According to Newt , law should be subject to popularity test

Post Reply New Topic

http://richarddawkins.net/articles/6442 ... cal-judges

This way, if the Occupy Wall street wanted Marxism, they could get judges against their popular will arrested. Great!

That's democracy. But we live in a Republic.

ruveyn

Newt Gingrich is quite radical. Hence, he should be arrested, or possibly lynched.

Newt will drop out soon and throw his support behind Romney in a last ditch effort to block Ron Paul. The party machinery will demand it.

I thought that the "Party Machinery" (including Fox Noise, Hate Radio, the Koch Brothers, King Rupert and Inuyasha) had already determined that Newt Gingrich would be the next president? Romney is too "moderate" and too Mormon for the "Party Machinery."

Romney was never deemed that by the establishment, the GOP base simply didn't like him. I've been telling you guys for months now that they've been pushing these flavors of the week to keep the heat of their man Romney. Gingrich was never a real candidate. The guy has no organization, no grassroots support, or money to really wage a real campaign not to mention the man was never considered electable. They'll all fall in line to support Romney to stop Ron Paul from winning the nomination. Inyuyasha will be supporting Mitt Romney January 4th.

Gingrich is too much of an egomaniac to ever agree to that. Certainly your conspiratorial stance that his whole campaign was only to distract from Romney is well beneath Newt's ego.

Call it a conspiracy if you want but I stand by what I said; I don't believe Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, or Gingrich were ever serious candidates. None of them had any organization or grassroots support to back up their poll numbers. They were merely paper-front runners because Fox News decided that they were. All of their rise and falls coincided with the abandonment of the previous "flavor of the month" by the conservative talking heads. Newt will either step aside or be forced aside. I hope you're right and he does stay in the race because he splits the establishment/neocon vote. However, after a Ron Paul victory in Iowa and the threat of another win in New Hampshire there will be tremendous pressure on him and the other establishment candidates to drop out and unify around Romney to block Ron Paul from winning the nomination. Gingrich's poll numbers are collapsing by the way, he's at 3rd and 4th(below Perry) place respectively in the latest polls out of Iowa.(PPP and Insider Advantage) Guess who is 1st first in both?

Even if you guys disagree with some of the conclusions I come to, you can't deny I've been spot on as far predicting how the race would go.

Gingrich will also have one of his famous temper tantrums if he finds out that Inuyasha has become a Romney supporter.

When Fox Noise put this up



it was clear that the Repugnican Establishment wasn't going to script Romney to win.

Jacoby: Fox has been critical of Romney; they have not been promoting other candidates in some roundabout way of protecting him. They have been casting about for some right-wing alternative to Romney. Yes, they have propelled each of the paper tigers to their 15 minutes of frontrunnership, but seemingly because they were actually hoping such candidates would succeed. As each candidate has in turn shown themselves to be inviable, they have switched to another. The GOP establishment in general is in a panic over the prospect of Gingrich winning the nomination (both because of his election chances and also because of the prospect of such a man ever being President) so now they are beginning to rally behind Romney who they recognize as their last real option. Bachmann, Cain, and Perry have all discredited themselves, Gingrich is unacceptable, Santorum and Huntsman have never really managed to get off the ground, and Paul is too far out for the GOP establishment. They don't like Romney and never particularly have, but they seem to have collectively decided that he is the only real option left standing.

I did see those polls on Iowa. All well and good, but you know Paul isn't winning the nomination.

I wouldn't say the establishment has never liked Romney. Romney certainly was an establishment favorite in 2008. Romney oddly enough was was the "ring-wing alternative" in 2008 for whatever reason. I guessing his "conservative" credentials weren't really pulled until the GOP decided it was against healthcare mandates. They even had the media created "paper tigers", as you put it, in 2008 with Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson. McCain surge at the end was also media created so I guess they can translate it into primary votes, altho McCain was an easy sell compared to the garbage they've run this time around.

Regardless of FNC's motivations behind promoting its chosen candidates; it has effectively protected Romney, intentionally or not, and has set the stage for the so called "conservatives" to unify behind a candidate whom was supposedly deemed unacceptable before. You do seem to recognize that these flavors of the month were never serious candidates and essentially media creations.

As for Ron Paul not being able to win the nomination, that is yet to be seen. That battle has not been waged yet but with Ron polling in 1st in Iowa and with in striking distance of New Hampshire. Nobody who has ever won both has been denied the nomination AFAIK. I'm feeling as good as ever about his chances. I suppose you're just saying that the establishment simply won't allow it but the alternative is giving the election to Obama. I don't think Ron will run 3rd party but he'll throw his support behind someone maybe Gary Johnson as a Libertarian. Now I'm not under any illusion that Gary Johnson could win but I think he could peel off enough votes to effect the election. PPP polled New Mexico not to long ago and GJ got over 20% in a 3 way vote, that's his home state but still pretty interesting.

If you want a conspiracy, I have 6 words for you; brokered convention, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie.

Damn Jacoby, we seem to be on the same wavelength tonight. I literally just finished up my satirical post in another thread that Karl Rove might be plotting to have the entire current field killed in tragic accident/and or liberal plot in order to bring Jeb Bush into the race, but adding Christie as his running-mate would be pure genius. Evil genius, but genius nonetheless.

One of us must be misremembering that election cycle (though I am not certain who). I had been under the impression that Huckabee was the major right-wing alternative, while Romney was seen as a fairly generic pro-business guy, an economic Republican, and McCain/Giuliani had more of a foreign policy emphasis.


I don't think Romney has ever been considered completely unacceptable. My sense is that most Republicans (both in the party establishment and in the base) wanted someone farther right than Romney but considered him an acceptable back-up or second choice. When all the right-wing candidates fell through (Palin didn't run, Christie and Jeb didn't run, Jindal didn't run, Trump dropped out, Cain dropped out, Bachmann said crazy/stupid things, Perry humiliated himself at the debates, Gingrich is Gingrich, etc) they were left with Romney by default.


Well, they were at least considered to be serious candidates. Trump and Perry certainly were taken very seriously when they first entered, and Gingrich somehow is still considered to be a serious candidate. The only reason none of these people have actually materialized as serious candidates is because they keep saying/doing ridiculous things that destroy their own candidacies.


Everyone is counting on a New Hampshire win, so don't expect Paul to have an easy time making up ground there. The punditry has already begun to downplay the importance of the Iowa primary. Remember Huckabee won there last time, and he ended up coming in third overall.


Nominating Paul would more certainly be giving the election to Obama.

I don't think Huckabee was ever really embraced by anyone besides social conservatives and southerners while Romney on the other hand had the money and backing from almost all of talk radio(the holy trinity of Rush, Hannity, and Beck with a whole host of others) and supposed hardcore conservatives like Jim DeMint, Rick Santorum, and Tom Tancredo. Romney got out when it was clear he wasn't going to win while Huckabee stayed in a while longer and picked up some anti-McCain protest votes so maybe that is what you are remembering.

As for everybody counting on a win in New Hampshire; I suppose but the way looks now it's going to be Romney, Paul, and Huntsman competing the most in the state. I think Gingrich will probably focus on South Carolina and Florida rather than New Hampshire if he doesn't finish well Iowa. Santorum, Bachmann, and Perry will either drop out after Iowa or stay until South Carolina but they'll be irrelevant in New Hampshire. Romney is going to be hard to beat in New Hampshire but a strong 2nd isn't a bad result all things considered but I do believe with an Iowa win, Ron will be set up to be very competitive in New Hampshire which is exactly 1 week later.

Saying Ron Paul being the GOP nominee would hand Obama the election is nonsense, there is nothing to suggest that at all at this time. He's the only candidate that independents prefer over Obama and has appeal to Democratic voters, according to PPP the only reason he doesn't beat Obama in head to head polls is because a % of GOP voters are "unsure" who they would vote for. This isn't my opinion but what the polls are saying.

According to some reports, Newt Gingrich is falling in the polls as a result of his latest statements that judges should be arrested and imprisoned.

I would have thought that most hard-core Repugnicans would have either

(a) agreed with him that judges who made "unpopular" (as in "not completely repugnican") decisions really should be arrested, tortured, imprisoned in concentration camps, and possibly executed;

or

(b) dismissed the reports as "left wing drive-by mainstream-media smears";

or

(c) some combination of (a) and (b);

and that this would have locked him in for the nomination and the presidency.

I am perplexed.

Pat Buchanan 2012.
Just you wait.

He's still alive, right?