Ames GOP debate and straw poll thread

Ron Paul getting fired UP!!!!! (We need a RP smiley...)

And yes, the moderators are not doing themselves proud here- by a long shot.

This debate is not helping Romney, I'm thinking. Lord Darth Evader!!

How a candidate answers a question like that can actually be very revealing.

He could have been classy, like John McCain was in 2008, and said that Romney's religion doesn't matter to him, it shouldn't matter to anybody, and stating for the record that anyone who thinks not being a Protestant makes Romey less of an American is dead wrong. Instead, he went weasely, doing the old "Well, I don't care, but someone else might, wink wink" that led to the question in the first place. You can certainly argue that the question led him there, but there were plenty of ways a classier man could have responded.

And then he followed it up with the completely unsolicited statement "when you’re talking about some of these sensitive issues, I think we owe it to ourselves to make sure people are committed to the Constitution of the United States of America first," which just reeks of the anti-Catholic scare tactics that were used against Kennedy in 1960s.

That question was worthwhile because it gave us a glimpse of what kind of person Herman Cain is, and it wasn't a pretty picture.

Yes and no.

On the one hand, Gingrich was right to call them out for their obsession with the "horse race" as opposed to actually talking about positions and issues. And overall, the debate seemed more aimed at creating good television than at showing where the candidates stood.

On the other hand, they actually did ask some hard questions -- which is rare in a presidential debate.

Hmm... I hadn't thought about it that way. I wasn't alive for the anti-Catholic tactics against Kennedy, and growing up in California in particular, would never have guessed that any anti-Catholic sentiment existed if it wasn't for history books.

Santorum has been quoted as saying he needs to finish at least fifth in the straw poll to keep going - so long for his supporters (and those who obsessively hate him) to all shift to Bachmann soon because he won't be making that cut.

Santorum and Bachmann are Religious Right nutjobs and don’t have a chance anyway.

Pawlenty sounds reasonable but he is kind of a toad.

Paul needs to try harder to not sound like a raving crank, which is how most people regard him.

Cain needs to try harder to prove he’s not a religious bigot.

Romney was flat; nothing new there.

I want to hear more from Huntsman. I think he got only two questions the whole debate.

Gingrich scored some points with me, but getting angry at every question isn’t going to help him.

The moderators wasted too much time asking about gaffes and other trivial shit.

I have now seen the clip where they all said they would reject a 10-1 spending cuts to tax increase deal. After seeing a clip like that it's obvious that Ronald Reagan would be completely unelectable in today's far right Republican party. Welcome back to the fold, Ron.

Romney was in Iowa, even though he's not contesting the straw poll. He lost his cool at the State Fair and started screaming about how corporations are people. And Sarah Palin was sniffing around for handshakes and deep-fried butter, even though she's "not running."

Actually, I thought Romney handled himself well, in front of a bunch of rude and frankly pretty ignorant-sounding hecklers who weren't interested in anything other than shouting slogans and jeering at everything he said.

Watch and decide for yourself.

[YT="Corporations"]KlPQkd_AA6c[/YT]

[YT="Social Security"]ozXpg1KuC08[/YT]

The second one is basically "I don't like the math, so I'm going to yell at you until it goes away." The first one is about on the same level as a couple of stoned college students sitting around going "Corporations, man!" "Yeah, corporations!" Only a lot angrier.

I'm no Romney fan, but he's not the one having a meltdown or making an ass of himself in those clips.

Any candidate that couldn't beat McCain will not be successful in the election let alone as President.

In all honesty, Ford was no McCain. Reagan tried to beat a sitting president in '76, like Ted Kennedy tried to do to Jimmy Carter in '80. That's a tough job, regardless of who is trying it.

But I still get your point.

For the straw poll, I'm thinking the results will be roughly:

1. Bachmann - they caucused for Huckabee. Bachmann should be right up their alley.
2. Paul
3. Cain
4. Santorum
5. Pawlenty
6. Romney/Gingrich
7. Gingrich/Romney
8. Huntsman
9. McCotter

Frankly, I hope the straw poll finishes off Pawlenty's campaign. I like him less and less every time I see him on TV. I caught a bit of McCotter's speech. For a paranoid semi-fascist, he's quite boring. I'm hopeful that Cain beats Santorum. I wish Santorum would come in further down, but I don't see it happening. Really, the only ordering that I think really needs to happen is Paul beating him. Gingrich, Romney, and Huntsman won't do terribly well, which, given the presence of Pawlenty and Santorum, is kinda too bad.

I can see Paul coming in 2nd.

I'm just waiting for Bauchmann to crash and burn soon.

I'm hoping around the primaries that the GOP will see that while Paul can win disaffected Democrats and Independents, Bachmann will go down in flames against Obama. I don't want the batshit insane inveterate liar out of the race until it's down to her and Paul.

Aaaand... it's Bachmann.

1. Bachmann 4823
2. Paul 4671
3. Pawlenty 2293
4. Santorum 1657
5. Cain 1456
6. Romney 567
7. Gingrich 385
8. Huntsman 69
9. McCotter 35

836 write-ins; unknown how many of those are for Perry.

Nailed it except for switching Pawlenty and Cain. I'm quite pleased with how closely Paul trailed Bachmann.

Interestingly, Bachmann's campaign claimed it gave away over 6000 tickets to her supporters. I'm thinking that by the end of the speeches, they were not her supporters anymore.

Perry should easily be able to blow all those candidates away. I don't even really like some of his ideas, and have a feeling that he is just more of the same, but he's a lot better than everyone on that list outside of Ron Paul.

And Ron Paul is a bit to extreme for me.

Perry seems to fit the bill for the modern GOP. Kill more Moslems, bomb Iran, expand the military and do it all in the name of Jesus.

consider for the moment that Bachmann, Santorum, and Cain all appeal to basically the same demographic.

That means almost half of the votes cast went to a social conservative. Iowa must be a pretty heavily divided population if the same state that elects Tom Harkin has so many Republicans on the hard right.

I like Paul more than i like the rest of these chumps (though less than I like Rand - or Gary Johnson) - but i can't remotely bring myself to take seriously the idea he'll be a contender. Every four year Ron Paul fans drool over his success in every way possible right up until votes start counting...then he whiffs. I see no reason at all to think this year will be different.

Paul is the only one on that list I'd vote for.

In general elections, Iowans tend to go more for the person than the party, and often elect moderates, especially in the central and eastern parts of the state. Hard-right fire-breathers do well in Republican caucuses, but less so in primaries (just as caucuses swing more to the extremes in general).

This is the state that has re-elected both the liberal Tom Harkin and the conservative Chuck Grassley to the Senate time and time again. Harkin has gotten more partisan in recent years, but even now isn't really a magnet for controversy. Grassley is a solid, decent man who everyone respects even when they don't agree with him. Yes, western Iowa gave us Steve "the King of Hate" King, but in central and eastern districts, the state has also elected Jim Leach, one of the most moderate Republicans in Congress, and Leonard Boswell, one of the most moderate Democrats.

I couldn't find a good one, but I did find this really cool Ren & Stimpy smilie.