February 8, 2012

The most recent Rasmussen poll has Santorum up 1 point over Obama.

A big gap closed up suddenly:
Rasmussen Reports, 2/2-2/3: Obama 44, Santorum 45
Rasmussen Reports, 1/31-2/1: Obama 46, Santorum 44
Rasmussen Reports, 1/23-1/24: Obama 48, Santorum 40
Rasmussen Reports, 1/17-1/18: Obama 48, Santorum 38
ADDED: By the way, there's a lot of talk about how Rush Limbaugh hasn't endorsed anyone, but — based on my own listening to nearly every recent show in the last month — I think he's been subtly influencing listeners to choose Santorum. Limbaugh frequently talks about how he doesn't do endorsements, that his "candidate" of choice is conservatism, and that he wants to be in a position to support whoever goes up against Obama in the fall. But he has repeatedly pointed to Santorum as the most conservative candidate and, perhaps more important, the candidate who will be most able to articulate conservatism when confronted with Obama.

126 comments:

LarsPorsena said...

Must be all the letters read from the pulpit of Catholic churches in the last week.

Jay said...

Joke candidate!

Unelectable!

Insert Rasmussen is a Republican polster comments from left wingers here ____.

DaveW said...

We don't have a pulpit. In Catholic churches it's called an ambo.

I seriously doubt Santorum has any chance of beating Obama, my guess is he's even more unlikely than Romney to pull that off.

Fen said...

You should note that

1) "These numbers will be reported on a three day rolling average."

2) Ras polled Likely Voters, the others at RCP polled Registered Voters.

else you'll be mixing apples and oranges.

Fen said...

I seriously doubt Santorum has any chance of beating Obama, my guess is he's even more unlikely than Romney to pull that off.

I don't care who the nom is, I'm voting Obama out

Matthew said...

Outliers make me nervous. Good thing we've got time to see how things shake out.

Matthew said...

Well, not much of an outlier, but, different enough to be willing to wait on it.

Andy R. said...

Santorum is not a serious candidate for President.

He is nothing but a protest vote for Republicans to demonstrate how much they dislike Romney.

The rubes will keep pining for their preferred whack-job for President (which has been severely limited by those people deciding to drop out rather than continue to embarrass themselves), until Romney is decreed the nominee and loses to Obama.

Paddy O said...

I was wondering when Santorum would get his turn to be the chief alternative to Romney.

Sadly, he reminds me a lot of the typical California Republican candidates, really firing up a base that is happy to be a minority party.

Andy R. said...

Joke candidate!

When someone tells me that Little Rickey Santorum wants to be President, what am I supposed to do but laugh?

Are we really supposed to waste our previous time on this earth explaining what a silly idea that is?

Fen said...

Andy R will change into another sockpuppet after Obama loses the election.

We should have a contest for his new name.

I pick: LibBigot

Matthew said...

"Obama is not a serious candidate for President.

He is nothing but a protest vote for Democrats to demonstrate how much they dislike Clinton."

Oh, late 2007 to early 2008. How I miss you.

Tank said...

Andy R is a racist.

And.

We now have potential choices between four [Zero, Romney, Gingrich [nah, he's done] and Santorum] big gov't, bank owned, not one chance in a million willing to do what is necessary, candidates.

DEAD COUNTRY WALKING.

Sad. We had a pretty good thing going here for awhile.

roesch/voltaire said...

Santorum is a serious pol who knows how DC works and how to get the pork to his state, and in his personal life lives the talk of conservatives so I think he if a fine representative for the Republican party.

Andy R. said...

It's weird how much Republicans dislike Romney. You realize he's going to be your nominee, right?

If you keep giving him second (or worse) place finishes in your primaries and then turn around and say he should be President we're just going to laugh at you.

Republicans have spent years and years fighting to make sure he doesn't become the nominee.

Scott M said...

Republicans have spent years and years fighting to make sure he doesn't become the nominee.

Is that anything like all the years Democrats fought to keep blacks from voting?

Brennan said...

He is nothing but a protest vote for Republicans to demonstrate how much they dislike Romney.

You would think that if they were protest votes for Santorum against Romney that the race would be close. But it wasn't close.

Amexpat said...

Best indicator of where things now stand is at Intrade.com. Obama continues to move up there - he's now at a 61.3% chance to be re-elected.

Romney's at around 81% to be nominated. Both seem about right to me.

William said...

Santorum seems earnest and decent, and he makes a better argument, simply by force of example, for conservative values than Gingrich does. However, I'm not sure that that altar boy look is what Americans seek in their President. Whatever your opinion on gay marriage or abortion, these issues are subisidiary to high unemployment and a huge national debt. I think Romeny can argue these issues better than Santorum and, of course, Obama.

Jason said...

Catholics. The Sleeper has awakened!

traditionalguy said...

The saint-orum odyssey has been interesting.

I sense that the GOP voters are sensitive about the Obama is a black man memes that won him the election in 2008.

Therefore the candidates from the south have all been dumped overboard, but Romney and saint-orum are still considered possibilities.

In the end, one of those two will win the Presidency. Both have strengths and weaknesses, but we need to support the nominee for his strenghts and not condemn the nominee for his weaknesses...as much fun as condemning people seems to be these days.

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

Are we really supposed to waste our previous time on this earth explaining what a silly idea that is


Typical leftist copout.

Yes, you won't waste your valuable time!

We believe you silly little boy. Really, we do!

edutcher said...

He won't win without more stress on the economy, but his win, especially in CO, with its large Hispanic population, shows GodZero's little war on religion is a bigger deal than the Lefties ever dreamed.

Andy R. said...

The rubes will keep pining for their preferred whack-job for President

Sounds more like the Demos in '08.

Or now.

Brennan said...

If you keep giving him second (or worse) place finishes in your primaries and then turn around and say he should be President we're just going to laugh at you.

This is why the left lives in the Land of Make Believe. Just pretend that what is real is not. What happened in 2008 did not really happen. There were not Obama 2nd place finishes. It just didn't happen. Make believe it didn't happen.

Tra la la la la. Ooo King Friday!

Andy R. said...

Santorum seems earnest and decent

Someone made a comment about Santorum being decent on metafilter last night, and I enjoyed the pushback:

"I don't think this idea should take hold. We should expect a better exemplar of decency than somebody who does not believe in the right of women to have control over their bodies or the right of gay men and lesbians to live equal lives as American citizens. Somebody who blamed the liberalism of Boston's voters for the sexual abuse in its Catholic seminaries. Who takes money from energy companies and coincidentally decries global warming as "junk science". Who is so opposed to the education of America's children that he wants to waste their time by forcing teachers to read out a list of objections to the theory of evolution.

He may be sincere, but that is very, very different from being decent."

and

"What's noble about a candidate who thinks that women who get pregnant as the result of a rape should view their pregnancies as a "broken gift" from God? What's noble about a candidate who thinks that a right to privacy doesn't exist in the Constitution? Or who thinks that contraception is a menace? Or who habitually compares fighting gay rights to combating terrorism? I could go on, but it's pointless. Santorum may think he wants to save souls but he's as ignoble as any of them.

His sweater-vest Catholic choirboy routine is an excellent cover, though, I'll give him that. He even has folks on Metafilter tripping over themselves to call him "decent" and "noble." What a crock of shit."

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

Someone made a comment about Santorum being decent on metafilter last night, and I enjoyed the pushback:


Of course you did. It a bunch of silly bromides, personal insults, and lies.

Why wouldn't you get a kick out of it?

Though I do rather enjoy you enthusiastically supporting that bigot in the White House who opposses gay marriage.
Why, it is almost as if you're unserious or something.

pm317 said...

For an ABO like me, Santorum is scary, period! His overtly and overly religious pronouncements and how that effects women is scary to me. I think he should just go home and breed more Santorum brood. There is no way he is going to defeat Obama in the GE.

Hoosier Daddy said...

What people like Andy doesn't understand is neither party has had a candidate worth a piss for the last two decades. Lack of GOP enthusiasim actually reflects the high standards conservatives expect from their nominees.

Democrats on the other hand cheerfully embraced an Arkansas carpetbagger and a junior senator/former community organizer and we ended up with President Dumb and Vice President Dumber.

Triangle Man said...

@Jay

Ask and ye shall receive.

Rasmussen polls don't always have a bias, but they sure did for the 2010 election. Their final Presidential election polls had a 4 point Republican bias with a 6 point total error and an astonishing 40 point error in the Hawaii Senate race. It's always working taking poll results with a grain of salt, but Rasmussen deserves a bit more skepticism than most.

Andy R. said...

It a bunch of silly bromides, personal insults, and lies.

What are the lies?

Patrick said...

Andy R,

I suspect you lack the self awareness to realize that the comments you cited assert only issues on which they disagree with Santorum, not anything about his character.

Disagreeing with you is a matter of opinion, it is not a character flaw. In other words, you have failed to make any meaningufl argument.

edutcher said...

Hatman only shows his own hatred.

Love to see his reaction if Conservatives were suddenly declared untermenschen.

Jason said...

Catholics. The Sleeper has awakened!

Don't laugh. Catholics, at about 25% of the population, are still a big part of the Democrat coalition and GodZero is doing a swell job of alienating them.

Add in the fact even liberal Catholics are up in arms (even EJ Dionne) and the Demos are very worried.

Matthew said...

"Who takes money from energy companies and coincidentally decries global warming as "junk science"."

If you're going to take GE's money, at least believe in global warming like some politicians.

Fen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jay said...

Andy R. said...

What are the lies?



The fact that you can't recognize them is telling.

thinks that contraception is a menace?

Lie.

who does not believe in the right of women to have control over their bodies

Silly bromide; lie

the right of gay men and lesbians to live equal lives as American citizens

Lie.

Who is so opposed to the education of America's children

Lie.

Seeing Red said...

For an ABO like me, Santorum is scary, period! His overtly and overly religious pronouncements and how that effects women is scary to me. I think he should just go home and breed more Santorum brood. There is no way he is going to defeat Obama in the GE.



Women shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Jay said...

Triangle Man said...
Ask and ye shall receive.


Ok.

But you missed it last week when garage was peeing himself about Raz having Obama up in Ohio over Romney.

Garage couldn't stop referencing said pollster.

Jay said...

decries global warming as "junk science"

Global warming is junk science given that a) the globe isn't really warming and b) there is no actual evidence that man can induce the globe to warm.

Another silly bromide.

Seeing Red said...

who does not believe in the right of women to have control over their bodies



Of course, if women actually controlled themselves or paid more attention to their body than their nail polish, outside of rape and incest, they wouldn't get pregnant, would they?


I want control of my body. Then why are you getting pregnant if you don't want to?

I will never understand that argument.

Seeing Red said...

Who is so opposed to the education of America's children


What does this even mean?

Andy R. said...

To them, the only good social conservative is the one who shuts the hell up and does what he is told.

You would think the social conservative rubes would catch on after how many times they have been played.

the right of gay men and lesbians to live equal lives as American citizens

Lie.


How exactly is that not a lie? I know Santorum thinks gay people are icky, but that's no excuse not to give them the same rights as straight people.

SGT Ted said...

It shows that Rush is right: When a candidate articulates conservative ideas and has credibility, he gets alot of support from Americans across the board.

edutcher said...

Andy R. said...

How exactly is that not a lie? I know Santorum thinks gay people are icky, but that's no excuse not to give them the same rights as straight people.

They do, moron.

What Constitutional rights are they denied?

Seeing Red said...

There are no more STD's.

It is now STI's


Infections. Jr. High health class, spent very little time on pregnancy, focused on "infections" you can get.

shiloh said...

Santo! Santo! Santo!

So Althouse, will you be switching your allegiance from mittens to Santo?

Regardless, it's early. :-P

rhhardin said...

Limbaugh doesn't see the power relations distinction between conservative and social conservative.

A conservative wants to distribute power to where the relevant knowledge is, which is the grass roots.

A social conservative wants to empower people like himself.

SGT Ted said...

Just like there are big chunk of lefty voters who's overriding issue is Abortion, there are a big chunk of righty voters who's overriding issue is Christianity.

This was Romneys problem in 2008. Alot of Christian voters and not just evangelicals, saw Mormonism as suspect. I know that Mormonism now forbids polygamy, but I think alot of people suspect it anyway.

My question. Is there any evidence that shows like "Sister Wives" have softened attitudes by humanizing the issues, regardless of what mainstream Mormons practice today?

Scott M said...

A social conservative wants to empower people like himself.

This. It doesn't matter what the topic is, you slide left toward tyranny and right toward anarchy. Striking the correct balance is the goal that continues to vex.

Are you not vexed? I'm vexed. (SNL with Lucy Lawless, I think)

Palladian said...

"A social conservative wants to empower people like himself."

There is no difference, as far as I can see, between a social conservative and a socialist.

Christopher in MA said...

"Someone who does not believe in the right of women to control their own bodies. . ."

Yeah, Bloomberg is an intolerant fool with his war on transfats, and the surgeon general's nonsense about second-hand smoke is a pain, too. Oh, wait, Hat - that's the GOOD kind of control over women's bodies. ASking someone to spare a thought before committing murder is BAD control.

"Who is so opposed to the education of American children that he wants to waste their time by forcing teachers to read out a list of objections to the theory of evolution."

Actually, that's a good idea. It would encourage critical thinking; if you believe in evolution, then you should be able to recognize the arguments against the theory and intelligently rebut them.

But I'm fairly sure your animus against Santorum is simply that he is genuinely religious, Hat. You've proven your intolerance quite a number of times on this blog.

Palladian said...

I'm not a social conservative and yet I'm anti-abortion. There is a libertarian argument for the legal protection of the rights of a nascent human life.

It's all the other stupid shit that Santorum believes and advocates the use of the State to enforce that grosses me out.

mccullough said...

Rick Santorum voted for high deficits and Medicare Part D. He stands for big, but not as big as Obama, government. He should run for his old Senate seat, since the guy who beat him is up for re-election this year.

Seeing Red said...

. ASking someone to spare a thought before committing murder is BAD control.


How about is a quickie worth being stuck with stupid & his baggage for the rest of my life? Is he really worth bragging rights?

Bender said...

Just like there are big chunk of lefty voters who's overriding issue is Abortion . . .

Like I said in the post from last night -- the only thing that the Big Tent Republicans despise more than Obama is a social conservative.

The Big Tenters would rather have the country run by a tyrannical socialist thug named Obama than give up the ability to kill their children.

They'd much rather pal around with Barack in the country club than have to associate with those unwashed social conservatives who believe in such unsavory things as God and the dignity of human life.

Fen said...

"Who is so opposed to the education of American children that he wants to waste their time by forcing teachers to read out a list of objections to the theory of evolution."

Wow. Only a libtard would claim that hearing the other side's pov makes you "opposed to education".

Perhaps you meant that Santorum is "opposed to indoctrination"?

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... I know Santorum thinks gay people are icky, but that's no excuse not to give them the same rights as straight people..."

I agree with Andy. I see no justification why gay people can't experience the same benefits of marriage as well as the joys of divorce, attorney's fees, property settlements, child support and custody battles over their adopted designer orphan.

Since there is no reason to believe gay divorce rates would be any lower than straights, I don't think it would take long before the gay community realizes marriage means more than tax advantages and shared health benefits.

Gay marriage proponents remind me of that chick who had the hissy fit about not being able to enroll at the Citidal and then didn't last a week once she won her fight. Be careful what you wish for.

Christopher in MA said...

Palladian, I'm with you. State coercion from the left OR right is to be resisted, which is why I find myself unable to support anyone on the GOP side. Unfortunately, it's the coercion from the left that is most damaging to our freedoms at the present time. Jonah Goldberg had an interesting column in USA Today which I don't know how to link to, but I'm sure a quick search will find it.

Jay said...

Hossier, right on cue:

Robin Tyler filed for divorce from Diane Olson on Jan. 25. The pair were among 14 same-sex couples who originally challenged the ban in 2008.

In an exclusive interview with NBC4, Tyler spoke about her decision.

"We're human and we went through difficult times," Tyler said. The marriage ran its course, she said.

Bender said...

And then add in that Santorum is not only a social conservative (most of whom are Evangelical), but is a Catholic -- and not one of those "good" CINO Catholics like Nancy Pelosi or Ted Kennedy, but a real, believing Catholic -- and that is just too much.

Too much, not only for lefty anti-Catholic bigots like The Hood, but too much for the moderate anti-Catholic bigots in the Republican Party. They may laugh at the silly Mormons, but they know that the Catholic Church is the real enemy (just like Obama and Sebelius know that the Church is the real enemy).

Andy R. said...

Actually, that's a good idea. It would encourage critical thinking; if you believe in evolution, then you should be able to recognize the arguments against the theory and intelligently rebut them.

Yeah, and when we explain to kids in science class about how lightning works we should also explain that maybe it's Zeus throwing lightning bolts form the sky. In order to teach them critical thinking.

Religious people can build as many churches as they like to try to brainwash kids with their anti-science nonsense, just keep it out of science class.

It's 2012 in America, you really think we need to spend any school time pretending that maybe God created all the animals 6,000 years ago and then buried a bunch of dinosaur bones to trick the people that didn't believe hard enough?

Scott M said...

It's 2012 in America, you really think we need to spend any school time pretending that maybe God created all the animals 6,000 years ago and then buried a bunch of dinosaur bones to trick the people that didn't believe hard enough?

Why not? Schools spend an awful lot of time pumping up little egos unrealistically without having to be there when little Johnny or Jane craters upon entering the real world. On top of that, we layer up the multi-culti bullshit that has zero to do with how well they read, write, or perform basic math skills. What's one more ridiculous and waste of time?

Palladian said...

I would prefer to stay out of the clutches of both the Benders and the Andy Rs of the world.

Different flavors of the same bigoted, simplistic, vindictive, power-hungry Utopians.

Jay said...

It's 2012 in America, you really think we need to spend any school time pretending that maybe God created all the animals 6,000 years ago

No, of course it is much better to spend time telling them being gay is "normal" (it is not, it immoral, abnormal and unhealthy) and that the globe is warming (it is not).

Palladian said...

ScottM's right, the left already destroyed public education in America. Why not allow the nutty religious right to apply the coup de grâce?

Palladian said...

Jay, you're exactly the same kind of ideologue as Andy R, and just as dangerous if you're ever given power over others. It's your type that is sending the US to the scrap heap.

Talk about immoral, abnormal and unhealthy.

Andy R. said...

No, of course it is much better to spend time telling them being gay is "normal" (it is not, it immoral, abnormal and unhealthy)

You must be a plant being purposefully outlandish to discredit anti-gay people. No one seriously believes this.

Andy R. said...

the same kind of ideologue as Andy R, and just as dangerous

If I were made dictator of the US, what sort of laws do you think I would decree that would be so dangerous?

Jay said...

Andy R. said...

You must be a plant being purposefully outlandish to discredit anti-gay people. No one seriously believes this.



Of course you don't believe it, it is fact.

I'll be happy to provide you quotes from the bible demonstrating the immoralality of it, the fact that it is abnormal comes from Webster's, and I'll be happy to provide you a bunch of links to the CDC and other places demonstrating how gays have higher incidences of STD's, HIV, eating disorders, drug & alchol abuse than heterosexuals.

But of course you'll ignore all that because you're stupid.

Jay said...

No one seriously believes this.


I realize you don't want to beleive that gays have a lower life expectancy than heterosexuals, but it is a fact.

Bender said...

If I were made dictator of the US, what sort of laws do you think I would decree that would be so dangerous?

I'd expect that you would decree that every cross in the country be set on fire. You've certainly been engaging in quite a lot of cross-burning here.

Seeing Red said...

Religious people can build as many churches as they like to try to brainwash kids with their anti-science nonsense, just keep it out of science class.



Man-made global warming - keep that religion out of school.

Christopher in MA said...

"Teachers can go to as many Algore rallies as they like to try to brainwash kids with their global warming nonsense, just keep it out of science class."

Fixed it for you, Hat.

BTW, not that you care, but the Catholic Church is hardly "anti-science." As well, it has stated often and clearly that there is no conflict between Church teaching and evolution. But then, you really don't care, do you, Hat? Not as long as you can blame some mythical "religion" which exists only in your mind as the boogeyman for your own personal issues.

Just go and desecrate a church already, and get it out of your system.

Andy R. said...

BTW, not that you care, but the Catholic Church is hardly "anti-science."

Does the Catholic Church still perform exorcisms? Science!

Jay said...

I hate this 'insider' and 'outsider talk but this was pretty good:

“Gov. Romney, ‘Mr. Outsider,’ was for government takeover of healthcare, was for government takeover of the private sector in the Wall Street bailout, and was for the government takeover of industry and energy with cap-and-trade,” Santorum said on CNN. “So ‘Mr. Private Sector’ was ‘Mr. Big Government’ when he was out there running.”



Santorum blasted Romney for running as a Washington outsider, alleging that the circumstances that led Romney to leave government were different from how they have been portrayed.

“I ran for the U.S. Senate the same year Mitt Romney ran for the U.S. Senate, and I won,” Santorum said. “It’s not that Gov. Romney didn’t want to be Sen. Romney — he wanted to be Sen. Romney, but he ran as a very liberal Republican in Massachusetts who had just become a Republican, and he lost. He lost badly in a year when Republicans had one of the biggest Republican sweeps in history, when the Republican revolution occurred.”

Andy R. said...

Is the conservative position now that the earth isn't getting warmer or that it is getting warmer but it isn't because of human activity or that it is getting warmer and is because of human activity but it would be too expensive to do anything about it?

Seeing Red said...

BTW, not that you care, but the Catholic Church is hardly "anti-science."

Does the Catholic Church still perform exorcisms? Science!




There's a lot of exorcisms going on within the climate religion, they're trying to exorcise the deniability aspect.

Seeing Red said...

It's called "the sun." Perhaps you've seen it? That big orange thing in the sky which sends out solar radiation?

East Anglia just said no warming for the past 15 years, didn't they?

MadisonMan said...

The Big Tenters would rather have the country run by a tyrannical socialist thug named Obama than give up the ability to kill their children.

If republican Big-Tenters finally drove the nail through the Heart of Roe v. Wade and had the decision overturned, then how would they energize their base to vote and send money?

Republican politicians -- all of them -- love that Abortion is legal because it gives them a way to raise money.

MadisonMan said...

Maybe 'love' is the wrong word.

They are certainly very very appreciative.

Christopher in MA said...

"Does the Catholic Church still perform exorcisms? Science!"

If you get your ideas about the Church from Hollywood, Hat, I can see where you would think it's full of sinister black-robed men who strap nubile girls to beds and jam crosses down their throats for some sadistic pleasure. A true exorcism is an extraordinarily rare event, and is resorted to only after all attempts at natural causes (spasms, epilepsy, neural dysfunction, &c.) have been ruled out.

Again, not that this matters to you. As someone once wrote, the greatest trick the Devil has come up with is to convince people he doesn't exist.

Seeing Red said...

[A] new book, Die Kalte Sonne, written by Prof Dr Fritz Vahrenholt and geologist/paleontologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning, has caused a sensation even in advance of its official publication yesterday. For Prof. Vahrenholt, a renewable energy expert, was one of the fathers of the modern German green movement and believed everything preached by the IPCC. But according to Focus magazine, he is now a far sadder and wiser man:

‘Doubt came two years ago when he was an expert reviewer of an IPCC report on renewable energy. “I discovered numerous errors and asked myself if the other IPCC reports on climate were similarly sloppy.”

‘In his book he explains how he dug into the IPCC climate report and was horrified by what he had found. Then add the 10 years of stagnant temperatures, failed predictions, Climategate e-mails, and discussions he had with dozens of other skeptical elite scientists. That was more than enough. FOCUS quotes: “I couldn’t take it any more. I had to write this book.”’

Rusty said...

Seeing Red said...
For an ABO like me, Santorum is scary, period! His overtly and overly religious pronouncements and how that effects women is scary to me.




Boo!


That's the beauty of our system. No matter what he believes, he can't force you to believe it too.
Ya know?
Within 10 miles of where I live there has to be 20 protestant churches, 12 catholic churches, 3 synagogs, two masques, and a hindu temple and I don't have to go to any one of em.
Have a good one.

shiloh said...

Reps always need a wedge issue to divide America. And as MM mentioned $$$ er fund raising is an added bonus! lol

Andy R. said...

A true exorcism is an extraordinarily rare event, and is resorted to only after all attempts at natural causes (spasms, epilepsy, neural dysfunction, &c.) have been ruled out.

We should teach that in health class. To encourage critical thinking. Science!

What century are you from?

Seeing Red said...

Millions of parents perform "exorcisms" every day - we have children in the public school system. My niece just learned the Crusades are our fault.

Seeing Red said...

Reps always need a wedge issue to divide America. And as MM mentioned $$$ er fund raising is an added bonus! lol



9 old unelected blackrobed men divided America. It should have been a states' rights issue, they would have come along in their own time.

Scott M said...

Is the conservative position now that the earth isn't getting warmer or that it is getting warmer but it isn't because of human activity or that it is getting warmer and is because of human activity but it would be too expensive to do anything about it?

Now, I'm not sure, Andy, but I'm fairly certain the guys at East Anglia don't have anything to do with setting conservative agendas. Perhaps you need to get up to speed? Speed causes heat, so make sure you purchase some carbon offsets before you start catching up.

Seeing Red said...

Hmmm, by Shiloh's definition, saying "no" is divisive. All we have to do is always say yes to the little darlings.

Ohhh, disagreeing is now bullying, do you feel bullied, Shiloh?

Christopher in MA said...

"What century are you from?"

Boy, you got me there, Hat. I'm wriggling in the crushing grip of reason. Like I said, explanations make no difference to you. You have your idee fixe, and that's that.

I have other things to do. I'll leave the last word to Archbishop Fulton Sheen:

"There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church. But there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. Which is, of course, quite a different thing."

Seeing Red said...

SGK just got wedged but good. How could PP be so divisive over such a small amout of money?

Bender said...

there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church

Christopher -- The Hood is ignorant not only of the Church and her history, he is clearly ignorant of the histories of science and the university, ignorant of exactly who it was that established and built the universities and academies and observatories.

Michael said...

It is interesting to see how easy it is to identify people who were poorly educated and those who are well educated. Compare and contrast the reasoning of Palladium with that of AndyR and you are immediately struck by the profound stupidity of one and the culture of the other. It may not, although it probably does, have anything to do with brains and everything to do with where each has spent their time. A similar comparison of TraditionalGuy and, say, Shiloh will yield similar unfavorable comparisons. This is also why I always take people interviewing for a position to lunch. The overhand grip on the fork or with respect to their knowledge of music tells all.

ricpic said...

Limbaugh's preference for a conservative over deeply liberal Romney ain't so subtle. All we need is an opponent who won't take the gloves off against Obama because of his wife's fear that exile from the beautiful people cocktail circuit would ensue.

Scott M said...

The overhand grip on the fork or with respect to their knowledge of music tells all.

You should also ask them if they crumple the toilet paper into a ball or if they wrap it around their fingers. The answer will tell you all you need to know about a person.

ricpic said...

Santorum said the 2012 election will be about FREEDOM! Mr. Establishment Mitt would never make such a naked crude inflammatory statement. Why, it just isn't done!

Of course, it IS about freedom. But decorum takes precedence over the truth - an infuriating truth at that - for the supremely comfortable.

ricpic said...

Who the hell crumples the toilet paper into a ball?!

Totally declasse.

shiloh said...

"SGK just got wedged but good."

No, by stupidly letting politics into the equation, they "wedged" themselves lol.

ie clueless conservatives.

damikesc said...

How exactly is that not a lie? I know Santorum thinks gay people are icky, but that's no excuse not to give them the same rights as straight people.

Can you note the difference in Obama's stance in gay marriage as opposed to Santorum's?

Quite are both openly opposed to it.


Religious people can build as many churches as they like to try to brainwash kids with their anti-science nonsense

...but enough about global warming alarmists.

Is the conservative position now that the earth isn't getting warmer

According to actual measurements over the last 15 years, that position would be the factual position.

So, yeah, it's the conservative one.

damikesc said...

No, by stupidly letting politics into the equation, they "wedged" themselves lol.

Yes, it's THEIR fault Lefties decided to act like the Mafia in relations to them.

But I'm sure caving will work out well in the long run. I bet lots of major corporations will want to participate with a major advocate of abortion --- which they have to be since PP doesn't do squat for breast cancer.

Bender said...

Can you note the difference in Obama's stance in gay marriage as opposed to Santorum's?
Quite are both openly opposed to it.


Can you note the difference in the oh-so-reasonable and most electable Romney's stance on abortion and other social issues as opposed to that extremist and unelectable Santorum's?

Romney insists that he too is pro-life and socially conservative.

But the difference between Obama and Santorum, on the one hand, and Romney and Santorum, on the other is -- as EVERYONE knows -- neither Obama nor Romney are honest and sincere. Everyone knows that neither one means what he says, that it is all a lie, something that is merely said to fool the fools, but with a wink-and-a-nod showing that they really believe the opposite.

Seeing Red said...

Wait a minute, why are the young getting mammograms in the first place? Those are really only for ages 40 and above. How many 40-somethings are getting abortions?

Seeing Red said...

"SGK just got wedged but good."

No, by stupidly letting politics into the equation, they "wedged" themselves lol.

ie clueless conservatives.


Maybe they should have just justified it by science, too many studies suggest abortions have upped your odds for breast cancer.

Alex said...

The rubes will keep pining for their preferred whack-job for President

Sounds like Obama to me.

Seeing Red said...

If you have a family history of breast cancer, why would you say, HEY, I think I'll go to PP for a referral?

Alex said...

Women have to realize that there are consequences to playing around with reproductive systems.

Seeing Red said...

Is the conservative position now that the earth isn't getting warmer


The article actually wondered if The Thames would freeze over like it did 300 years ago. They held faires on it.

Revenant said...

But he has repeatedly pointed to Santorum as the most conservative candidate

This fits with my theory that conservatives only look at social issues.

Alex said...

Santorum is the social conservative, but he's a statist on economics. I'm shocked Rush doesn't know this. Where does Santorum stand on free-market policies? Where does he stand on the Keystone pipeline, drilling ANWR, capital gains tax, NLRB power?

Alex said...

This fits with my theory that conservatives only look at social issues.

social conservatives only look at social issues. The rest of us aren't fooled.

LilEvie said...

Rasmussen releases these crazy polls and everyone in media loves them because it shakes things up, makes it looks like there's still a contest - suspense! But in the end they're always outliers.

Sanatorium is running for '16, or '20 and he knows it. The better he looks now, the more it will be "his turn" next time. Bleh. He is a statist and loved every law and regulation that promoted his causes. A law just for Terry Schiavo?

The malleability of Romney is his advantage. As long as the tea party reigns, he will go with the flow.

LilEvie said...

Why does every thread have to be about Hatboy? He's playing an interactive game; don't engage him and maybe he'll go away.

John Stodder said...

Boy, this thread misses the point more than usual.

The meaning of that poll number, which is probably an outlier in reality, is this: Obama is so disliked by about half the country, give or take a percentage point, that he will struggle to be re-elected against any Republican.

This has been a known fact for about 16 months.

I don't think Santorum is the best candidate to beat Obama, because despite his unpopularity, he retains enough loyalty from Dems that one would not want to go into the fall campaign with such a right-wing extremist on social issues who might cause voters like me (although I'd vote for him if I had to) to stay home and justify that decision on the sense that he is just too far out there in the anti-gay and anti-contraception/abortion realms.

But the fact that he COULD beat him is the real story. Obama is that disliked. Voters are that eager to fire him, that they would elect someone with those backward views over him, perhaps.

Seeing Red said...

...Women have to realize that there are consequences to playing around with reproductive systems.



I thought that was what sex ed was for?

Scott M said...

...Women have to realize that there are consequences to playing around with reproductive systems.



I thought that was what sex ed was for?


I thought that's what sedan back seats were for.

Cedarford said...

Paddy O said...
I was wondering when Santorum would get his turn to be the chief alternative to Romney.

Sadly, he reminds me a lot of the typical California Republican candidates, really firing up a base that is happy to be a minority party.

======================
California Republicans may be out of power, utterly unable to do a thing but moan about how California is going to hell in a handbasket, but they have their "true conservative" moral purity.

Keep in mind that another 4 years of Obama is a gold mine money-making opportunity for conservative Media - Performers and Entertainers like Rush, Sean Hannity, and Michael Savage.

Their wealth and influence will grow if they can manipulate events and get a Newt or Theocrat Santorum to go down in flames against Obama.

shiloh said...

"another 4 years of Obama is a gold mine ..."

Including Althouse ie conservative blogs ie (4) more years of whining etc. etc.

Along the same line as MM mentioned and I have been sayin' for many years ie Reps really don't want Roe v. Wade totally overturned as it's a cash cow for the Rep party.

The bottom line, as always, is the bottom line!

traditionalguy said...

For 6 months I saw Santorum and Gingrich splitting the Conservative votes while Romney coasted to nomination as Mr laid back and electable.

But what if it turns into battered and cardboard man Romney and battered and mean man Gingrich splitting the Conservative votes while Santorum coasts to nomination as the Catholic candidate that is more moderate and has a good personality. Hmmm?

mccullough said...

Santorum cannot beat Obama and he's not a conservative on fiscal issues.

Romney might not be conservative enough on fiscal issues, but he's better than Rick Santorum who affirmatively voted for the pork and W. deficits and Medicare Part D and all the other bullshit.

Conservatives need to repeal Obamacare and Medicare Part D and stop spending so much money. Santorum is not the man to carry that message. He believes in government telling people what to do.

I can understand why conservatives dislike Romney. I can't understand why any conservative likes Santorum.

jim said...

InTrade rates Santorum's odds of being the GOP nominee at a whopping 8.2%, so this is akin to debating exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. By the way, Obama's chances of re-election were rated at circa 51% there for ages, but in the last week they've shot up to 61.3%.

NOSTRADAMUS ALERT: given that most of the seats up for contention are the Democrats' to lose, & unemployment is still high, I predict that (barring any major screwups, which at this point reeks of optimism) Republicans will do well in the House, less well in the Senate, & in light of the worst GOP slate of nominees in more than a decade, Obama will serve a second term ... four years later, the Right will be amazed & astonished to discover that in fact the rivers are not turned to blood, nor is the sky transformed to ashes.

The big story so far is what a breathtakingly epic clusterfuck the GOP caucuses & primaries have been - not exactly a glowing beacon of hope for the general election if you're a supporter.

Reince Priebus is starting to make even Michael Steele look like an organizational genius - it's a real testimonial to party discipline that calls for him to resign aren't already emerging, but I think that will change in a hurry come November.

shiloh said...

"it's a real testimonial to party discipline that calls for him to resign aren't already emerging"

Priebus is not an African/American like Steele. And although Priebus is probably more inept than Steele, if he's bounced it will just show the continuing lack of leadership in teabaggerland.

To be fair, Priebus has been keeping a relatively low profile, whereas Steele was putting foot in mouth daily, apologizing to Limbaugh, etc. Plus Steele was a token pick, selected (((only))) because he was African/American ie the Reps answer to Obama. :D

Again, slim pickins as regards to leadership in the party of Lincoln.

Revenant said...

Santorum coasts to nomination as the Catholic candidate that is more moderate and has a good personality.

I can only assume you're describing an election in the mirror universe. My only question: which candidate has a goatee? Is it all of them or just Ron Paul?

The Crack Emcee said...

About your Rush comments - that's bullshit;

I listen to Rush daily, and it's been his listeners (usually female) who have been forcing the issue of Santorum's credentials on him. He's agreed, and then taken their view, since then.

BTW - have you noticed that when I was for Newt he went up, but, once I abandoned him over his ex, he fell - with women leaving his side in droves. And, since I switched to Santorum, he's now Da Man?

Being a realist can be nice sometimes.

Nobody wants Romney - who you and Meade endorsed.

Please make a note of it,...

Alex said...

Crack - do you even care about a free market economy?

yashu said...

Newt's kamikaze mission did hurt Romney. Someone here described his press conference as a murder-suicide, and that's what it was like. Newt self-destructed, but he went down blasting hyperbolic fulminations, declaring Romney to be the most evil politician in American history, an egregious liar with without a shred of integrity or honor who's buying the election etc. etc. That nervous breakdown hurt Newt more than Romney-- it took Newt out of the race-- but of course those statements (even though they're total BS) would hurt Romney too.

The beneficiary, naturally, is Santorum-- who was out of the line of fire, kept out of the fray. But I also suspect Santorum has been getting a lot of endorsements and votes lately because those endorsements and votes have been safe-- without risk, without danger, because until yesterday, no one really believed there was any chance that Santorum could actually win the nomination. Everyone assumed Romney was a foregone conclusion. So a Santorum vote could make for a feel-good vote, or a protest vote, or way to flaunt your anti-Romney conservative cred (even though the only thing that makes Santorum more conservative than Romney is his social conservatism; if you look at his history, there's nothing fiscally conservative about him at all).

If a Santorum nomination really comes to seem like a realistic possibility, I presume more people are going to snap out of it, and vote for the candidate they really want to battle Obama in the general election, the candidate they can realistically envision as chief executive and commander in chief of the USA. At least I hope so.

crosspatch said...

I think Santorum is a respectable candidate and I would have no trouble voting for him. I am concerned, though, at how successful he would be at drawing enough crossover Democrats to win. But with Obama alienating religious people, that might not be as difficult this week as it was last week.

Revenant said...

Crack - do you even care about a free market economy?

You know who cares about free market economies? NEW AGERS, that's who.