-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
US PoliGAF 2012 | The Romney VeepStakes: Waiting for Chris Christie to Sing
- Thread starter Invisible_Insane
- Start date
- Status
The Librarian
Banned
I'll get to your other post when I get back on my computer, I'm on my phone right now, but in regards to SP on the states, the only reason CA doesn't have SP right now is because of the Governator. Legislature passed SP twice and it was vetoed both times. It was gonna pass a third time in 2010 but it was pulled from the calendar because of another veto threat. I fully expect CA to pass SP before the decade is up, and as long as it has a Democratic governor.
We AZDEMs are working to make the state as competitive as possible, but even we are not anticipating an Obama win here. It'll be a NC/2008 surprise should it happen.
In 2016, should Obama win and be successful in his 2nd term, it won't matter because FL will be solid blue and NV/NM/CO will be nearly so.
Demographics here are basically 3-4 cycles behind FL. Older people are leaving the electorate and many, many more young ones are entering. So FL/2000 = AZ/2016 IMO.
Byakuya769
Member
If California gets SP, the writing is on the wall for the rest of the country.
perfectchaos007
Member
el retorno
Member
That'd be great and its how we'll get single payer in the states. People will see it works.
I hope NY gets it because I'm actually interested in going there.
Souldriver
Member
Random question: have there been any polls on how an independent run from Paul would affect the Obama's and Republican nominee's chances of winning the general election?
I'm not convinced which candidate would be hurt the most. Paul is in the republican party, but as a libertarian he's (simplified) economically right but socially left. Also, Paul supporters are often (simplified) young and idealistic... the populace that Obama appealed to in 2008.
So of which candidate would Paul steal the most votes? Obama, or Mr. Republican?
I'm not convinced which candidate would be hurt the most. Paul is in the republican party, but as a libertarian he's (simplified) economically right but socially left. Also, Paul supporters are often (simplified) young and idealistic... the populace that Obama appealed to in 2008.
So of which candidate would Paul steal the most votes? Obama, or Mr. Republican?
el retorno
Member
I believe I saw something about it hurting Romney and handing Obama a win. I think it was a foxnews poll.
Byakuya769
Member
Republicans, because Ron Paul is not socially left.
True, but with SP, the employers will just pay for tax offsets and uplift policies instead to retain employees. But it is a much smaller threat than 6 weeks of COBRA is currently.
ElectricBlue187
Member
I'd say republicans. Minorities will not vote for Paul
The Pew poll suggests 44(D-Obama)/32(R-Romney)/18(I-Paul).
Mortrialus
Banned
Yes. I look forward to the televised debate of Chris Christie vs. Elizabeth Warren in which Christie tells Warren to suck his dick and the republicans cheer, giving him a 30 minute standing ovation.
Holy shit. Did someone manage to record that?
Edit: Yep, someone did.
He won't risk ruining his son's potentially long future in the Republican party. Gotta keep the Paul brand going.
Souldriver
Member
Thanks for the responses people. So it's probably in Obama's favor...
Well, sure. But he's more socially liberal than conventional republican candidates. And what I've gathered from him, is that even if he personally disapproves of something, he still believes in the "laisser faire" principle that people should be allowed to do what they want. Although he does often hide behind "state rights", as in "states should be allowed to do what they want", not "individuals".
Well, sure. But he's more socially liberal than conventional republican candidates. And what I've gathered from him, is that even if he personally disapproves of something, he still believes in the "laisser faire" principle that people should be allowed to do what they want. Although he does often hide behind "state rights", as in "states should be allowed to do what they want", not "individuals".
Refrigerator
Member
From what I have read, Ron Paul doesn't hold allusions that he would or could actually win this race. I believe his end game would be to last until the convention and force his platform to be broadcast to as large a conservative and national audience as possible.
As far as I can gather, he wants to incubate his beliefs among young conservatives, disregarding how incongruous many of them are to orthodox conservative ideology. A third-party run wouldn't accomplish that.
Invisible_Insane
Member
For all of its "messaging genius," I was pretty surprised and disappointed by the Obama administration's failure to tie implementing something like the public option to competitiveness. People talk about the healthcare legislation and jobs as if the two could have nothing to do with each other.
Would love to see Minnesota implement a SP system. Won't happen anytime soon though.
I'd argue it would. He'd appeal to both young conservatives and young disappointed liberals. He'd get a much bigger audience for his horrible ideology. I just don't think Paul has the balls to run because it would ruin his son's political career.
Synth_floyd
Banned
4 man debate should be interesting. I hope Newt wins South Carolina, or I hope anyone but Romney wins.
Invisible_Insane
Member
Not a chance in hell. There are enough Republicans in the state legislature to see that it never happens, and I don't think Cuomo would get behind it if he really does have national ambitions.
TheDrowningMan
Member
I think that Romney is such an incredibly weak candidate that Paul could snatch a bit more away by polling day. I suspect that Obama's absolute floor in an election would be about 40, but I don't think it's inconceivable that Paul could reach the early twenties and knock Romney beneath 30. He's held in genuine contempt by so many Republicans.
If Gingrich snatched the nomination, although he's more popular with hard-core conservative Republicans, he's so personally unlikeable that almost all of the independent vote could be lost. I wouldn't be overly shocked to see him at 25% in a three-man race.
Of course, it could just as easily be the case that most of Paul's vote falls away, and he ends up with only 5% or thereabouts, nibbling very slightly more from the GOP nominee.
el retorno
Member
maybe in 10 or 15 years.Refrigerator
Member
That's another element, but I feel that Paul understands that in our political duopoly, the only chance he has to exert long-term political and ideological influence would be through the Republican party. A third-party run would be suicidal to that two-fold - it's obvious he wouldn't win, and he would earn the enmity of millions for killing the Republican nominee's chances against Obama.
I am too young and far removed from being a student of this to understand how a brokered convention would work, but the GOP did itself no favors by changing their primary rules to encourage a long-winded nomination process.
Souldriver
Member
Seriously. It would be so awesome to see a three horse race in the US, with end results being something like 40/Obama, 32/Romney, 28/Paul.
Would be similar to the UK, where the LibDems also broke into the typical two party system
(but consistently get fucked by the voting system)
PhoenixDark
Banned
That Mitt "losing his temper" video looked faker than Michelle Obama buying cleaning products. It's as if he was given a script for when someone yelled 99v1 at him, and responded word for word. Meh.
Yeah, makes sense.
QuickSilverD
Member
Isn't there another debate tonight? is there a link?
MechaSnake
Member
rohlfinator
Member
I can't see Paul getting that much support. He's getting a lot of noise in the primaries and on the internet because his supporters are more passionate and vocal, but he appeals to the core Republican base even less than Romney. I can't imagine him getting more than about 10% of the vote and even that seems generous. Unless he siphons votes from Obama, but as others have said, that's unlikely.
The Chosen One
Member
Game Time
Man w/ Glasses
Member
And so it begins. . . again.
The other thing about Romney's stalling that is getting overlooked is that he appears to be saying that he will only release his 2011 taxes after the deadline.
2010 2009 taxes will be infinitely more interesting to see his effective tax rate (after deductions and accounting gymnastics) when he thought no one was watching.
His 2011 taxes will be totally hedged to not fully minimize his effective tax rate if he thought it would help his campaign optics.
ErasureAcer
Banned
National Anthem? WTF!!!
As far as I know, it wouldn't be until 2014 at the absolute earliest. That's when the provision in the health care bill kicks in that would allow states to opt out for their own system.
The Chosen One
Member
Wow, John King starting with the dirty.
NihonTiger90
Member
Newt going in for the kill.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Newt would you like to talk about your open marriage marriage proposal...you know because it's only between "one man and one woman" and it's "holy"?
- Status