Skip to main content

Rick Santorum and Ron Paul are the latest to feel the anti-Romney surge

Like the game musical chairs? If so, you'll love the fight for the Republican nomination leading up to the 2012 presidential election.

I think it's become painfully obvious by this point in the primary - the Republican base does NOT want Mitt Romney as their nominee. The guy has held fairly steady in the polls, between 20 and 30% throughout this long, drawn-out process. The ultra-conservative Michele Bachmann felt the initial anti-Romney surge, reaching about 20% in polls before falling off, perhaps due to her lack of electability or being bat s**t crazy. Rick Perry was the next in line to feel this surge, until he spoke at a debate and his allure then faded. Pizza man Herman Cain felt the next surge in the polls until multiple women came forward about his alleged sexual advance unto them. Newt Gingrich was next in line before the Republican base realized just how much baggage he carries with him and his numbers have faded as well. Who's feeling the surge now? Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Due to the recent revelation of former controversial newsletters Paul was a part of, I'm guessing his recent surge will soon be a thing of the past. That leaves Rick Santorum feeling the latest push by anti-Romney Republican voters. The guy has been in the single digits (oft times very low single digits) for most of the primary season. He's suddenly in contention for the Iowa Caucus, alongside Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. At this very point, the race is being called a toss-up between the three, with Santorum feeling the most momentum.

Okay, so who's left? Jon Huntsman? He may be even more moderate than Romney. So, what are Republicans going to do? Stick to the guy whom has held steady poll wise throughout the crazy primary season or continue to push for a more conservative candidate, hoping one of them will be able to garner long-term traction, of whom they haven't found yet. This has been a ridiculous process. I remember the Democratic Party in 2008 seemed pretty set on Hilary Clinton as their nominee at the outset. John Edwards was a steady 2nd and Barack Obama suddenly became the sleeper. Obama continued the momentum early in the primary and Edwards soon dropped out. For the majority of the crazy process, it was a two-person race. Republicans can't narrow it down to two people. Really, they have only one viable candidate, however they don't like him one bit, so they're doing everything in their power to find someone else.

In the meantime, Obama has to be laughing quite heartily. The crazier his process gets on the other side of the aisle, the better Obama's odds look at being re-elected. Bachmann? Perry? Cain? Gingrich? Paul? Santorum? If the Republican base can't make up their minds, chances are liberals and most moderates will make up their minds and stay away from the before-mentioned GOP candidates.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"