So it had nothing to do with the antiquated caucus system where exclusionary backroom party politics reigns over democracy? Interesting.

A better line would be "because they're too busy looking for a job in this 'recovering' economy"

Uhm, not to burst your bubble, Mr. ThinkProgress, but there was a constitutional amendment on the ballot in Florida in '08. No such amendment in '12... so... yeah.

meat0918: W...T...F...

I can has national primary day???

//Or better yet, instant run-off voting and do away with primaries altogether?!?!?

but then the candidate who would win would just have the most money. going state by state politicians can give speeches and meet people and build support from that instead of just buying tv ads.

I think that was the plot of an episode of David the Gnome.

GentDirkly: Uhm, not to burst your bubble, Mr. ThinkProgress, but there was a constitutional amendment on the ballot in Florida in '08. No such amendment in '12... so... yeah.

Yeah, and I think the Decemberists were playing in New Hampshire.

Actually, this doesn't surprise me. It often happens this way. In fact, it's a huge thing for people not to release exit polling or states numbers until the polls close in the west coast because if an election is close, it could actually stop people from going to vote if they think someone already won.

The most common thing to effect campaigns that you don't think about? Rain or poor weather. The biggest nightmare for any campaign is for it to be rainy across all the states because people won't go out and vote if it's rainy.

Ridiculous I say.

So there's an enthusiasm gap from the party representing the "moral majority" in a state where half the citizens make their living in casinos, strip clubs, or brothels? Weird.

What this points to is Romney's choice for VP is going to be critical to his success. My guess - RON PAUL.

/srsly

33k out of 450k registered republicans. Sad tag was on vacation...

And for what it's worth, I live in Virginia. I can't remember the last time I voted in a primary because by the time it got to me, my vote was pretty much didn't matter.

lennavan: What this points to is Romney's choice for VP is going to be critical to his success. My guess - RON PAUL.

/srsly

No way, Paul wouldn't even endorse McCain last time around, there's no way he'd run with Romney. Probably a governor of some sort like Bob McDonnell or (in my dreams) Rubio

DROxINxTHExWIND: I used to think Fark was the only website that had regular trolls.

what a sweet kid!
*puffs cigar*

typos make headlines better

monoski: 33k out of 450k registered republicans. Sad tag was on vacation...


Similar numbers are coming from all the caucus' so far. Compares those turn out numbers to Dubya's run in 2000 and the GOP should really be shiatting their pants.

skilbride: lennavan: What this points to is Romney's choice for VP is going to be critical to his success. My guess - RON PAUL.

/srsly

No way, Paul wouldn't even endorse McCain last time around, there's no way he'd run with Romney. Probably a governor of some sort like Bob McDonnell or (in my dreams) Rubio

Er, Marco Rubio, the guy who doesn't want health insurance providers to have to provide contraception? Not sure why you dream about that. But I'm not sure Rubio is a good choice anyways, I don't think he has that great of national recognition.

I agree with you on Paul but part of me thinks he might realize he's getting older and his time to effect any change is now. And if Romney actually wants to win, I think having the ground team of Ron Paul is an enormous asset.

CygnusDarius: So, when life gives you lemons...

When life gives you lemons... (new window)

operation Meh is going exactly as planned Bwahahaha!

/Romney, like Gore and Kerry, in fashionable red.

Cletus C.: So it had nothing to do with the antiquated caucus system where exclusionary backroom party politics reigns over democracy? Interesting.

The Republican caucuses are not like Democratic caucuses. It's essentially a straw poll where you show up to vote at a specific time. There's no consensus-building or thresholds to reach.

At this rate, the general election will come down to whether the pro-Obama or anti-Obama super PACs can pour more money into bamboozling enough people to vote for/against him. The GOP candidate could be a small dog for all it will matter - heck, their chances might improve if it really was a small dog, given the existing slate of willing candidates.

Romney is Kerry, Newt is toxic, and the rest are window dressing. Four more years of mild liberalism in certain areas of social policy, Clintonian triangulation in economic matters (with some supply-side gravy thrown in), and ongoing military adventurism and "strong executive/who needs warrants or reasons?" domestic control policy, here you come.

lennavan: skilbride: lennavan: What this points to is Romney's choice for VP is going to be critical to his success. My guess - RON PAUL.

/srsly

No way, Paul wouldn't even endorse McCain last time around, there's no way he'd run with Romney. Probably a governor of some sort like Bob McDonnell or (in my dreams) Rubio

Er, Marco Rubio, the guy who doesn't want health insurance providers to have to provide contraception? Not sure why you dream about that. But I'm not sure Rubio is a good choice anyways, I don't think he has that great of national recognition.

I agree with you on Paul but part of me thinks he might realize he's getting older and his time to effect any change is now. And if Romney actually wants to win, I think having the ground team of Ron Paul is an enormous asset.

I thought all the talk was about Rubio as VP because he'd sew up the Hispanic vote. (allegedly)

"The Lurkers support me in e-mail
They all think I'm great don't you know.
You posters just don't understand me
But soon you will reap what you sow.
Lurkers, lurkers, lurkers support me, you'll see, you'll see
Off in e-mail the lurkers support me, you'll see.

The lurkers support me in e-mail
"So why don't they post?" you all cry
They're scared of your hostile intentions
They just can't be as brave as I.

Lurkers, lurkers, lurkers support me, you'll see, you'll see
Off in e-mail the lurkers support me, you'll see.

One day I'll round up all my lurkers
We'll have a newsgroup of our own
Without all this flak from you morons
My lurkers will post round my throne.

Lurkers, lurkers, lurkers support me, you'll see, you'll see
Off in e-mail the lurkers support me, you'll see."

That's exactly why Obama's speech the Decemberists only drew a few thousand people.

So, basically Romney won with 96% of all registered voters' approval.

Since, y'know, the 93% of voters who stayed home obviously wanted whoever won, or they'd've voted for Gingrich or Paul.

/"Don't blame me, I didn't vote for Romney!"
//"You stayed home. Romney won. Thus, you did vote for Romney."

Republicans publicly admit that they believe President Obama is turning America into an Islamo-fasci-social-Communist dystopia, and this coming November is their best shot at throwing the bum out of his office. In response to this once-in-a-lifetime chance at keeping America the bastion of freedom, 10% fewer Republicans have cast votes in their states' primaries and caucuses than those four years ago. There is no way to spin this fact without looking like a complete tool factory.

Submitter misspelled Rmoney.

I Said: I hope they show this same solid support in the general.

Came to say this. Done in one.

Only on Fark would having such a commanding lead that people don't even bother turning out to the polls be construed as a bad thing. The Republicans in Nevada may not be excited to come out and vote when the outcome isn't in doubt, but they're going to be lining up in November to kick Obummer out of office. Just you wait and see. This isn't about Romney, it's a moratorium on our European-style Socialism experiment.

It the fix is in, and we know it. When Obama and his cronies control the elctection boards, there is no what to win. That is why we are apatheteicly throwing Romney under the bus so Obama wins and we finally get to do the right thing. WEST 2016!!

Koalaesq: I thought all the talk was about Rubio as VP because he'd sew up the Hispanic vote. (allegedly)

I didn't actually think they were serious. The GOP candidates were at a debate, in part hosted by a Hispanic group and were asked which Hispanics they'd consider. So they went with Rubio. I hadn't heard any Rubio talk before this, so I just assumed it was pandering.

Link (new window)

Koalaesq: lennavan: skilbride: lennavan: What this points to is Romney's choice for VP is going to be critical to his success. My guess - RON PAUL.

/srsly

No way, Paul wouldn't even endorse McCain last time around, there's no way he'd run with Romney. Probably a governor of some sort like Bob McDonnell or (in my dreams) Rubio

Er, Marco Rubio, the guy who doesn't want health insurance providers to have to provide contraception? Not sure why you dream about that. But I'm not sure Rubio is a good choice anyways, I don't think he has that great of national recognition.

I agree with you on Paul but part of me thinks he might realize he's getting older and his time to effect any change is now. And if Romney actually wants to win, I think having the ground team of Ron Paul is an enormous asset.

I thought all the talk was about Rubio as VP because he'd sew up the Hispanic vote. (allegedly)

I've been hearing all this talk about how Romney and Paul not sniping at each other while sniping at everybody else, and this could be foreshadowing...

...unless I missed something. I tend to tune out when I hear key words, like "Romney"

Cletus C.: So it had nothing to do with the antiquated caucus system where exclusionary backroom party politics reigns over democracy? Interesting.

With 44K participating in the 2004 caucus, I'm sure you're on to something.

This is what Mormonmentum looks like.

Shaggy_C: Only on Fark would having such a commanding lead that people don't even bother turning out to the polls be construed as a bad thing. The Republicans in Nevada may not be excited to come out and vote when the outcome isn't in doubt, but they're going to be lining up in November to kick Obummer out of office. Just you wait and see. This isn't about Romney, it's a moratorium on our European-style Socialism experiment.

Dude, you need an alt to do this sorta stuff. And it was good too. =]

*2008

Koalaesq: lennavan: skilbride: lennavan: What this points to is Romney's choice for VP is going to be critical to his success. My guess - RON PAUL.

/srsly

No way, Paul wouldn't even endorse McCain last time around, there's no way he'd run with Romney. Probably a governor of some sort like Bob McDonnell or (in my dreams) Rubio

Er, Marco Rubio, the guy who doesn't want health insurance providers to have to provide contraception? Not sure why you dream about that. But I'm not sure Rubio is a good choice anyways, I don't think he has that great of national recognition.

I agree with you on Paul but part of me thinks he might realize he's getting older and his time to effect any change is now. And if Romney actually wants to win, I think having the ground team of Ron Paul is an enormous asset.

I thought all the talk was about Rubio as VP because he'd sew up the Hispanic vote. (allegedly)

I heard he's pretty popular in Florida and would likely bring in his home state. I think he's a nutbar and would be/is toxic to our country, but that just means he shares some traits with Florida.

Umeraken Ideut: I've been hearing all this talk about how Romney and Paul not sniping at each other while sniping at everybody else, and this could be foreshadowing...

Yeah, I think there was an Atlantic article linked about that a few days ago.

Lord_Baull: *2008

Those of us k what you are talking abo