Tuesday, February 2, 2016

Post-Iowa sniping.

And so the primary process begins, and pundits have actual results to hash over endlessly.

The right wing media I read spent most of their time talking about how Hillary totally lost by not blowing Sanders out of the water. But not Freepers! Freepers have found hating their fellows much more enticing than hating Hillary. And so Cruz's win means mostly more sniping, with a touch of anti-Rubio paranoia.

The Unknown Republican uses Trump's own vacuous words against him:
Winners aren’t losers. They’re winners — like me! A loser’s a loser. Which one will you be?

Apparently Trump chose “loser” tonight.
jonrick46 tries to argue Trump wasn't really trying, so this is basically a win:
I don’t consider Trump’s numbers much of a loss. Trump results were won with one hand tied behind his back. He has not had the experience running a campaign. Cruz’s election to the U.S. Senate gave him great experience running a campaign. Cruz’s victory may be an inch deep with the huge effort put in by 12,000 volunteers working Iowa for months. I would have expected a bigger win. Why not?
xzins is sure Trump is done with:
Trump lost iowa. It’s over. now new Hampshire. Don’t kid yourself. Rubio is the major opponent
Gene Eric loves Trump even more though!
It’s ironic that Trump expressed grace while the Cruz campaign exhibited the behavior the ardent Cruz supporters claim to hate about Trump.

Who doesn’t respect Carson? He’s a great man. Whatever the outcome, I hope his voice remains active thereafter.
Some Cruz folks told caucus goers Carson was dropping out. Such dirty tricks are par for the Iowa course. libbylu doesn't believe it though!
Cruz did not lie. You guys can drag up every story told about him or you can read only what you want to or get all your info from donnie.

Lie count:
Little donnie: 100,000 or too many to count.
Cruz: If this were true would be 1.
He didn’t even lie about his ethanol position and won Iowa.
TigerClaws knows the real enemy is Rubio:
I think Rubio is the establishment guy and they were the big winners tonight. They have a viable alternative to Trump/Cruz.

Fox just called Rubio the new JFK. It’s Obama 2016.
Catsrus thinks Rubio stole it:
You are right - they want a GOPe and Rubio is their guy. Who knows if those votes in Iowa for the Rube were fair: After all, Microsoft, who so graciously, offered their tally machines free of charge to Iowa, is one of the large donors to the Rubio campaign. What could go wrong?
hillarys cankles uses Rubio's rise to...attack Cruz supporters.
Listening to the cruzers is hilarious. Your slimeball won Iowa. Whoopty doo. Know why? Cause Rubio really won according to the MSM. As has been posted a couple times already: THE ESTABLISHMENT WON TODAY. Cruz has no chance in the general. ZERO CHANCE. And on the way through the primaries trump and Cruz will battle it out while RUBIO is propelled past both of them.

You cruzers are so friggin shortsighted it’s pathetic.
The Unknown Republican is riding high, and New Hampshire can suck it:
Trump will win in New Hampshire.

If that assuages the pain, you keep sticking to that.
momincombatboots knows winning New Hampshire just proves you're liberal:
Trump will win in New Hampshire.

Democrats always do... Mr Single Payor 2000 is their guy.. Force Israel.. Force Apple... Every democrat I know is voting for him. Not impressed by trump, a democrat, winning nhamp. Maybe he will stop at St. Paul’s high, give some poor soul a senior salute with his bud John Kerry.
patlin seems to think Trump is a better Christian than Cruz:
How abut the art of being an HONEST CHRISTIAN? Where does that factor play in Cruz campaign of lies? You can not have it both ways, a lie is a lie and even worse, an unrepentant liar!
fireman15 attacks the real enemy - Cruz supporters:
I don’t know what Cruz’s true character is. I do know that Sarah Palin who knows both Trump and Cruz chose to support Trump.

Recently not all but many Cruz supporters have given us clues about their true character. Even tonight after the good news we still get pretty much the same type of posts from them. We need to remind ourselves however that regardless of their poor manners and social ineptness they are the “true conservatives”. I am sorry but it is both strange and sad.
Vision Thing
Wow. You’re pretty excited for a guy whose candidate only got 28 percent of the vote. 72 percent don’t want your guy. :)

But congrats to Cruz. Impressive win in IA.
Dude, lose the sour grapes. Not cool.


  1. I'm guessing that harleylady27 (aka. Ms. "Trump Rump Trump") is just about now waking up in some gutter in a puddle of her own puke after passing out in some bar last night after tRump's decisive loss to Cruz.

  2. Winners aren’t losers. They’re winners — like me! A loser’s a loser. Which one will you be?

    Actually, those are Jimmy Kimmel's words. Part of a skit where he ghost wrote a Dr. Seuss-esque children's book for Donald Trump.

  3. "You're going to get tired of winning"

    I guess he was already tired of winning.

  4. It's rather sad to think that Conservatives haven't had, a majority grouo, a leader they can get behind with real inspired enthusiasm since... I dunno, real. Liberals have had Obama and Clinton in the last 2 decades, but I remember the "Meh, better than Bush" behind Kerry. And the "Welp, he's Republican" behind both Bush's elections.

    So, maybe, nkt since Reagan? Maybe that's why he's so lionized.

    1. Even Reagan took awhile to catch fire.
      South Carolina and then Super Tuesday will be, either, the momentum builders for someone, or will solidify a permanent split in the party that will carry over into the general election.

    2. That's true enough. I might not have been clear enough - I simply mean that looking back at past candidates, there hasn't been such excitement since. At least into the actual election Reagan had real support, not just a voting against the other guy support. Of course, I can only really remember him *being* President, not the actual election cycle, since I was busy being born, then in Elementary school, during his terms, so outside retrospective accounts (both pro and anti Reagan), my 1st person memory as a child of non-political parents is limited.

      I do still say that if you simply described his stances and actions as President, absent his name, most Freepers would call him a Commie Muslim LIEbral. Same with Nixon.

      The future decades will be quite interesting as we have more and more everyman opinions to analyze and compare with that future date's version of reality.

  5. I never understood the devotion to Reagan. He raised taxes, instituted gun control, lowered our nuclear arsenal, did shady deals with terrorist, and I don't know what else.

    Is it just a fake Reagan they think of like how fake Jesus told the poor to pull themselves out of poverty and wanted to kill those different from him?

    1. Ditto. As Mary Shmich said, "Advice is a form of nostalgia, dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth."

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. Romney guy here....

    These guys don't understand that it's pretty much over for them anyway.

    In the Q4 of 2015, Clinton raised more than Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Donald Trump (minus the self-funding) did combined!

    As Bernie blew his wad on Iowa and New Hampshire, she sits on a $115M war chest while Republicans battle it out for first place....and THEN they can commit to fundraising!

    Whomever is the GOP candidate is going to SERIOUSLY be behind the 8-ball until about May or June. That's less than 6 months to raise funds and campaign.

    It's over. It's over before it's even begun! Sure the "liberal media" needs to make this a race because Campaign Season is where their bread is buttered, but as much as I could guarantee a Romney loss in July of 2012, I can pretty-well guarantee a Clinton win in February of 2016.

    1. It's good to hear your feedback. I knew as early as January 2012 that Obama was on his way to re-election. The right hated Obama more than they loved Romney, and everyone else was too crazy to beat him.

      This time, I'd love to say that I know Clinton will win, but it's just too unsure. I'm pretty sure she'll win the nomination, and she has pretty good odds of winning the general, but as Donald Trump proved by getting 2nd place in Iowa by barely campaigning, it's not always about the fundraising or campaigning. Combine that with Hillary's tendency to bring unwanted attention to herself by giving Republicans fuel for the fake scandals they love, and we could be looking at a President Cruz, President Trump or President Rubio.

      I hope you're right, but Hillary had better campaign like she really wants it this time, and keep the Clinton drama crap to a minimum.

    2. As usual, interesting analysis. I'm not sure I think the money game is as determinative these days, but I do give Hillary the edge nevertheless.

      I am interested in what you think the effect, if any, a big loss like this would have on the GOP.

    3. It really depends on the candidate. They describe anyone with a willing to compromise as "GOP elite" so I imagine that if the winner (and still ultimate loser) is a Tea Partier, they'll likely shed responsibility.

      The GOP is going through some growing pains because they realize that they're way out of touch with a good percentage of the electorate (Hispanic, women, African Americans, etc.) and they're doing their best to increase the size of the tent much to the chagrin of Conservatives.

    4. "The right hated Obama more than they loved Romney, and everyone else was too crazy to beat him..."

      Absolutely right!

      The interesting thing is that Conservatives think the reason why they didn't win was because Romney wasn't Conservative (i.e.: crazy) enough! Sure you can show them the characteristics of 2012 voters and how you're likely not going to win a national election with views that would give you trouble even in a statewide race, but they're convinced that they're right.

      Just a quick for instance: Romney was hammered on women's issues because he's (more recently) pro-life. Imagine how it's going to play out for Cruz who is not only pro-life, but is also against ALL instances of abortion, even in cases of rape, incest or where the mother's life is in jeopardy.

      He doesn't stand a chance!