Gingrich wins in SC?

[Bob]

Why? Gingrich is a progressive.

Yes, he is a Republican – but Republicans can be progressives too. Teddy Roosevelt started the Progressive party. Understand that the foundation of progressive politics is control. It is control over your behavior. It is the belief of some in government that it is not we the people that should rule, but that "they" know better.

Gingrich has said over and over that his favorite president in the modern era was FDR. Why? Because both FDR and Gingrich believe that you should not be trusted to make your own choices in life. That they are the smart ones, the chosen ones.

Why would evangelicals vote for Gingrich over Santorum? Gingrich isnt exactly the most moral guy around? I think some folks think Gingrich could thrash Obama is a debate -- so what, if he does not hold the same values that conservatives say they espouse. I am very disappointed tonight...

[W*GS]

Santorum is your guy, eh?

He would never have "control over your behavior", would he?

When are you evangelical proto-fascists ever going to realize that many of us won't submit to you?

[Bob]

Originally Posted by W*GS

Santorum is your guy, eh?

He would never have "control over your behavior", would he?

When are you evangelical proto-fascists ever going to realize that many of us won't submit to you?

Yup, although not my first choice, but out of those left I do think that he is most conservative. I think that Ron Paul would protect liberty best on most issues here except I dont think he gets the threats we face internationally, which could destroy our liberties here in a hurry if we got hit again.

I dont know if evangelicals would let a Mormon into the evangelical club, or let a Native American into the fascist club, but I guess you were attempting to make a point somewhere?

[Mile High Mojoe]

I take the SC primary vote with a grain of salt. I’ve been a supporter of Santorum throughout because he is the most principled Conservative left in the race. That said I’m glad that Newt beat Romney because of these 3 he’s my least favorite candidate left in the race.

Newt will give Obama a much better fight in the general than Romney because he’s a weak kneed RINO, he’s not a good debater, he’s far less conservative and if anything he’s more of a moderate Democrat than a principally Conservative Republican.

The best news tonight to come out of the SC primary was that Paul was in dead last which is exactly where he belongs. He was and still is the worst possible choice in the beginning or the end of this race.

The poll numbers on Paul that you see in the media are inflated and fraudulent. They’re completely fabricated by his fanatical group of internet supporters who do nothing but set in front of a computer day after day voting for him in these meaningless polls again and again to make him look as if has more support than he actually does.

I love how CNN in the last 3 months has had him on repeatedly to prop him up hoping and praying that somehow he gets traction because they know and anyone who has political sense knows that Paul is unelectable and as such it helps promote a fraud to give Obama an even better chance for reelection. If you’ve watch this news coverage and believed what they’ve said about Paul you need to wake up you’ve been duped because he’s dead in the water and will never win the nomination. All he is doing now is helping to divide the party further and give Obama that much more of an advantage in the general.

One day a better candidate from the Libertarian party may finally emerge that doesn’t have as many warts as Paul does. I hope this will end Paul’s race and that this will be his last run for President because he only represents a small fringe of the Republican Party, and in my opinion has been a joke his whole political career. I know I have many friends who support Paul but this my honest view on him but it's no reflection on you.

Good night Newt, keep up the push and Santorum I hope you pull more votes in Florida because if you don’t I think it’s time you step aside and let Newt finish off Romney.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Mile High Mojoe

I take the SC primary vote with a grain of salt. I’ve been a supporter of Santorum throughout because he is the most principled Conservative left in the race. That said I’m glad that Newt beat Romney because of these 3 he’s my least favorite candidate left in the race.

Newt will give Obama a much better fight in the general than Romney because he’s a weak kneed RINO, he’s not a good debater, he’s far less conservative and if anything he’s more of a moderate Democrat than a principally Conservative Republican.

The best news tonight to come out of the SC primary was that Paul was in dead last which is exactly where he belongs. He was and still is the worst possible choice in the beginning or the end of this race.

The poll numbers on Paul that you see in the media are inflated and fraudulent. They’re completely fabricated by his fanatical group of internet supporters who do nothing but set in front of a computer day after day voting for him in these meaningless polls again and again to make him look as if has more support than he actually does.

I love how CNN in the last 3 months has had him on repeatedly to prop him up hoping and praying that somehow he gets traction because they know and anyone who has political sense knows that Paul is unelectable and as such it helps promote a fraud to give Obama an even better chance for reelection. If you’ve watch this news coverage and believed what they’ve said about Paul you need to wake up you’ve been duped because he’s dead in the water and will never win the nomination. All he is doing now is helping to divide the party further and give Obama that much more of an advantage in the general.

One day a better candidate from the Libertarian party may finally emerge that doesn’t have as many warts as Paul does. I hope this will end Paul’s race and that this will be his last run for President because he only represents a small fringe of the Republican Party, and in my opinion has been a joke his whole political career. I know I have many friends who support Paul but this my honest view on him but it's no reflection on you.

Good night Newt, keep up the push and Santorum I hope you pull more votes in Florida because if you don’t I think it’s time you step aside and let Newt finish off Romney.

Paul's a mixed bag -- I think from an international standpoint he does make us less safe -- I havent read all the things in his newsletter from way back when, but at minimum he should have kept better tabs on what others were writing when his name was connetced to it. And no, I dont think he would do well against Obama, but I dont want to be like everyone else who decides in the primaries who they want based on who they think can beat Obama (that is why we have had Republican version of musical chairs) and not on who they think would best represent their ideological views and values.

So, we agree that Paul is more than an odd duck -- but one of my biggest issues is spending, and Paul would be outstanding on that front.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Bob

Why? Gingrich is a progressive.

Yes, he is a Republican – but Republicans can be progressives too. Teddy Roosevelt started the Progressive party. Understand that the foundation of progressive politics is control. It is control over your behavior. It is the belief of some in government that it is not we the people that should rule, but that "they" know better.

Gingrich has said over and over that his favorite president in the modern era was FDR. Why? Because both FDR and Gingrich believe that you should not be trusted to make your own choices in life. That they are the smart ones, the chosen ones.

Why would evangelicals vote for Gingrich over Santorum? Gingrich isnt exactly the most moral guy around? I think some folks think Gingrich could thrash Obama is a debate -- so what, if he does not hold the same values that conservatives say they espouse. I am very disappointed tonight...

You come up with some ridiculous takes, but this one is so disconnected to reality that it's almost astonishing.

[lonestar]

Outstanding..

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

You come up with some ridiculous takes, but this one is so disconnected to reality that it's almost astonishing.

I guess it would then make sense to to be me on ignore. You and LA are political statists that dont really value freedom based on what I have seen -- you see things in myopic left and right contexts. Its kinda sad really. As your reality is one that sees big government is good, naturally, I must seem "disconnected" from your statist ideology.

Good luck with that.

[mosca]

Originally Posted by Bob

Why would evangelicals vote for Gingrich over Santorum? Gingrich isnt exactly the most moral guy around? I think some folks think Gingrich could thrash Obama is a debate -- so what, if he does not hold the same values that conservatives say they espouse. I am very disappointed tonight...

Gingrich likely won because he's the kind of war-mongering, pro-military spending chickenhawk that Fox News and South Carolina voters love. His genius strategy of "Kill them" towards America's enemies resonates with the South Carolina Christian voters who booed the Golden Rule during the SC debate.

Most voters care little if anything about the important issues or the morality of any candidate. This is SC we're talking about - I'll bet that the voters there will push the button for whatever candidate the mainstream media is pushing.

A disappointment, but... it's reality.

[Mile High Mojoe]

Originally Posted by mosca

Gingrich likely won because he's the kind of war-mongering, pro-military spending chickenhawk that Fox News and South Carolina voters love. His genius strategy of "Kill them" towards America's enemies resonates with the South Carolina Christian voters who booed the Golden Rule during the SC debate.

Most voters care little if anything about the important issues or the morality of any candidate. This is SC we're talking about - I'll bet that the voters there will push the button for whatever candidate the mainstream media is pushing.

A disappointment, but... it's reality.

[mosca]

Here's why we should take SC's primary results with a grain of salt - anyone remember SC's Miss Teen USA candidate from 2007? The state doesn't exactly have a reputation for being bright:

[Taco John]

This is a good result because it ensures a brokered convention. Gingrich doesn't have access to 25% of the delegates due to poor organization. He can't win the nomination, so his only role is to block and damage Romney. Newt and Romney will beat eachother up while Ron Paul quietly amasses a bunch of delegates.

Right now, evangelicals are in a panic because they need to stop Gingrich, and so they are pouring a bunch of money into Santorum to win Florida. Santorum has the same problem that Gingrich has in that he doesn't have the organization to have the ballot access he needs to win the nomination.

Newt has burned down the house and permanently damaged the establishment's chances to beat Barack Obama. This thing is going to a brokered convention, where Paul's organization is already making plans:

Ron Paul

A prominent friend told me some weeks ago that he noticed an odd thing. In his state, several people who have been successful in getting themselves known as very probably Mitt Romney delegates for the Republican National Convention are also his supporters. And they are not just my friends’ supporters, they are also long time staunch Ron Paul supporters.

Why then would they, long time staunch Ron Paul supporters, align this year with Mitt Romney? He made calls and talked to friends in other states. All of them saw the same thing happening — long time Dr. Paul supporters working to become delegates to the convention pledging to support Mitt Romney and others.

If the field stays fractured at this level, with only a few people, but each getting delegates enough to prevent the front runner from an outright majority, there will be a second vote at the Republican National Convention.

Delegates are only locked in for their candidate during the first vote. After the first vote, they can vote for whoever they want. So if Mitt Romney is unable to clear an outright majority on the first ballot, suddenly he could see some of his delegates turn on him — turn and go back to Ron Paul.

It is an ingenious strategy premised on a convention where no one gets majority support early. It plays well to a primary calendar where the delegates are first awarded proportionally. Who knows if it is a campaign strategy or just his volunteers, but the Paul campaign has been active now for four years trying to take over local parties.

It may pay off if the GOP doesn’t unite around a candidate soon.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/0...nuary-19-2012/

[Taco John]

This is a recipe for disaster

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Bob

I guess it would then make sense to to be me on ignore. You and LA are political statists that dont really value freedom based on what I have seen -- you see things in myopic left and right contexts. Its kinda sad really. As your reality is one that sees big government is good, naturally, I must seem "disconnected" from your statist ideology.

Good luck with that.

And you are one of the most deeply miseducated people I've ever heard of. TR, FDR and Gingrich are all "progressives?" That is such a jaw-dropping disconnect from historical reality that one can only wonder at its bizarre source.

[mhgaffney]

Originally Posted by mosca

Gingrich likely won because he's the kind of war-mongering, pro-military spending chickenhawk that Fox News and South Carolina voters love. His genius strategy of "Kill them" towards America's enemies resonates with the South Carolina Christian voters who booed the Golden Rule during the SC debate.

Most voters care little if anything about the important issues or the morality of any candidate. This is SC we're talking about - I'll bet that the voters there will push the button for whatever candidate the mainstream media is pushing.

A disappointment, but... it's reality.

Good post.

Newt is a train wreck in process. You get what you vote for.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by mosca

Gingrich likely won because he's the kind of war-mongering, pro-military spending chickenhawk that Fox News and South Carolina voters love. His genius strategy of "Kill them" towards America's enemies resonates with the South Carolina Christian voters who booed the Golden Rule during the SC debate.

Most voters care little if anything about the important issues or the morality of any candidate. This is SC we're talking about - I'll bet that the voters there will push the button for whatever candidate the mainstream media is pushing.

A disappointment, but... it's reality.

Sherman should have burned every stick of that place to the ground and salted the earth. South Carolina is the cradle of American treason. No surprise they would find a hero in a sociopath like Gingrich.

[elsid13]

All this tells me, is that Tea Party is not a power player as some predicted. That and the fact that Republicans candidate pool is weak.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Sherman should have burned every stick of that place to the ground and salted the earth.

He should have done the same to the entire cracker belt, IMO.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[Blart]

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

And you are one of the most deeply miseducated people I've ever heard of. TR, FDR and Gingrich are all "progressives?" That is such a jaw-dropping disconnect from historical reality that one can only wonder at its bizarre source.

It’s not a state secret that Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive, (I have included several resources below for those with some intellectual curiosity.) Teddy started the Progressive party (or the Bull Moose Party) during the 1912 election when he broke away from the Republicans after he was miffed in not getting the Republican nomination – Taft got that. The result was the vote was split and Wilson became president. In several books I have read by Progressives, they admit that in terms of policies Wilson and Roosevelt were more alike than different.

I know that you did not need this information before earning your GED, but you should know what the hell you are talking about before throwing dispersions about what you believe to be my lack of education on this issue. All of this history has nothing to do with some of the side issues some think is important now – right and left issues. I know that you can only think in left and right terms, assuming there is a big difference, between the established political parties but there is not. Teddy Roosevelt was “right” of the political spectrum but all about big government – therefore when someone like McCain states that he was his favorite president, that tells me something about mcCain.

I am assuming you already believe that FDR was progressive, so do I need to make that point? Why does Newt love him so much, if Newt is a small government guy? The answer is, that Newt is not a small government guy, but plays one on TV.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexpe...r-progressive/
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1755.html
http://www.ssa.gov/history/trspeech.html

[Bob]

Originally Posted by elsid13

All this tells me, is that Tea Party is not a power player as some predicted. That and the fact that Republicans candidate pool is weak.

I think that many in the Tea Party are willing to comprimise, and still cant tell the difference between big and small government. Maybe some in the Tea Party still think that big government is ok just so long as it is "their guy" who is in charge violating constitutional principles.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by mosca

Gingrich likely won because he's the kind of war-mongering, pro-military spending chickenhawk that Fox News and South Carolina voters love. His genius strategy of "Kill them" towards America's enemies resonates with the South Carolina Christian voters who booed the Golden Rule during the SC debate.

Most voters care little if anything about the important issues or the morality of any candidate. This is SC we're talking about - I'll bet that the voters there will push the button for whatever candidate the mainstream media is pushing.

A disappointment, but... it's reality.

I will agree with you on one point, and that is that the mainstream media does have a great deal of power, even over those conservatives who claim to not trust the media.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Bob

It’s not a state secret that Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive, (I have included several resources below for those with some intellectual curiosity.) Teddy started the Progressive party (or the Bull Moose Party) during the 1912 election when he broke away from the Republicans after he was miffed in not getting the Republican nomination – Taft got that. The result was the vote was split and Wilson became president. In several books I have read by Progressives, they admit that in terms of policies Wilson and Roosevelt were more alike than different.

I know that you did not need this information before earning your GED, but you should know what the hell you are talking about before throwing dispersions about what you believe to be my lack of education on this issue. All of this history has nothing to do with some of the side issues some think is important now – right and left issues. I know that you can only think in left and right terms, assuming there is a big difference, between the established political parties but there is not. Teddy Roosevelt was “right” of the political spectrum but all about big government – therefore when someone like McCain states that he was his favorite president, that tells me something about mcCain.

I am assuming you already believe that FDR was progressive, so do I need to make that point? Why does Newt love him so much, if Newt is a small government guy? The answer is, that Newt is not a small government guy, but plays one on TV.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexpe...r-progressive/
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1755.html
http://www.ssa.gov/history/trspeech.html

Of course TR and FDR are progressives. Newt is the political opposite of both those men. To argue otherwise is ludicrous. We have a forty year political career of Newt's to study. He is the polar opposite. What amazes me is that there are people in this country now (like you) who are so far out on the Right Wing fringe that, to them, Newt looks like he shares the politics of TR and FDR. Weirdest times I have ever seen.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Of course TR and FDR are progressives. Newt is the political opposite of both those men. To argue otherwise is ludicrous. We have a forty year political career of Newt's to study. He is the polar opposite. What amazes me is that there are people in this country now (like you) who are so far out on the Right Wing fringe that, to them, Newt looks like he shares the politics of TR and FDR. Weirdest times I have ever seen.

What are, in your opinion, the defining characteristics of the Progressive movement?