+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Santorum spanks Romney (/showthread.php?tid=131662)
Santorum spanks Romney - Grace62 - 02-08-2012
That was just fun to write.
3/3 for Santorum tonight??
I'm going to be surprised if Rick prevails in Colorado -that should've been Romney territory. We'll see.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - Grace62 - 02-08-2012
Seriously? I did that again? Sorry.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - GGD - 02-08-2012
This thread is worthless without pictures.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - haikuman - 02-08-2012
It hurts so good . . . ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dOsbsuhYGQ
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - Filliam H. Muffman - 02-08-2012
Santorum only won Missouri because Newt failed to get on the ballot to siphon votes. Maybe that is why 4% were still undecided... why would you go to a primary vote and choose undecided when it did not even count? The delegates are going to be picked later. How the primaries are being run is turning out to be as much of an embarrassment as the clown car selection of candidates.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - Grace62 - 02-08-2012
"Uncommitted" in a non-binding primary just sends a message that you're not yet interested in supporting any of the candidates. There are Republicans still holding out hope for "someone else."
Even though it is mainly a beauty contest, for a candidate who needs some momentum like Rick Santorum just being able to say you won something helps.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - Mike Sellers - 02-08-2012
Grace62 wrote: There are Republicans still holding out hope for "someone else."
Maybe Mighty Mouse will come out of retirement.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - beagledave - 02-08-2012
We've know for a number of weeks now that this will be a protracted process. The second tier players are shifting around some (Paul might even win some obscure primary before this is done).
At the end of the day, Romney will win...grudgingly for many GOP folks.
Then it will be about (1) Will the economy be trending upward enough to help Obama, (2) Will there be more people who "want something different...and not fuss about about who that is" (in which case Romney wins) or will more people do an actual scrutiny of Romney (in which case Obama wins).
There is always some unseen element (3) like military action somewhere.
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - Rolando - 02-08-2012
How about "Santorum all over Romney"?
Re: Santorum spanks Romney - Ted King - 02-08-2012
beagledave wrote:
We've know for a number of weeks now that this will be a protracted process. The second tier players are shifting around some (Paul might even win some obscure primary before this is done).
At the end of the day, Romney will win...grudgingly for many GOP folks.
Then it will be about (1) Will the economy be trending upward enough to help Obama, (2) Will there be more people who "want something different...and not fuss about about who that is" (in which case Romney wins) or will more people do an actual scrutiny of Romney (in which case Obama wins).
There is always some unseen element (3) like military action somewhere.
I think that pretty much sums it up, but I would add another wildcard - the anonymous and unlimited spending that individuals and groups can do now since Citizens United. This will be the first presidential campaign since that decision so it's kind of hard to tell for sure just how much impact it will have. The Koch brothers and like minded 0.1%'s seem bound and determined to spend as much money as needed to make sure Obama isn't reelected. That may not matter, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if in a close election like this one is bound to be, that huge amounts of negative PAC advertising against Obama may be enough to swing a couple of crucial states' electoral college votes to Romney.