January 29, 2008

Romney and McCain tied at 30% each.

With 1% of the vote reported in the Florida primary. According to CNN TV.

ADDED: With 20% reporting, they're showing 36% for McCain and 31% for Romney — but they're not projecting based on the exit polls.

MORE: Now, its 34 to 33% with 32% of the returns in. Exciting. For McCain and Romney. For Rudy, it's pretty sad, but I think he lost it on his own, and not just because of the wait-for-Florida strategy. I had liked him best early on, but I disconnected from him a while back.

AND: TIME.com says Giuliani will endorse McCain.

AND: CNN just projected McCain as the winner.

AND: Giuliani speaks. He's saying lofty things about having a higher purpose. He wasn't in this for himself, he says. He believes in a cause, and he'll fight for it. He believes in the Republican Party. "This is a big party. I'm even in this party."

AND: From the McCain campaign: "Not as late a night as many expected. Romney outspent McCain by a huge margin. We find out on the 31st how much Romney has spent on his campaign. It will be an astonishing figure. At this point, he’s just hurting the Republican Party with his negative attacks."

AND: Romney speaks. He's got a memorized speech — you can tell when he makes a little misstep and starts over — and now the crowd is supposed to chant "They haven't" but they aren't chanting chantily enough. So Mitt and his crowd are stiff? So what? America is great, Mitt tells us. But the politicians are bad, so it's time for "the citizens" to take over. He's listing a lot of issues, like: People should get married before they have kids. He gives Bush credit for keeping us safe. Now, he's emphasizing the economy, which, you may already know, is in his DNA. He's "actually had a job in the real economy" — unlike those other politicos. Though he started out saying he had just congratulated John McCain, he ends triumphantly, as if he'd won, and clearly, he'll keep barreling along.

AND: McCain's speaking now. He emphasizes that this was an all-Republican primary. He's nicely modest about his margin of victory as he compliments Romney for "fighting hard." He thanks Huckabee for his "good humor and grace." He calls Giuliani his "good friend" and an "exceptional leader." He refers to Super Tuesday. It's a "national primary" and "I intend to win it," he says with a big smile. He talks about being inspired by Ronald Reagan, and outlines the story of how he's always been a conservative. The Republican Party only does well when it sticks to conservative principles, he says. (I note that's what Rush Limbaugh has been saying for the past week — in the context of attacking McCain mercilessly.) "We have a ways to go, but we're getting close."


Zachary Sire said...

I wonder who Ann will pretend to maybe want to vote for, against Hillary, when Rudy loses tonight and drops out?!

She used to love him so much! Maybe she'll feign support for Romney?

I see her now as a McCain girl, if only because they have the same color hair.

Joe M. said...

Ann, I don't want to sound pushy or anything, but when you're posting these updates could you put a time on them?

And, as always, thanks for the excellent blog.

Richard Fagin said...

The MSM is rooting and waiting for Sen. McCain to win the nomination so they can drag out the Keating Five stuff and bludgeon him with it. That'll teach him to make friends with the media. You're a Republican, John, dammit! They hate your freakin' guts.

ricpic said...

Heh Heh Heh

I had to fake some right wing crap,
But when I have this thing wrapped up
I'll tell 'em all to shut their trap --
Won't that give those ingrates a pup!

Elliott A said...

No matter who runs against Hillary, their dirty laundry pile will be smaller.

EnigmatiCore said...

Well, sans Rudy I am candidate-less. Each party has a remaining 'major' (sorta) candidate who I absolutely will not vote for--- Edwards and Huckabee. Each party has a remaining frontrunner that I would really rather not vote for (Hillary and Romney).

Guess I am down to Obama and McCain. Youth versus experience. I guess there is a really good chance the primaries will make my decision for me.

titusoffs said...

Can we see you do a cheerleading vlog for whatever republican wins tonight?

Do you still have your pompons?

That would be hot.

James said...

I gotta say, I think the wait-until-Florida strategy has to take at least 90% of the blame. Yeah, he might not have won the earlier states, but he certainly would have had a chance to take a few of them if he did anything there. Instead, he holed himself up, while everyone else was getting press for their wins or close-seconds. Hell, even getting in the fray of some of the infighting would have been better for him, at least he would have been in the news longer than someone saying, "And Rudy was campaigning in Florida today . . . again."

The only time most people got to see him was during the debates, where he started losing questions because a lot of them were based on the policy differences/fights between the other candidates that had come out while they were battling each other in the early states.

I think, with some campaigning (and maybe laying off the 9/11 a bit, even though I guess that was about all he had) in the early states, he could easily be in McCain's position right now, or possibly better. Instead, he got too scared of the Romney money machine in Iowa and New Hampshire and thought that no one had a chance to beat Mitt there.

Hindsight certainly is 20/20, but regardless, possibly the biggest blunder in campaign strategy in quite a while.

Paddy O said...

If McCain includes Thompson in some kind of position, maybe VP, and has Rudy involved in campaigning, and maybe another position, or maybe VP, I'd say McCain will be pretty hard to beat in the Fall.

James said...

By the way, since I don't know exactly how I'd search for it, and because I have some work to do, can someone remind me whether this primary is open or closed?

Ann Althouse said...


EnigmatiCore said...

Paddy, what do you think of McCain-Huckabee? My tea leaves tell me that is what is coming.

somefeller said...

McCain/Thompson in '08: This country for old men!

Revenant said...

Cripes, McCain-Huckabee? I think I'd rather vote for a Clinton-Obama ticket.

titusoffs said...

I demand a cheerleading vlog for McCain.

Get those pompons out and give us a cheer.

It will be really hot. I am thinking of the Mario Bello in that movie with Viggo-when she had her cheerleading outfit on.

somefeller said...

Jokes aside, this was a good night for the GOP. McCain is the most electable candidate they have, and is the only one with a good narrative to go up against Hillary or Obama. I've long expected the next election to be a close one, Democratic triumphalism notwithstanding (too much parity in party identification, even with Republicans in the Bush blues), and McCain will make it tougher. But I'm still thinking Hillary or Obama will win, thankfully.

James said...

Thank you, then I just realized the CNN page I have up showing the updating results has "Closed Primary" in bold letters . . . Well, I guess this goes a long way to satisfying at least some of the Republicans' concerns that it was the independents and dems fueling his other victories.

titusoffs said...

I am watching Romney and trying to figure out which one of his sons I want to do most.

Romney is really something from a Leave It To Beaver episode.

ricpic said...

Dems vs. Me Toos in November.

ricpic said...

It must be terribly wearing to be in heat all the time, Titus.

titusoffs said...

Mitt's wife is looking like she is retraining water tonight.

titusoffs said...

I am a man ricpic-that is common.

rcocean said...

Just remember McCain has never got more than 38% in any state. He won with 36 percent of the vote.

Conservatives still hate him and most didn't vote for him. If he gets the nomination, we'll either get our first black President or Hill and Bill part II.

This conservative won't pull the lever for McCain, no matter who the Democrat nominee is.

titusoffs said...

The blonde Romney son definitely looks like a poof. He is very light in his loafers-he can't stand with his weight evenly distributed on both feet.
But look at the god awful suit he is wearing.

titusoffs said...

Romney really hates government-it's kind of weird that he is running for office.

I am kind of horny-I think I am going to go out and find some hog.

Steven said...

Huckabee anywhere on a ticket is an "I'd rather vote for a Clinton-Obama ticket" for me.

And could somebody castrate Mr. Jerkoffs? Thanks.

MadisonMan said...

Giuliani was the only candidate I have a gut reaction too. And it isn't a good gut reaction -- it was a this guy could be a dictator reaction. So I'm not sad to see him out, if he does leave.

Does anyone else get the sense that the Republicans are doing what the Democrats did in 2004? That is, electing someone in the primary that is unelectable generally.

EnigmatiCore said...

"it was a this guy could be a dictator reaction."

I think that says a lot more about you than it does him, fwiw.

titusoffs said...

Charlie Crist, the governor is definitely a mo. Look at that tan.

FYI-Mass lost more jobs while Romney was governor than all but 2 other states.

titusoffs said...

That Mel Martinez is a slimey mofo.

Maxine Weiss said...

Pet-Peeve: Carrying a ceramic mug outdoors, anywhere--- except the backyard!

A definite no-no.

titusoffs said...

charlie crist has definitely had some hog in his day.

Paddy O said...

Paddy, what do you think of McCain-Huckabee?

Yeah, that's the other possible picture, isn't it?

Doesn't make sense to me, to be honest, and I'm not saying that because I really dislike Huckabee.

Figure that Evangelicals, Huckabee's only benefit, will be voting for the Republican over Hillary or over Obama. Huckabee doesn't, obviously, bring in the South. And real conservatives think Huckabee is less of a Republican than McCain, without any of the strengths Rudy might offer.

Huckabee is getting less than a majority of Evangelical votes, and these are mostly from the more conservative side of the movement. Obama is picking up a lot, if not most, of the younger Evangelical voters that I know, and I'm not sure how they'd go if they had to choose between Hillary and McCain. They'd certainly, certainly not be drawn in by Huckabee. McCain might be good enough to cause some of the liberal leaning Evangelicals to swing his way.

I'm of the Evangelical persuasion and I'd be almost tempted to skip the election if Huckabee is anywhere on the ticket, because I see so much of the traditional religious, Elmer Gantry, kind of pandering in him.

The only benefits I could see is that Huckabee does have a subset of a key base, and he's a great campaigner. He's also younger and has that "fire in the belly," the apparent lack of which caused so many people to reject Thompson and leave us with this present group.

Maxine Weiss said...

Regarding the shops on South Congress: How do these people stay in business?

Electric Ladyland, Yard Dog, Uncommon Objects--- they can't be doing a very high volume of sales.

These hole-in-the-wall, Mom & Pop places have very little revenue coming in, and can't begin to compete with the retail giants.

The burden and inconvenience of having to keep up that kind of overhead, with maybe one sale per day, if they're lucky....

The facade of this Austin-type funky quirky-ness only takes you so far, and isn't very lucrative financially.

Meade said...

I'm still holding out hope for a brokered convention from which everyone ends up getting behind Condoleezza Rice.

Maxine Weiss said...

Let's face it: small business, and Mom & Pop retail, isn't where the money's at, these days.

Unknown said...

Pat Buchanan on John McCain's platform:

— The jobs are never coming back
— The illegals are never going home
— We're going to have a lot more wars

Joan said...

Cripes, McCain-Huckabee? I think I'd rather vote for a Clinton-Obama ticket

If the country's going to hell in a hand basket, we're better off in the long run if we can blame it on the Democrats.

Henry said...

Madison Man -- Between McCain and Romney, I'd say McCain is the better general election candidate and the best of the Republicans other than Thompson. Thompson was probably best in theory, but a candidate has got to actually want to campaign.

I'd say McCain vs. Clinton isn't a bad matchup for the Republicans. McCain's media-supported persona as a candid straight-talker accentuates the negative of Clinton's message discipline.

McCain vs. Obama would be tougher; Obama's media strengths -- youth, energy, freshness -- accentuate McCain's media weaknesses -- age and overexposure.

James said...

Yep, Mitt Romney is no politician, he's one of us "citizens." Were the things he talked about really that scatter-brained?

Danny said...

That's why I, a bleeding heart big gov lefty, cast my vote for bush in 04. Figured we were heading south with either goofball, might as well pick the one who'll give the dens a leg up in 2008.

vbspurs said...

Hey guys, long time no see. :)

Ann, missed your blog immensely. Hope you are well!

A quick delurk to say that I voted today in the (closed) primary -- for Rudy.

I realise now that his strategy, which looked prescient when there were 3 different winners in 3 States, is fundamentally flawed.

What we Florida voters, in toto, saw was a guy who ran on one issue.

But we also saw a distant, somewhat helpless candidate who didn't seem in charge.

Remember, that is his stated forté: he knows how to lead.

I've no doubt he does, but possibly not a national campaign. It's like he's running for Mayor of NYC all over again.

But I also believe that Floridians saw the disregard his campaign had for other States: when he simply was a no-show in previous contests.

That is a kind of attitude a future president of the United States can ill-afford to have.

(BTW, this is an attitude employed by Senator Clinton, and the stark opposite of a hungry dark-horse candidate like Mike Huckabee:

If she doesn't feel the State is significant enough, or doesn't have campaign contributions potential, she projects a very uncaring attitude)

I only inject her into this since now is the time to start evaluating campaign strategies.

We have a clearer picture of what each candidate is willing to do, to become President -- bottom line is, Rudy didn't do enough.

His campaign hinged on all those transplanted New Yorkers, who were magically to would vote for him based on being from back home.

My best friend's family is one such New York family. They are Neapolitan-Americans to boot.

And though I tried to convince them last night, only one of 13 members voted today.

The connexion just wasn't there anymore. After all, they came down here in the late 70s.

They're Floridians now, not New Yorkers.

I sit stupified here thinking that was the lynchpin reason Mayor Giuliani chose as his campaign strategy because I do believe in him.

Ah well.

I'll have a devil of a time getting worked up about President Chipmunk Cheeks.


a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...

I liked Romney's stimulus package ideas. A lot of the people who liked Thompson have Romney as their second choice. Romney clearly has been able to pull in significant Republican votes; I think McCain and the country would be served by Romney running in the vp slot.

vbspurs said...

Should've waited 5 seconds to post:

Fox News are reporting Rudy Giuliani is dropping out of the race Wednesday.

And he's endorsing Senator John McCain.

Well there we are.


caplight said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ruth Anne Adams said...

I'd be O.K. with a McCain/Thompson ticket.

According to Campaign Carl Cameron, Fred was really running for veep anyway.

carly said...

I've already emailed Rudy asking for my money back; not because he's done--because he's planning to endorse McCain, supposedly in exchange for the AG spot. Yuck.

I'm really not sure I could vote for McCain, even if he's the Republican nominee--don't like him, don't trust him. His name is on legislation that's deprived citizens of personal liberty to a far greater degree than any provisions of the Patriot Act have or could. If Huckabee is on his ticket I definitely won't vote for them. If McCain picks Jim Demint--or Mike Steele--I'd probably hold my nose and pull the lever for him.

vbspurs said...

Fred was really running for veep anyway.

Hey again Ruth Anne. :)

There are some candidates which project Veepness from day 1, don't you think?

They say President Clinton ran in 1992 never expecting to be the nominee. It's the political equivalent "throw it up and see what sticks", or "you just never know".

Maybe Huckabee fits that bill better than Thompson, since the latter isn't really that viable.

(BTW, to my surprise the Miami-Dade Co. ballot still had his name there, and Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, etc. Rudy was the top selection choice)

I'm not too sure McCain will choose Huckabee though. He has shown that he CAN win in the Deep South on his own.

The Veep strategy is always to choose the guy who balances you -- if you are perceived as a more liberal Republican, say from the North, you go with a more conservative person, who can help you in troubled States, like the South. Ditto for the Democrats.

As Ann observed once, no one likes Romney. That is palpable.

So I doubt it'll be McCain/Romney, clearly though, the strongest Republican ticket.

I'm thinking McCain may want to shore up his California or Western connexions...and perhaps Thompson MAY help there.

Interesting, no?


vbspurs said...

Mark Halperin in Time has these 10 pointers on "10 Things Giuliani Could've Done Differently:

1. Run with a challenge to the Republican Party to be a big tent, tolerant of his views on abortion, gay rights, and other social issues.

2. Spent time in New Hampshire conducting a more conventional (and less lofty) campaign - more town meetings, longer and more intensive visits, more time mixing with voters and schmoozing local pols.

3. Abandoned Iowa completely and concentrated on New Hampshire, coddling it with a major charm offensive and persuading it by demonstrating a drive to win.

4. Allocated more funds for TV ads and less for mail and radio in early states.

5. Cultivated members of the national press and tried to get to know (and be known by) them.

6. Chosen several of his “twelve commitments” and aggressively run on them in substantive detail.

7. Moved to control his public image and hone his campaign rationale when his poll numbers started to tank.

8. Changed his stump speech when his poll numbers started to tank.

9. Dealt pro-actively with his personal life vulnerabilities, rather than passively addressing them only when asked.

10. Engaged in comparative/negative campaigning against his rivals, while showing a true passion for the presidency.

It reminds me of the post-Kerry campaign dissection:

It was ineffectual. Rudderless. Visionless.

The difference is that Rudy may not have won the whole enchilada, running as the nominee. He was gotten rid of before he could commit the same campaign mistakes running for the Presidency.

I doubt McCain will make the same mistake, much though I don't care for him.


Maxine Weiss said...

This is sexual harassment:

"Burton raised his eyebrows suggestively while telling Driscoll on about 20 occasions that he had a dream about her the previous night."


rcocean said...

Rudy never had a chance in Iowa. His big mistake was not betting the farm in New Hampshire, which he could have won, and then following that up with lots of campaigning in Mich. and then Florida.

By the time Florida came around, the moderates and WOT conservatives had switched over McCain. McCain is gettng most of his votes from former Rudy supporters.

Eli Blake said...

Richard Fagin (7:21):

The MSM is rooting and waiting for Sen. McCain to win the nomination so they can drag out the Keating Five stuff and bludgeon him with it.

Trust me, Richard. I live in Arizona and there's bigger skeletons in the closet than that.

EnigmatiCore said...

Won't stick, Eli. If there was any gumminess to it, Romney would have flung it.

John Stodder said...

Just remember McCain has never got more than 38% in any state. He won with 36 percent of the vote.

Conservatives still hate him and most didn't vote for him.

Define "most." Yes, Romney got a majority, but McCain got a healthy slice. You make it sound like no conservatives voted for him.

As for the low numbers, what about the other candidates? This was a six person race. To get a majority in a well-funded field like that is almost impossible til you get the candidate population down to 3 or 2.

The MSM is rooting and waiting for Sen. McCain to win the nomination so they can drag out the Keating Five stuff and bludgeon him with it.

Hey, at least he apologized!

Keating Five was a 1980s story. I really don't see this as relevant to the election and neither will the MSM.

Against HRC, McCain has a strong chance. Against Obama, forget it.

Freeman Hunt said...

I wanted Romney or Giuliani to win today. Que sera sera.

I could warm up to McCain with Thompson as VP, but that probably the only way I could warm up to him.

Eli Blake said...


DANG, I am glad that your wit and charm are back on this blog!

Even if you ARE wrong most of the time, you're always wrong with class.

John Stodder said...

Trust me, Richard. I live in Arizona and there's bigger skeletons in the closet than that.

Read it. Interesting. Useless in a campaign. Too complicated, and none of it sticks to McCain. The essence of what you're saying is, his wife came from a family of rich thugs. Details about rich thugs. Father in law and daughter contribute big bucks to McCain's campaign. Any proof this money was tied directly to illegal dealings? Any proof McCain knew same? Any proof of McCain quid pro quo?

Eli Blake said...


Romney really doesn't want to get into a deep discussion of family and geneology, now does he?

vbspurs said...

Even if you ARE wrong most of the time, you're always wrong with class.

I'll take it! :)

(Great to see you, Eli. This is by far my favourite blog, and a big part of that is that it has some top people like yourself!)

Going to sleep, perchance to dream of a McCain/Giuliani ticket...


Eli Blake said...

John Stodder,

Well, McCain was a member of the family. So I'd suggest he had more reason to know about the mafia stuff than, for example, Hillary Clinton had to know about how Norman Hsu was getting the money he bundled together and sent her, and that was a campaign story.

Maxine Weiss said...

Sleep is for wimps, and besides--you might miss something.

EnigmatiCore said...


Oh. I see. You are one of those conspiracy nuts.

I understand now.

Laura Reynolds said...

Eli and I hardly ever agree but we both are glad to see Victoria!

Well if the MSM pays twice as much attention to Mafia McCain as Hillary's Hsus big campaign story than if I have my math correct two times zero equals zero.

Peter Hoh said...

McCain doesn't have to give anything to Giuliani, and I certainly hope he doesn't. Rudy needs to convince his clients at Giuliani partners that he somehow matters. Good luck with that.

I think McCain should look elsewhere for VP. Huckabee did well in Iowa, but after that, he fell flat. I'm not sure he brings enough to the ticket.

My governor, Tim Pawlenty, has been campaigning for McCain all along, even before it was cool. He's a lot younger than Huckabee, and he has the conservative cred that should help some of those Republicans who don't like McCain.

I can't remember where I've encountered them, but there's a movement to promote Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, as VP material. Hey, why the heck not. Putting a woman on the ticket worked so well for Walter Mondale.

Maxine Weiss said...


Eli Blake said...


Not zero. I heard about it first on CNN.

But maybe if your math is correct, that mafia story would be a pair of Hsus.

Specifically, concrete overHsus.

(Victoria: see how easy it is to be pithy?)

titusoffs said...

Fellow republicans I thought I was going to fart and instead my kung pao chicken squirted out into my sweats.

What a mess. I took a shower and feel better now.

Now, where is that cheerleading vlog? Let's move it Mary.

Eli Blake said...

Peter Hoh:

IF Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and McCain is the GOP nominee, then putting a woman on the ticket would probably backfire on McCain, because it would be so obviously patronizing.

Heck, if the Democrats patch up their differences and get a Hillary/Obama or Obama/Hillary ticket*, then does that obligate McCain to pick Condi Rice?

You at least want to maintain the illusion that the person you pick for the VP was picked because you think they are the best person for the job, or at least that they can help you win.

*-- incidentally I think that either of the above would be a terrible ticket for the Democrats, because you need the Veep nominee to go out and be the hatchet man (or hatchet woman). Dick Cheney did that to perfection. Since both Obama and Hillary are likely to still harbor future Presidential ambitions if they don't get nominated this time, I think that either of them choosing the other as veep would give them the same problems as Bob Dole had with Jack Kemp or as John Kerry had with John Edwards-- the veep nominee has to be willing to go on the attack because if the Presidential candidate has to do it themselves either they drive up their own negatives or things they want brought out about the opponent don't get brought out. The lesson is don't pick a V.P. candidate with future ambitions. Even Bill Clinton won largely because of Perot, as Al Gore was always keeping an eye on his own stock.

Maxine Weiss said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Peter Hoh said...

Eli, pigs will fly before Clinton and Obama team up. Neither will be a VP. Edwards won't, either.

I was being facetious about Palin. If she is a good future candidate, then the party needs to figure out how to give her some national exposure. McCain won't go for a complete unknown.

McCain might consider Mark Sanford, governor of South Carolina. Some other Southeastern governor would work, too.

Super Tuesday should shake things out for the Democrats. Clinton and Obama may split the states, but Obama will win with bigger margins, and it will be impossible for Clinton to spin the results as she did South Carolina.

Maxine Weiss said...

Yes yes yes....A Gemini/Leo relationship is great.

And, especially an August 15 Leo. I know an August 15th Leo, and a Gemini who have tremendous chemistry.

As long as you understand that a Leo is the center of attention at all times, and very bossy. But, I don't think Gemini minds that. I, a Pisces, would never tolerate that...but I think Gemini is ok with it, and welcomes it. Gemini usually likes to sit back and be entertained, and an August 15 Leo is more than happy to provide a show.

Don't bring an August 15 Leo anywhere near me though.....because NOBODY upstages me, a Feb 27th...Pisces !!!! My horoscope says to stay far away from that August 15 Leo.

Gemini/Pisces....I don't know about, either. That combo could work, but I don't think it's necessarily ideal.
All the Geminis I know tend to roll their eyes and be very non-plussed with my antics....even though secretly they dig me!

Eli Blake said...

Peter Hoh:

As a Democrat, I'm generally inclined to agree with you (and hope you are right for the reasons I wrote in my post). Though JFK and LBJ were known to personally detest each other but the ticket was a stroke of genius.

There is a way that Edwards could still end up on the ticket though. Edwards is obviously angling for the remote possibility that he can split the pie just right so that neither of the other two have an outright majority of delegates and he can negotiate for another shot at veep (or Attorney General if he can't swing a VP nomination.) I could see that in the debates, where he teamed up with Obama against Clinton most of the time but in the debate right before NH he teamed up with Clinton vs. Obama.

It's a long shot strategy, but it is possible, and I wouldn't write it off. At least given what Edwards has to work with right now, it's the smartest strategy he can realistically be following and Edwards is a very smart man.

Peter Hoh said...

Eli, I'm not up on the convention procedures, in part because there hasn't been a contested convention in my adult lifetime. Will Edwards really be able to control his delegates, or will he be in the position of only being able to urge them to vote one way or another?

Maxine Weiss said...

Gemini/Capricorn is an excellent combination in relationships.

Capricorn is a very controlling sign, and again, Gemini doesn't seem to mind too much.

I cannot be controlled (can I?) so I don't think I'm right for a Capricorn, although many mainstream Astrologists disagree with that. I've, personally, never never never had success with Capricorns, and it's gotten very ugly with me and them.

But I know a fabulous Capricorn/Gemini relationship that I've seen work.

I think the very best is Leo/Gemini, but Capricorn/Gemini is very good too.

Gemini is a very docile, very placid sort of sign, but with an acid-tongue. Very acerbic, and caustic at times, but ultimately obedient, and more than willing to yield.

Domineering signs like Leo love that.

Eli Blake said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Eli Blake said...


Excellent explanation of Republican economic theory.

Plus, don't buy bonds when Venus is in Sagittarius.

Maxine Weiss said...

I really really need a Virgo. A Virgin---that's what I'm looking for.

I've found Pisces/Virgo to be a wonderful relationship.

Pisces/Cancer is good too.

Never never never get me anywhere near a Leo, though.

Eli Blake said...


I think he can pledge them on the first round, but if not then it is likely that his delegates would go along with such a recommendation if he made a deal that resulted in his becoming the V.P. or AG nominee.

Eli Blake said...

Though, Peter:

It will be exceedingly difficult for Edwards to succeed, he has to balance everything-- including where he spends his time in order to cost one candidate or the other, and doing so is extraordinarily tricky. If he does it then I'll have to give him accolades for doing the best job of tightrope walking since the Flying Wallendas.

Mutaman said...

Gee, its eems like only yesterday when Ann's love affair with Rudy was in full bloom. Well Rudy, back to something you're really good at- making money off of 9/11.

Michael The Magnificent said...

He emphasizes that this was an all-Republican primary.

Well, Florida may not have an open primary, but since the DNC is refusing to seat Florida's electors, that leaves a whole bunch of Florida Democrats with no reason to vote in the Democrat primary, and every reason to change party affiliation and vote in the Republican primary.

Randy said...

Peter, by the time the Democratic convention rolls around, it will be long over. California is already in the bag, I think. (What say you, John Stodder?)

Per the LA Times/CNN poll as reported by FirstRead:

About half of voters are expected to use mail-in ballots -- which have been available since Jan. 7 -- and Clinton was romping over Obama among that group, 53% to 30%. Among those expecting to cast ballots in a traditional precinct visit, the race was a closer 42% to 34% in Clinton's favor.

A 23-point lead among half the voters before election day dawns. Obama is highly unlikely to win by 24 on election day. And with that kind of lead, Clinton stands to rake in the delegates, not squeek by with a small majority.

BTW, in the superdelegate race, Clinton's lead is holding, 184-95-36. (Most of Edwards 36 are home-state neighbors rooting for the local boy.) 20% of the delegates are super-delegates and we're approaching the half-way point among them. At this rate, looks like they will be providing an extra 200 vote edge for Clinton.

Randy said...

Well, Florida may not have an open primary, but since the DNC is refusing to seat Florida's electors, that leaves a whole bunch of Florida Democrats with no reason to vote in the Democrat primary, and every reason to change party affiliation and vote in the Republican primary.

Most people counldn't be bothered, Michael. I doubt even a thousand did that. BTW, it appears that the Democratic primary turnout was 50% higher than the 2004 turnout. The race was somewhat closer among those voting today. She won by 17 overall, but early voters went for her by 20 (they were about one-third of the total), raising her margin by a couple of points. In a rout such as this, no big deal. In a closer election, a huge deal. Looking at the trends, not enough swing towards Obama to make a huge difference in most states on February 5, and too many early voters in half those states. Still, good polling info on many of the states is as yet unavailable.

Randy said...

Victoria: Nice to see you! Nice summary of all of the reasons Rudy Giuliani failed. My favorite was:

It's like he's running for Mayor of NYC all over again.


ricpic said...

Hey Maxine, you left out Sagittarius. I'm hurt.

Er, Althouse, Rush did not viciously attack McCain, he accurately attacked McCain. But then, I doubt you actually listen to Rush, you just get your take from the rest of the herd of independent minds.

Ann Althouse said...

Wow, Victoria came back! Sorry I conked out early and missed the chance to say that last nice. She's one of the great commenters from an earlier era on the blog.

ricpic: "Er, Althouse, Rush did not viciously attack McCain, he accurately attacked McCain. But then, I doubt you actually listen to Rush, you just get your take from the rest of the herd of independent minds."

1. I didn't say "viciously." I said "mercilessly." That is not an accusation of inaccuracy, unless you are assuming I credit McCain with accuracy when he portrays himself as a consistent conservative. Seems to me you read my post and heard what you thought you'd hear. Have I been acting like a McCain fan?

2. In fact, I do listen to Rush. I subscribed to his website so I could keep track of his show efficiently and I've been listening all week. For example, I heard that set of parody songs he did the other day, based on "Walk on the Wild Side" and "If You Don't Know Me By Now." Really well done.

3. Why are you taking this attitude with me?

MadisonMan said...

I'm also happy to see Victoria postings.

Rudy was running for Mayor of New York because that's the one office he knows how to run for successfully.

And I would be stunned if Obama picked Edwards as a VP. A candidate all about change picks the last (failed) VP candidate as this year's VP candidate? Talk about going off message!

ricpic said...


Mea culpa. You clearly do listen to Rush. Though I still disagree that his criticism of McCain was merciless - I'd call it deserved - it's your take on what Rush said, not second hand. I was wrong to assume. I apologize.

Joe M. said...

"merciless" and "deserved" are by no means mutually exclusive.

Even if the attacks are deserved, they can still be without mercy.