GOP Primary Megathread!

[Eddie Teach]

Garbon is right.  Clearly, the Republicans would be far more open to Barack Obama if, like Sarah Palin, his daughter was knocked up out of wedlock by a rough, burly, muscular High School graduate.

I suggest you avoid a career in punditry or political journalism, unless your goal is to be a deep undercover agent saboteur.

[mongers]

With our political crop? Just models of incompetency across the board, not ultimate evils.

It's always easy to just blame idiot politicians, but that's also almost always vapid.  The real culprits are the people who whipped a large proportion of the population into utter frenzy, and made the country ungovernable.  Democracy only works if the losers still recognize the legitimacy of the winners.

[Phillip V]

6% of Alabama primary voters and 4% Mississippi primary voters last night were Democrats. I wonder if they did any mischief.

[CountDeMoney]

6% of Alabama primary voters and 4% Mississippi primary voters last night were Democrats. I wonder if they did any mischief.

I don't know.  I don't think they come out at night very often.

[Sheilbh]

6% of Alabama primary voters and 4% Mississippi primary voters last night were Democrats. I wonder if they did any mischief.

The Romney campaign should avoid this line.  It makes them look whiny which all politicians should try and avoid (it's one of Santorum's flaws too).

Also I'm not sure how much it matters.  In most states about double the number of Democrats voted in Republican primaries in 2008 than have done in 2012, there were a number of cross-overs in the Democrats in 2008 too.  It's normally one of those signs of an exciting, engaging close campaign.  In this case perhaps not.

[Phillip V]

6% of Alabama primary voters and 4% Mississippi primary voters last night were Democrats. I wonder if they did any mischief.

The Romney campaign should avoid this line.  It makes them look whiny which all politicians should try and avoid (it's one of Santorum's flaws too).

Also I'm not sure how much it matters.  In most states about double the number of Democrats voted in Republican primaries in 2008 than have done in 2012, there were a number of cross-overs in the Democrats in 2008 too.  It's normally one of those signs of an exciting, engaging close campaign.  In this case perhaps not.

A line for analysis, not for campaigning.

[garbon]

With our political crop? Just models of incompetency across the board, not ultimate evils.

It's always easy to just blame idiot politicians, but that's also almost always vapid.  The real culprits are the people who whipped a large proportion of the population into utter frenzy, and made the country ungovernable.  Democracy only works if the losers still recognize the legitimacy of the winners.

Not sure how that really goes against what I said.  Why would you recognize the legitimacy of the winners if you didn't respect any candidates to begin with?

[Razgovory]

Because respect and  legitimacy are two separate things.

[DGuller]

Not sure how that really goes against what I said.  Why would you recognize the legitimacy of the winners if you didn't respect any candidates to begin with?

Because they won the election, for one.  You don't have the like the politicians, but you have to recognize their power if they win it in free and fair elections.

[garbon]

Not sure how that really goes against what I said.  Why would you recognize the legitimacy of the winners if you didn't respect any candidates to begin with?

Because they won the election, for one.  You don't have the like the politicians, but you have to recognize their power if they win it in free and fair elections.

For both of you, what exactly does recognition entail?

I'm not really seeing the importance in distinguishing recognition / respect in this context.  Certainly one looks foolish by trying to claim via a birth certificate that they don't think a president is legitimate but on some level they are just providing the same signaling as someone who doesn't respect the president - we didn't want you and we don't support you.

I guess if we were at a place where those who weren't recognizing were actively trying to take the president out (as in some sort of coup) - that might be another matter but is that what the buffoons like Trump are trying to do?

[Sheilbh]

I guess if we were at a place where those who weren't recognizing were actively trying to take the president out (as in some sort of coup) - that might be another matter but is that what the buffoons like Trump are trying to do?

I suppose you get to that stage over time though.  I think the difference is that legitimacy comes from respect for the process and institutions involved in a political transfer of power.  They are sufficient to guarantee that someone who cannot be President cannot run, that the election will be free and fair, and so on.  That's different from actually respecting the individual candidates and is far more important.  It's what's lacking in unstable democracies or countries that are likely to suffer a coup because a candidate is 'illegitimate'.

I haven't followed the wider argument at all, so I've no idea what this is to do with.  I'm just jumping in at the illegitimacy v respect point.

[alfred russel]

6% of Alabama primary voters and 4% Mississippi primary voters last night were Democrats. I wonder if they did any mischief.

There are probably some remaining southern conservative mouthbreathing democrats that haven't gotten around to switching to the republican party yet. I'd be less inclined to think it was mischief in alabama and mississippi than michigan.

[alfred russel]

Republicans who thought electability was the most important issue went heavily for Santorum last night, similar happened for Gingrich in SC.  Romney's planning to change his first name to 'Not' in a desperate attempt to wrap the primaries up.

Clearly the people being polled don't know what the term 'electability' means, then.

It is the deep south. What do you expect?

[alfred russel]

I hope Santorum gets nominated - this will ensure four more years of Obama.

A few days ago there was a respectable poll that put Santorum a point up on Obama. Granted, most have him behind, but he is often within the margin of error. Considering he will get a bump if he got out of the primaries, and another if he makes a popular VP choice, don't be so sure he loses.

I do think he would get crushed though.

[Razgovory]

Not sure how that really goes against what I said.  Why would you recognize the legitimacy of the winners if you didn't respect any candidates to begin with?

Because they won the election, for one.  You don't have the like the politicians, but you have to recognize their power if they win it in free and fair elections.

For both of you, what exactly does recognition entail?

I'm not really seeing the importance in distinguishing recognition / respect in this context.  Certainly one looks foolish by trying to claim via a birth certificate that they don't think a president is legitimate but on some level they are just providing the same signaling as someone who doesn't respect the president - we didn't want you and we don't support you.

I guess if we were at a place where those who weren't recognizing were actively trying to take the president out (as in some sort of coup) - that might be another matter but is that what the buffoons like Trump are trying to do?

Recognition entails that some one has the right to be or do something.  Respect is your personal opinion of the person.