisoning. However, that doesn't mean that I wouldn't prefer Ron Paul to be President, since he's a far better choice than NWO sellouts Mitt Romney, Gingrich, or the Indonesian Usurper. A quarter loaf of bread is better than no bread at all.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 7:55 AM on January 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


Oh God, I can't help myself anymore!

"Romney Slips in Iowa, Santorum To Blame"

"Santorum Ruins Romney's Chance of a Clean Sheet on His Special Night in Iowa"

"Romney Loses Grip in Iowa, Santorum Everywhere"

"Santorum Muddies Political Waters in Iowa"

*gasp*
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 7:56 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


Santorum links black people, public aid programs
Videos posted on several websites show Santorum discussing programs such as Medicaid and food stamps, then saying: "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money."
I can't believe no one has mentioned this gem that was kicking out last night.
posted by Mister Fabulous at 7:58 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


If Gingrich/Paul pull out before the big finish or decide to really aggressively stick it to Romney, I'm worried we're going to wind up with Santorum on the Presidential linens.

Once you throw out the idea that you can believe anything a candidate says, you could've chosen a winner a year ago. If all you can do is go on their track record and stuff they said before they decided to run for president, it seems so easy to choose. Bachman, Perry, Gingrich, Cain and Santorum couldn't say *anything* that would convince me they were anything but a bunch of shitheads. Paul and Romney are opposites, but both have decent records. I'm totally fine with either one of them. Paul mostly practices what he preaches. Romney, by most measures, did a good job in Massachusetts.

Not sure either feels like a winner, though. Paul has the "80% unvarnished truth, 20% lunacy" thing. Romney makes people recoil in uncanny-valley disgust. On paper, Romney plays that game better than the rest of these yahoos. Whether you view him has being a flip-flopper or someone who is hunting for the platform that most of his would-be constituents agree with, he's doing exactly what every successful presidential candidate does. His personality doesn't let him do it convincingly, though.
posted by pjaust at 8:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Something something three-way something something three guys something Santorum.

My husband's line was "Santorum Squeezes between Paul and Romney in Iowa Three-Way."
posted by KathrynT at 8:13 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


Joey Michaels: "the way the right redefined global warming as "climate change.""

"Global warming" is an inaccurate term, "climate change" is far better. "Global warming" was what lead us to the right-wingers shouting "Gotcha!" every time a winter is unusually cold.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:22 AM on January 4, 2012 [5 favorites]


So Bachmann has officially dropped out? Press conference is going on now. Which is really just her reading more crap, looking down at the page.
posted by cashman at 8:28 AM on January 4, 2012


So yes - "The people of Iowa have spoken, and so I have decided to stand aside", Bachmann says. Plus Reagan Reagan Reagan and Regan reagan with my Reagan faith in God Reagan Reagan who Reaganed against socialist Obummer and so I thank my Reagan husband and Reagan.
posted by cashman at 8:32 AM on January 4, 2012 [8 favorites]


Paul has the "80% unvarnished truth, 20% lunacy" thing.

I think you've reversed the polarity there. You know, watching Ron Paul last night I began to believe that it's only the lack of a hot, deadly, bisexual babe to accompany him that's keeping him from being the wise old Heinlein hero he truly wants to be. (OTOH, son Rand's gray v-neck sweater/maroon turtleneck combo suggests that he, at least, has a future in Starfleet.)
posted by octobersurprise at 8:32 AM on January 4, 2012 [10 favorites]


I know most mefites don't read the right wing blogs, a nasty little habit I picked up in 2004, but those folks hate Mitt Romney. They are poisoning the well for him day by day.

Yea but at this point four years ago, they hated McCain too.
posted by octothorpe at 8:46 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


And look how well that turned out!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 8:47 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


I'm confused why the GOP field is so crappy. It's like they've been sniffing their own farts for so long, they no longer noticed how bad they smell.

At least McCain and Palin were a scrappy challenge, if poor choice. At this point, it's like the GOP is handing election to Obama.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:50 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


"Yes, Mitt Romney, America is beautiful. And that hymn you quoted to attack Pres Obama was written by a progressive MA Congregationalist who happened to be a lesbian and a liberal Episcopal organist from NJ. America is beautiful to ALL Americans, not just the ones whose vote you are trying to woo."
posted by cashman at 8:50 AM on January 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


I get the feeling that they're going to mess up this election with either a candidate the general public hates or a candidate the base would just rather avoid voting for. Then they'll do well in the next midterms with republicans who are bitter they didn't get any good choices. Obstructionism continues, as you really can't do anything with the Tea Party around unless you have trifecta government one way or the other.
posted by mccarty.tim at 8:53 AM on January 4, 2012


Which hymn? My google fails me.
posted by mccarty.tim at 8:55 AM on January 4, 2012


Oh, America the beautiful. I see.
posted by mccarty.tim at 8:58 AM on January 4, 2012


At this point, it's like the GOP is handing election to Obama.

I suppose some might argue that Obama is actually the preferred choice for the Republican powers that be (who can't actually say so). But that would be crazy.
posted by Glinn at 9:05 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


When Ron Paul is President, Rand will be his Chief Science Officer.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


If it makes me a hipster to say "The Samtorum jokes are too mainstream and are overdone," then I am a hipster.
posted by andreaazure at 9:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


I think the reason we don't see respected establishment republicans running (heck, even Lindsy Grahm would be better than this batch) is because the GOP knows they can't win with a candidate they truly like in this election. They know Obama won't really destroy/bankrupt America like they say, but they know no matter what he does, he will derange and mobilize the base even more if he gets a second term, and democrats will be apathetic and disappointed from a mediocre president (assuming he doesn't have a great sophomore term). Thus, they're holding back their A-team for an easier election.

Put simply, Romney is their Kerry.
posted by mccarty.tim at 9:12 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


If Rick Santorum said 'The hipster jokes are too mainstream and are overdone,' then I still wouldn't vote for him.
posted by box at 9:14 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


I know most mefites don't read the right wing blogs, a nasty little habit I picked up in 2004, but those folks hate Mitt Romney.

I read those blogs too, including back in 2008, when those same sites gnashed and wailed when Romney dropped out because he was "their only hope to stop McCain."

They hate Romney. They hate the black Muslim socialist even more. Just like how McCain picked Palin, he'll compensate by tossing the crazies a bone or two and they'll do their duty.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:16 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


Not that I'm any fan of Santorum, but maybe enough with the actual googlebombing in mefi threads.
posted by cortex at 9:23 AM on January 4, 2012 [8 favorites]


Do you fear that Metafilter's reputation may be stained?
posted by Artw at 9:33 AM on January 4, 2012 [5 favorites]


As incidents rise, Mefites asked to stop spreading Santorum.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:35 AM on January 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


Not that I'm any fan of Santorum, but maybe enough with the actual googlebombing in mefi threads.

Just a thought but shouldn't rel="nofollow" be added automatically on user generated links as a matter of course? This would make the entire discussion moot.
posted by Talez at 9:59 AM on January 4, 2012


Our general line of thinking there is that 99% of what gets linked here gets linked in good faith, and we try to deal with the other 1% promptly and judiciously. nofollow by default basically says user content can't be trusted, which may be true in a lot of places but isn't how we want to deal with it on mefi.
posted by cortex at 10:15 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


It's official now, we have our first casualty: Bachmann has dropped out of the race.
posted by daniel_charms at 10:27 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


It was official a few hours ago, but I do enjoy seeing it again. Maybe she can drop out of the race again tonight, tomorrow and over the weekend. Like every few days just hold a press conference and look down as you read off of a piece of paper, announcing you're dropping out of the race.
posted by cashman at 10:31 AM on January 4, 2012 [5 favorites]


/rolls dice

SNAKE EYES!
posted by Artw at 10:37 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Romney’s Mormon Problem.
posted by ericb at 10:44 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Bachmann has dropped out of the race

...and the heretofore 'suspended' Perry campaign zombie-lurches towards South Carolina. The comedy writes itself!
posted by hangashore at 10:50 AM on January 4, 2012


Romney’s Mormon Problem.

In a way it's surprising there aren't more Mormons in right wing politics, given that they're all about maintaining squeaky clean normal looking face on top of some utterly insane beliefs.
posted by Artw at 10:52 AM on January 4, 2012


In a way it's surprising there aren't more Mormons in right wing politics, given that they're all about maintaining squeaky clean normal looking face on top of some utterly insane beliefs.

Theocratic politicians have a hard time making broad alliances, because if there's anything they like more than regulating personal behavior, it's burning heretics.
posted by empath at 11:00 AM on January 4, 2012




...and the heretofore 'suspended' Perry campaign zombie-lurches towards South Carolina.

Attaboy, Rick. I knew the PerryPalin ticket wouldn't go away that easi...what the hell is he wearing? A diving suit with shorts over it? His hair looks like he walked out of a Dilbert strip. The comedy writes itself indeed.
posted by cashman at 11:03 AM on January 4, 2012


It's official now, we have our first casualty: Bachmann has dropped out of the race.

I'm torn on this. Having Bachmann as the nominee would have been hilarious on levels we probably can't imagine. On the other hand, we would have had to listen to all of it. Maybe she'll be VP? Romney needs someone with teeth who's willing to throw punches as opposed to the harsh flip flops that are all Mitt seems capable of.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:08 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Like every few days just hold a press conference and look down as you read off of a piece of paper, announcing you're dropping out of the race.

Not at all implausible. Remember that this is the woman who announced her run for the Republican nomination while onstage at a debate. There would be a nice parallelism there.
posted by gauche at 11:24 AM on January 4, 2012


The next set of debates will be fascinating. Imagine! Santorum being asked a question!
posted by Ironmouth at 11:31 AM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


My debate question for all candidates would be "do you believe that the grand canyon is the product of erosion?"
posted by Artw at 11:36 AM on January 4, 2012 [12 favorites]


"Weary of Romney, Voters Try a Taste of Santorum"
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:39 AM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


Artw. Yes - from the flood of Noah, duh!
posted by symbioid at 11:43 AM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


cashman: "what the hell is he wearing? A diving suit with shorts over it? His hair looks like he walked out of a Dilbert strip. The comedy writes itself indeed."

I'm the last person to defend Perry for...well, anything, but it looks like he was out running in the cold. The hair is a result of having taken a hat off (my hair, post hat, would terrify even the most stout-hearted Rottweilers). The shorts are over a pair of running tights. One wears tights (vs. sweats) so there's no extra material to chafe between the legs , and one wears shorts over the tights (shorts are often so thin they don't count as "extra material) because ain't nobody wants to look at Rick Perry's junk.
posted by notsnot at 11:48 AM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]




Goddamn, but we need to revoke their tax-exempt status right quick.
posted by Aizkolari at 12:07 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


The shorts are over a pair of running tights. One wears tights (vs. sweats) so there's no extra material to chafe between the legs , and one wears shorts over the tights (shorts are often so thin they don't count as "extra material) because ain't nobody wants to look at Rick Perry's junk.

I call bullshit. Where's his sidearm?
posted by The Bellman at 12:21 PM on January 4, 2012


Rick Santorum feels like Rocky Balboa

From the comments: Somebody should tell Santorum that at the end of "Rocky" Rocky lost - to the black guy
posted by Mister Fabulous at 12:33 PM on January 4, 2012 [10 favorites]


Well, the triumph of Rocky was that even though everyone thought he was a bum who didn't deserve to be in the ring he managed to go the distance and put up fierce competition. So, it works for someone who isn't claiming they won.

Now, the reason it falls apart is that this was just round 1 and it isn't really a good movie if Rocky gets knocked out in round 2.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 12:38 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Apollo Creed 2012!

(Ivan Drago, now *there* was a real Marxist menace.)
posted by joe lisboa at 12:58 PM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


If Santorum wants to follow the Rocky playbook, did he never reach his potential because he was too busy working for criminals?
posted by drezdn at 1:02 PM on January 4, 2012


Ron Paul Swanson

So awesome.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:03 PM on January 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


My debate question for all candidates would be "do you believe that the grand canyon is the product of erosion?"
This is a trick question. The Grand Canyon is a liberal myth.
posted by Flunkie at 1:09 PM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


Like plate tectonics!
posted by Artw at 1:10 PM on January 4, 2012


(Man, the Romney presidency is going to be hard on non-creation geologists)
posted by Artw at 1:11 PM on January 4, 2012


This pistol?

It could easily be concealed in the shorts.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 1:16 PM on January 4, 2012




I feel disappointment about Bachman dropping out. Now her attention will come back to Minnesota instead of spending her donors' money in a national campaign and just providing that extra touch of crazy to the national debate and maintaining a stellar record of non-voting and performance in congress.
posted by jadepearl at 1:26 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


"iowa buried in bullshit, corn crop grows"
posted by pyramid termite at 1:41 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]




Obama (finally) plays recess hardball: The president ignores GOP obstructionism and appoints Richard Cordray as chief consumer finance watchdog

He's also appointing three new members of the National Labor Relations Board, which is enough to maintain the quorum that a Republican appointee was trying to stop via temper tantrum.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:48 PM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Richard Cordray has the same haircut as Kenneth from 30 Rock.
posted by smackfu at 1:55 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Richard Cordray has the same haircut as Kenneth from 30 Rock.

I can only imagine what a conversation between Cordray, Bobby Jindal, and Jack McBrayer would be like.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:57 PM on January 4, 2012


Jon Stewart On Rick Santorum 'Surge': 'Get The F*ck Outta Here!' [VIDEO].

That was last night. I can't wait to see what he says this evening.
posted by ericb at 1:58 PM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]




Should Rick Santorum's Google problem be fixed?

September 2011: Rick Santorum Contacted Google, Says Company Spreads 'Filth'.
posted by ericb at 2:12 PM on January 4, 2012


I like when they suggest he contact whoever runs the website.
posted by Artw at 2:17 PM on January 4, 2012


Also, I think I speak for the entire UK when I say fuck you Rick Santorum!
posted by Artw at 2:23 PM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


Spreading Santorum blog (with current postings, etc.).
posted by ericb at 2:24 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Ahem.
posted by bukvich at 2:41 PM on January 4, 2012


I'm sure ericb just spurted that out without thinking.
posted by Artw at 2:42 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Ahem.

Huh? To googlebomb, you have to link to the website using the intended search text, i.e. "Rick Santorum." Just linking to the site as "blog" isn't a googlebomb because it doesn't associate his name with the intended website.
posted by dialetheia at 2:46 PM on January 4, 2012


National Journal: 11 Things You Might Not Know About Rick Santorum.
posted by ericb at 2:51 PM on January 4, 2012


Yeah dialetheia I guess those were more like google firecrackers.

Happy new year and all that!
posted by bukvich at 2:51 PM on January 4, 2012




@THEHermanCain: I will be appearing on the @HannityShow tonight at 9:30pm Eastern to make a special announcement! #tcot

Gingrich endorsement incoming?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:16 PM on January 4, 2012


"Romney squeezes out Santorum" via santorum.com's blog. I'll spare you the bad rap video featuring santorum lyrics.

Anyone else find that santorum.com responds slower than spreadingsantorum.com?

I'd naively imagine that only the first link or two really contributes towards the search engine optimization, well unless Google parses individual comments, but they might just ignore the comments too. I'd worry that excessively many links sets off fraud detectors actually. I've never worried about over-linking any site myself though because (a) I link useless shit all the time anyways and (b) we never link them more than a couple times per thread usually.. we just got carried away here.

posted by jeffburdges at 3:18 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]




If I knew nothing about the primary campaign or the Iowa caucases, and then read this thread, I'd still know nothing. Metafilter's doing a great job at participating in this trend of political discussions as shallow as gossip about reality television.
posted by allseeingabstract at 3:43 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


The primary under discussion doesn't really rise above the level of reality television.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 3:53 PM on January 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


furiousxgeorge is right. I think if these candidates had non-insane ideas that they wanted to discuss in a normal manner with an atmosphere of "think about this idea, and maybe we can agree upon some things" that would be reflected in the discussions here. As it stands though, the candidates involved say and do things that are pretty far out there in large part, so it would almost be a disservice to treat that like it's rising to some high level of discourse. The Tea Party seems to have chased all the sanity into hiding.

If I talk to my neighbor about things and she states her opinions and ideas in an atmosphere that offers mutual respect and a desire for peaceful compromise, then things are going well. If I talk to my neighbor and he is saying zany shit about how I shouldn't be allowed to have the same rights as him, about how god has given him and his people dominion over me, and how people who look like me are all a certain way - well don't expect me to respect that and act like he is some kind of renown thinker.
posted by cashman at 4:20 PM on January 4, 2012


"The primary under discussion doesn't really rise above the level of reality television."

Agreed. But I hoped the level of discussion here at Metafilter would.
posted by allseeingabstract at 4:22 PM on January 4, 2012


And it isn't just about Republicans having bad ideas, I mean they are out there quoting Pokemon and forgetting which departments of the government they want to cut and making up stories about vaccines causing retardation and pointing out the positives of child labor...it's just a ridiculous field.

What kind of substantive discussion do you want to hear?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:26 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


"What kind of substantive discussion do you want to hear?"

You answered it. Substantive.
posted by allseeingabstract at 4:29 PM on January 4, 2012


Well, you said *IF* you knew nothing about the primaries, so presumably, you do. But your only comments in this thread are the ones complaining about how we are discussing it. So be the change you want to see.
posted by mreleganza at 4:32 PM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


Wait for some meat, is honestly I think the issue here. Iowa caucuses happened but nothing new is on the table now, really. A bit of jockeying, a lot of spin, but nobody's come to the table with anything to discuss: Santorum's still Santorum, Romney's still Romney, Paul's still Paul, etc.

This is hardly the first thread we've had about the primary process this cycle. There's not necessarily a whole lot to say at the moment that hasn't been said. I like substantive commentary too, but I think there's a degree of realism in expectations required here: when the only thing new at the moment is some new spin from the same old folks playing the same old angles, there's not a whole lot to dig into.
posted by cortex at 4:32 PM on January 4, 2012


Putting Santorum on the table does seem to open the floodgates.
posted by Artw at 4:34 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


What kind of substantive discussion do you want to hear?

I'm with furiousxgeorge here. There isn't a substantive discussion to be had. The Iowa Caucuses serve two purposes: weed out the candidates that were truly worthless, and give the spotlight to candidates that hadn't had the spotlight before. They have served their purpose. Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry were sixth and fifth respectively, and have been shown the exit (very likely for Perry). Romney did well enough to continue. Ron Paul had a decent showing, although he will still continue to not be taken seriously. Rick Santorum came in second by a mere 8 votes. Seeing he hasn't had the spotlight previously, well, he's there now.

If Santorum getting attention turns out to be anything different than it has for Bachmann, Cain, Perry, or Gingrich, I would find myself greatly shocked. I suspect he will get good reviews by Fox News, then several revelations will come out that there's no way in hell anyone should support him, and then he'll crumble.

Rick Santorum is an extreme social conservative. He was soundly defeated as a Republican incumbent senator in Pennsylvania, losing by 18% in 2006. He has repeatedly attempted to force the country to be more religious (read: Christian, quickly followed by Catholic). He is staunchly anti-gay. He has publicly stated that homosexual marriage will lead to marriage between men and children, and men and animals. He wants to bring back forced prayer in schools, wants creationism taught in science classes. He has stated that secularism is an evil in the US. He wants to start war in Iran and force regime change. He is anti-abortion to an extreme: no exception for rape, incest, and dismisses that there are cases where abortions are necessary for women's health. That's right, those exceptions just don't exist. He's plainly stated that feminism is a problem in the US, and that women should take a more "traditional role in the family."

The guy is a complete joke. I can't believe his wife or daughters haven't slapped him upside the head for being such a complete buffoon. That he was twice a senator makes me ill. I don't know if I would be able to speak to anyone that I knew voted for this guy given how truly terrible of a person he is. Dan Savage equating his name to fecal matter is the least this man deserves, but in my mind, it's a fair start.
posted by Mister Fabulous at 4:46 PM on January 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


The guy is a complete joke. I can't believe his wife or daughters haven't slapped him upside the head for being such a complete buffoon.

Considering the disgust many feel for Santorum it might be hard to swallow, but women in Iowa seem to like Santorum more than men according to the CNN exit polling.

(chart and joke via SA)
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:57 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


Goddamn, but we need to revoke their tax-exempt status right quick.

There is a link between the desire to control the churches and the new media of radio - with the IRS being the way of control.
Charles Coughlin

How the IRS Controls Christian Churches Texe Marrs of Power of Prophecy, an author and radio broadcaster, has been the focus of an extended IRS investigation because of his conservative Christian views. He has learned the IRS rules, first-hand, the hard way. - the page has a few dull axes it tries to sharpen so many ppl won't be happy.
posted by rough ashlar at 5:19 PM on January 4, 2012


A quick word regarding the Santorum jokes.

I am of two minds. On the one hand, I recognize that they've been overplayed.

On the other hand, if they serve to remind people of the fact (or alert people to the fact) that he is a hateful and ignorant human being, then the jokes have served a valuable purpose.

Savage's definition of small "s" santorum is shorthand for everything Mister Fabulous wrote about. If a significant portion of our country comes out as supporting him, well, they've revealed themselves to be as hateful and ignorant as he. Probably more ignorant.

I don't think a significant portion of the country is going to support him, though.
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:23 PM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


April 2003:
SANTORUM: “...In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —”

AP: “I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about ‘man on dog’ with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out.”
September 2011:
SANTORUM: “And the quote that I have been, quote, ‘criticized’ for was almost identical to a quote in a 1980 Supreme Court case where the majority decision basically said what I said… that if the Supreme Court establishes a right to consensual sexual activity, then it’s hard to draw the line between what sexual activity will be permitted under the Constitution and it leaves open a long list of consensual activities that most people I think would find rather unappealing.”

“And so, that’s what I said. I stand by the comment.”
posted by kirkaracha at 5:41 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


I'm pleased that mefi has provided such concentrated santorum coverage, reddit has many disappointingly small pools, but obviously they cover more ground with santorum overall, witness Double Fudge Santorum.

Santorum was selected as UrbanDictionary's Word of the Day for Jan 3rd 2012.  I've friends who proudly knew the frothy mix definition first, btw.

If you prefer the substance be disgussed more substantively then gawker has cataloged the santorum headlines appearing thus far (in-print-ish).

Or you might care that Santorum's nephew endorses Ron Paul if you like gossip.  Or maybe watch Dan Savage explaining santorum's anti-straight agenda.  I liked Savage's Colbert interview, btw.

And you might note that CREW's 2006 Most Corrupt Members of Congress Report named Santorum among the top three most corrupt senators.. if your into that sort of thing, not sure how far you swing that way.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:52 PM on January 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


Andrew Sullivan has dished up the santorum nicely too, btw.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:44 PM on January 4, 2012


"Santorum rushes from behind after dislodging Romney." (don't miss the comments)
I'm wondering how much Santorum will stain Romney now. lol

25 People Who Just Googled “Santorum” For The First Time (via homunculus)
posted by jeffburdges at 7:54 PM on January 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


25 People Who Just Googled “Santorum” For The First Time

I love this. For those of us who have been snickering at "Santorum" for years, it's easy to forget that not everyone is in on, and indeed over, the joke. Seeing people learn about Santorum for the first time gives me immense joy.

If you're looking for more innocent victims to teach about Santorum, I highly recommend your parents - I told my mom yesterday, and I don't think she's going to forgive me anytime soon, but it was so worth it.
posted by naoko at 8:25 PM on January 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


Clearly, they need to make romney a word too.

"My boss told a sexist joke today down the hall from Jennifer in the IT department, and I couldn't help but laugh and pal around nervously... only to get a pay raise later. I feel a wee mitt romney today."
posted by markkraft at 11:23 PM on January 4, 2012


"Do you have any prune juice? I've got a Romney."
posted by jeffburdges at 11:38 PM on January 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


(self-link) I've just updated my political scandal web site's Santorum page. I'd love to hear about any scandals I've missed via memail or whatever. My favorite quotes (via TPM):

“I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money.” - Santorum, last night
"I didn't say black people. I started to say word and kind of went 'bleurgh' and mixed my thoughts. I started to say one word and came up with a different word and moved on." - today
posted by msalt at 12:09 AM on January 5, 2012 [3 favorites]


MetaFilter: I started to say a word and kind of went 'bleurgh'
posted by markkraft at 12:12 AM on January 5, 2012


Not exactly scandal, but I would highlight his involvement in the Schiavo situation, there was a good amount of backlash for that outside of social conservative circles.

For braindead quotes, the McCain thing for sure.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 2:07 AM on January 5, 2012 [2 favorites]


rick (v): to remove [a substance from the anus] orally.
"He was so grateful for the lay that he ricked his partner." (via)
posted by jeffburdges at 10:03 AM on January 5, 2012


Would anal penetration then be a rick roll?
posted by msalt at 11:02 AM on January 5, 2012


Rick Santorum doesn't like bleurgh people.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 11:23 AM on January 5, 2012 [2 favorites]




Santorum Becomes Millionaire in Six Years After U.S. Senate Loss:
"If he's claiming he's not an insider, this is the thing that insiders do -- after public office they cash in," said Kent Cooper, a campaign finance expert and former Federal Elections Commission assistant staff director.
posted by peeedro at 1:42 PM on January 5, 2012 [3 favorites]






Not exactly scandal, but I would highlight his involvement in the Schiavo situation, there was a good amount of backlash for that outside of social conservative circles.

For braindead quotes, the McCain thing for sure.


Hmmm, I see what I didn't mean to do there.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 4:56 PM on January 5, 2012 [2 favorites]


Dan Savage on Rick Santorum's homophobic frothing.
posted by Artw at 5:03 PM on January 5, 2012


Santorum Defends Infamous 'Man On Dog' Comments [with VIDEO].
posted by ericb at 5:07 PM on January 5, 2012




Washington Times/JZ Analytics New Hampshire Poll:

Romney: 38.0%
Paul: 23.6%
Santorum: 10.8%
Not Sure: 9.7%
Gingrich: 9.1%
Huntsman: 8.0%
Perry: 0.5%
Bachmann: 0.3%

posted by furiousxgeorge at 5:17 PM on January 5, 2012


Did Santorum's 1/4/12 comments in Brentwood, NH identify blacks with welfare recipients? You make the call. (It's unclear what other word starting with "bla-" he might have been fumbling for at that moment.)

Also, his tin-foil hatty accusations that Federal assistance programs are payola for Democratic votes is pretty nutty, and it'd be nice if the media would talk about that in addition to the possible racism in the clip.
posted by aught at 8:21 AM on January 6, 2012


Faith in Public Life Action Blog: ...it’s a political delusion to think Rick Santorum is a standard-bearer of authentic Catholic values in politics. In fact, on several issues central to Catholic social teaching – torture, war, immigration, climate change, the widening gap between rich and poor and workers’ rights – Santorum is radically out of step with his faith’s teachings as articulated by Catholic bishops and several popes over the centuries.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 10:23 AM on January 6, 2012 [4 favorites]


Did Santorum's 1/4/12 comments in Brentwood, NH identify blacks with welfare recipients? You make the call.

Either way, he seems to think black people have difficulty being capable human beings:

Black People Could Learn a Thing or Two About Marriage from the Obamas

How insulated a life does one live to fit a foot this big in one's mouth, I wonder?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:20 AM on January 7, 2012


www.notromney.org (via)
posted by octothorpe at 1:32 PM on January 7, 2012


I love the text at the bottom of the page! TO BE CONTINUED... What does Romney do, now that he knows Newt is his father?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:31 PM on January 7, 2012 [1 favorite]


The gloves come off.

Apparently a billionaire gave Gingrich 10 million to run those ads in South Carolina. They're brutal, and doing Obama's work for him, if Romney happens to win the nomination.
posted by empath at 10:29 PM on January 8, 2012




Fire your insurance company!

Apparently we're neigh on into fantasy land here folks where all Americans can afford private health insurance and they'll let you switch once you're headlong into cancer treatment and realize your coverage actually sucks.
posted by Talez at 8:24 AM on January 10, 2012


Palin To Romney: Show Us Your Tax Returns, Prove You Created 100K Jobs

Mitt's Missing 100K Jobs, are they in Mexico and South-East Asia?

Mitt Romney: Did He Create A Hundred Thousand Jobs Or Kill Seven Thousand?

Reading the righty blogs this week, the right seems to be working itself up in to a desperate lather as it dawns on them that Romney is almost certainly going to be the nominee. Somehow, up until this week, they still had dreams that Newt or Perry could pull it out but now that Mitt has won two in a row and is favored in SC, they're starting to panic. I'm sure that they'll all do an unapologetic 180 sometime before the convention and go all in with Romney since the alternative is four more years of the Socialist Muslim Kenyan but in the mean time it's fun to watch the flop sweat.
posted by octothorpe at 4:35 AM on January 12, 2012 [1 favorite]




Santorum comes out ahead in Iowa.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:25 AM on January 19, 2012


Eww!
posted by Artw at 7:27 AM on January 19, 2012




Perry drops out, endorses Newt.

At this point, I'm just mentally replacing all Republican candidates names with some kind of poop related image.
posted by empath at 7:51 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]




Ewww. x2!
posted by Artw at 12:04 PM on January 19, 2012


That literally smacks of bullshit.
posted by iamkimiam at 12:06 AM on January 20, 2012




Has the liberal outrage started yet?
posted by Artw at 4:15 PM on January 20, 2012


Rand Paul detained by TSA
Imagine if the TSA accidentally won Ron Paul super Tuesday. lol
I just hope Santorum doesn't get all over everything.
posted by jeffburdges at 10:11 AM on January 23, 2012


Oh god, this is going to get Mefi spaffing over the Pauls even more, isn't it?
posted by Artw at 11:24 AM on January 23, 2012




« Older Justice deferred   |   Pin-gu... Pin-gu... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post