Huh. The tea party/christian dominionists must run those states caucuses. the same guys that get 20% in the general election on a good day.

It's like his own personal Spooky Mormon Hell Dream. How marvelous.

You're all welcome.

unlikely: You're all welcome.

Was your caucus open to people outside the party?

Diogenes: Was your caucus open to people outside the party?

I would vote for Santorum in an open caucus. He stands the least chance in a general election with normal voters.

WTF Indeed: Nothing happened last night. Hillary is ignoring caucus states and instead focusing on larger states. The only thing it did was reinforce the idea that Hillary isn't the consensus Dem candidate otherwise she would have won all those states. Arizona will be bloody, and Super Tuesday will decide who the anti-Hillary candidate is Obama or Edwards.

2008 called, it wants its post back.

/Hillary won Super Tuesday, too

Santorum wins in 3 states? I have no idea how the Obama Dirty Tricks Squad is pulling this off, but the effort is worthy of Nixon.

Sleeping Monkey: I would vote for Santorum in an open caucus. He stands the least chance in a general election with normal voters.

I wouldn't be so quick to make that call. Santorum comes across in a way that none of the others do- as sincere, genuine, and articulate. I share next to nothing of his worldview, but for those that do (or those that might), he'd be appealing. I would say that Newt stands the least chance, and Mitt certainly has shown enough cracks to be a problematic candidate.

WTF Indeed: Nothing happened last night. Romney is ignoring caucus states and instead focusing on larger states. The only thing it did was reinforce the idea that Romney isn't the consensus GOP candidate otherwise he would have won all those states. Arizona will be bloody, and Super Tuesday will decide who the anti-Romney candidate is Santorum or Newt.

Romney won Colorado with 60% of the vote in 2008. To pretend that nothing changed last night is ridiculous.

unyon: Sleeping Monkey: I would vote for Santorum in an open caucus. He stands the least chance in a general election with normal voters.

I wouldn't be so quick to make that call. Santorum comes across in a way that none of the others do- as sincere, genuine, and articulate. I share next to nothing of his worldview, but for those that do (or those that might), he'd be appealing. I would say that Newt stands the least chance, and Mitt certainly has shown enough cracks to be a problematic candidate.

Til Santorum gets around to his views on gays, or prayer, or any of the other numerous items in his cultural holy war. And if you get tired of that, "K Street Project" and Santorum's deep ties to criminal funding in DC should keep people interested for a while.

But yeah, he's telegenic. Kind of goes with the territory for candidates for president. sincere, sure, but his views are wackadoodle culture warrior and he's corrupt besides. I'm not saying the red state 30% wont vote for him, but they were never voting for Obama anyway. I'm saying Santorum has many negatives that most middle-of-the-road people are going to look at as dealbreakers. One v one with Obama, and Santorum will start out sounding sane and wind up sounding like a member of the 700 club. Which he pretty much is.

Sleeping Monkey: Diogenes: Was your caucus open to people outside the party?

I would vote for Santorum in an open caucus. He stands the least chance in a general election with normal voters.

I have teammates in Colorado Springs. They're really funny about talking about their politics. It's hard to say what they really think, because I think alot of them do stuff like you're suggesting.

While this is all amusing, it's just the reality that barring some unforseen scandal, Romney is the only person with a chance of winning the nomination.

Generation_D: Huh. The tea party/christian dominionists must run those states caucuses. the same guys that get 20% in the general election on a good day.

There are at least 3 Farkers in Missouri who are voting for Obama in November who voted for Santorum yesterday just to screw with Romney and/or the GOP. Probably more.

Diogenes: I have teammates in Colorado Springs. They're really funny about talking about their politics. It's hard to say what they really think, because I think alot of them do stuff like you're suggesting.

Unfortunately, CO doesn't have open caucuses. Most people in the Springs though are crazy right-wingers, but certainly not all of them.

unyon: I wouldn't be so quick to make that call. Santorum comes across in a way that none of the others do- as sincere, genuine, and articulate. I share next to nothing of his worldview, but for those that do (or those that might), he'd be appealing. I would say that Newt stands the least chance, and Mitt certainly has shown enough cracks to be a problematic candidate.

There may have been a time, and may yet be again, where a right-wing-culture-warrior-dominionist could do well a general election. But this is not one of those times.

Sleeping Monkey: Most people in the Springs though are crazy right-wingers, but certainly not all of them.

My "partner" out there on the team (we have to provide time zone coverage for the products he and I support) is a high up muckity muck in the Mormon Church. Deacon or something. He led one of the meetings last night (not sure if that's the right verbiage).

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: I think you really have to look at 2004 for a good comparison, where the other party was going up against an incumbent:

Kerry = Romney = Safe boring rich candidate
Dean = Gingrich = Iconoclast challenger
Edwards = Santorum = Party base (Labor vs. Religious conservative)
Kucinich = Paul = Fringe candidate that is in it to challenge the party

Not a good comparison. Kerry wrapped that race up very early. Kerry won the first 7 primaries (not counting DC), never getting less than 38% of the vote.

Just because Kerry is boring, that doesn't mean the dynamics of the race are the same.

This is reminding me a whole lot more of one of those 1980s Democratic Party races, where you'd have 5 or 6 guys, none of whom had a shot in the general election.

DamnYankees: Not a good comparison. Kerry wrapped that race up very early. Kerry won the first 7 primaries (not counting DC), never getting less than 38% of the vote.

Just because Kerry is boring, that doesn't mean the dynamics of the race are the same.

No, that is true. And though the numbers and races may not show it, but I know alot of like-minded Dems were less than thrilled with Kerry. Tepid support at best. Which when you consider the alternative at the time is kinda sad.

/personal anecdotal evidence is personal

Diogenes: My "partner" out there on the team (we have to provide time zone coverage for the products he and I support) is a high up muckity muck in the Mormon Church. Deacon or something. He led one of the meetings last night (not sure if that's the right verbiage).

Hmm, Mormons huh? Not sure where that puts him on the political spectrum, but I'm sure he's in the minority. That place is like Dominionist Central. Besides Focus on Your Family and the Air Force Base, it's loaded with evangelical parachurch organizations.

Diogenes: unlikely: You're all welcome.

Was your caucus open to people outside the party?

No.

I've been a republican since 1986, and there are still people here who refer to me as a "Bush toadying republican troll" because I was so late to figure out how much crazy really was sloshing around at the bottom of that boat.

Sleeping Monkey: Diogenes: My "partner" out there on the team (we have to provide time zone coverage for the products he and I support) is a high up muckity muck in the Mormon Church. Deacon or something. He led one of the meetings last night (not sure if that's the right verbiage).

Hmm, Mormons huh? Not sure where that puts him on the political spectrum, but I'm sure he's in the minority. That place is like Dominionist Central. Besides Focus on Your Family and the Air Force Base, it's loaded with evangelical parachurch organizations.

Well aware of the "uniqueness" of CS after reading "The Family." Scary. I hope I get to go out there sometime to just to see and experience it in person.

/but only if it's on the company dime
//not that curious

WTF Indeed: 2008 Romney, who was more conservative than 2012 Romney

I find fault with that. I don't think Romney is less conservative than before, but that the field has moved way the fark to the right in the last four years. Plus Romney didn't win on the backs of the evangelical vote in 2008, Huckabee did. Huckabee and Santorum are a much more realistic comparison.

WTF Indeed: Nothing happened last night. Romney is ignoring caucus states and instead focusing on larger states. The only thing it did was reinforce the idea that Romney isn't the consensus GOP candidate otherwise he would have won all those states. Arizona will be bloody, and Super Tuesday will decide who the anti-Romney candidate is Santorum or Newt.

Not sure if beer.

:(

I love the smell of Santorum in the morning. It smells like victory. . . for Obama.

DarnoKonrad: . Based on my own private anecdotes, I don't know a single Republican in the Romney mold.

That's because Republicans in the Romney mold are all the really rich ones who would never be seen in the same room with 95% of the GOP base.

sprawl15: Kerry tended to be either liked or disliked by his own party. Romney is either liked or absolutely hated by his own party.

I can agree with that. Well said.

Romney didn't lose anything last night, because he had no chance of ever winning a general election. At this point, I hope these cretins spend more and more of their supporters money on attack ads and hate speeches.

Every dollar a Rick Santorum fan spends tilting at windmills is a dollar that person can't spend on bomb making material for Planned Parenthood.

Masso: I'm disturbed that some people looked honestly at Rick Santorum and said to themselves, "Yup, Presidential material there." and give him statewide victory. 4 of them.

The word you're searching for is "horrified." It's disturbing he was ever in the running. Winning primaries are far worse.