Friday Political Thread: Special Apologetic Edition

When you start blogging presidential debates, the expectation arises that you will blog all of them. But some weeks there are four presidential debates (or forums) tumbling one after another like drunk clowns skittering out of a Mini. And sometimes these debates break out during travel or vacation days. I think we know what kind of a week this was.

As a general rule I don't plan on live-blogging interest group-sponsored debates that aren't on national TV, unless I'm in the room when they're happening. And I don't plan on blogging presidential forums where candidates field questions without engaging with one another. Nonetheless the AFL-CIO, Logo and ABC News debates deserved their own threads and some coverage, so here it is:

- The Democrats played ball and participated in an AFL-CIO forum, but the federation declined to endorse a candidate. Could the endorsement of the AFL-CIO still swing the Democratic primary?

- What does the LOGO forum, and the willingness of Democrats to show up for it, say about the march of gay rights?

- A running pundits' joke after the last couple Republican forums was that Fred Thompson "won" them by staying above the fray. You didn't hear that joke so much after Sunday's debate—you heard more about Romney's one-liners, Giuliani's continuing strong performances, and Mike Huckabee's inevitable break out of the bottom tier. So by delaying this long, has Thompson already blown his chance?

And a question about this weekend:

- Mitt Romney will win the Iowa Straw Poll, but who will come in second? Third? If Ron Paul doesn't make it to the top 3, as his campaign staff has speculated, should he quit the race?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • D. Greene||

    How much clout does AFL-CIO have anymore? Isn't only 8% of the U.S. workforce unionized now?

    For a little perspective, I saw somewhere else that Ron Paul's campaign has purchased 800 tickets for supporters, and something like 40,000 people are predicted to attend. Ron Paul should stick it out regardless of the straw poll results, especially if his fundraising still outpaces the other second tier candidates. He is providing an invaluable service by actually dissenting on the foreign policy of the Republican party for the past five years. Tancredo, Hunter, and Thompson are all on my short list of who should drop out soon.

  • D. Greene||

    (Tommy Thompson, that is)

  • ||

    I never thought I'd say this (and we will never speak of it again), but I wish I still lived in Iowa so I could vote for Paul in the straw poll.

    Ugh, how I hated living in Iowa.

    Otherwise, I've nothing to contribute. Yet.

  • jet||

    Hunter-Thompson '08

  • D. Greene||

    Cthulhu-Zul '12

  • Eric Dondero||

    Rasmussen today has Fred Thompson declining 5 points in the last few days in the Daily Tracking poll. He was running a point or two ahead of Giuliani a week ago.

    Giuliani is now solidly 5 points ahead in Rasumussen.

    Giuliani is also ahead in the poll out of NJ today, something like 40 points over his next GOP rival.

    Finally, in USA Today/Gallup Giuliani is at 35% over Thompson with 23%.

    Two important findings in that poll:

    1. All Republicans, church-going and non-church going generally support Giuliani.

    2. Young Republicans overwhelmingly support Giuliani over all other rivals.

  • x,y||

    But what percentage of authoritarians support Giuliani? 95%? 98% 100%?

  • ||

    D. Green,it's not the AFL-CIO that has the power.It's all the Federal,state and local unions.

  • me||

    110%

  • ||

    If Ron Paul doesn't make it to the top 3, as his campaign staff has speculated, should he quit the race?

    Yes, if feet on the ground don't materialize in Iowa, to quote Lawrence Garfield:
    "We're dead, all right. We're just not broke. And do you know the surest way to go broke? Keep getting an increasing share of a shrinking market."

    I'm going to be in Iowa tomorrow to support RON PAUL. I hope to see you there! =:^D

    If he doesn't finish in the money, he will get even less coverage than he has thus far. He's accomplished far more than I thought he could already. I don't want to see him flogging all the way down. Personally, if Iowa is a bust, I hope he takes whatever cash he has left and heads to Vegas. After all hes done over the past twenty plus years, no one deserves it more.

  • ||

    Paul's got time to kill before he steps up to competing for his primary. He should retire after New Hampshire next year, but keep spreading hsi message until then (or until he runs out of money)

  • ||

    excuse me, his congressional seat, in which he will crush DONDERRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

  • ||

    D. Greene,

    40,000 RON PAUL supporters? Where did you read that?

  • ||

    Good data to consider, Eric D.

    However, from what I've seen, Rassmussen polls are much better at capturing trends than producing accurate snapshots. That Thompson is declining, I find quite credible, but the size of Guiliani's lead, I'm not so sure.

    Second, let's not forget, Fred Thompson (and Newt! Do you think his signs will say "Newt!" ?) aren't declared candidates yet, and haven't really been running.

  • edna||

    Newt! Do you think his signs will say "Newt!" ?

    i got better.

  • ||

    Ron Paul should come in about 6th. Most people are predicting 9th or 10th. He's been in Iowa for about a week: as compared to Romney who's basically lived there.

    A 9th or 10th Place finish for Paul is very bad. 6th-4th is very, very good. And top 3 is a damn coup.

  • D. Greene||

    Sorry, I did not word that clearly.

    40,000 people in general are expected to participate in the Ames straw poll.

    The Ron Paul campaign has only bough 800 tickets.

  • VM||

    D Greene:

    2012 shall be the second term of kneeling before ZOD. (hier)

  • ||

    Wait a minute, where's the Ron Paul surge so confidently predicted in these pages? Isn't this the man that reflects the true feelings of the electorate?

    Or was all that talk BS that the writers didn't even believe?

  • ||

    My vote goes to Rudy! He was the hardest worker at Ground Zero.

  • ed||

    The AFL-CIO "debate" was like watching the Special Olympics. Who can get excited about a bunch of retards pandering to a crowd of mongoloid idiots? I'd rather watch eye surgery.
    Worst. Election cycle. Ever.

  • SIV||

    Bill Richardson's obfuscation and dissembling answer to whether homosexuality is a "choice"
    at the Gay "debate" suggests a degree of political courage I didn't expect from him.

    I'm presuming it wasn't stupidity.

  • Stephen The Goldberger||

    my prediction for weekend straw poll
    1. romney has a suprisingly disapointing showing
    2. fred thompson formally announces his candidacy
    3. ron paul places 3rd to guiliani's 2nd.

  • GinSlinger||

    Ron Paul should come in about 6th. Most people are predicting 9th or 10th. He's been in Iowa for about a week: as compared to Romney who's basically lived there.

    A 9th or 10th Place finish for Paul is very bad. 6th-4th is very, very good. And top 3 is a damn coup.


    What odd math. As far as the straw poll is concerned, aren't there only 8 canidates?

    Plus, Paul's booth has got a pretty primo l;ocation, it appears from page two of hier (.pdf)

  • GinSlinger||

    Specifically, refering to my own post, if the canidates have declined to participate in the Ames Straw Poll (or, indeed, haven't declared canidacy) are they eligble to receive votes? There are only 8 booths at the Straw Poll, I assumed, you know, you kinda had to be there to receive votes, but I may be wrong.

  • D. Greene||

    It should be noted that Giuliani and McCain are not actually going to be appearing in Ames to speak, so that will probably affect their chances a bit.

    From the IOWA GOP's Straw Poll Page:

    In 1999.....

    * Over 37,000 tickets were sold
    * Approximately 40,000 attended
    * Exactly 23,685 votes were cast
    * Over 235 buses helped transport supporters to Ames
    * Six hundred journalists from more than 250 news organizations were on hand to report from the Straw Poll

  • D. Greene||

    *But Giuliani and McCain will still be on the ballots as an option.

  • ||

    What does the LOGO forum, and the willingness of Democrats to show up for it, say about the march of gay rights?

    I dunno about the willingness stuff, but the answers they gave seem to imply that gay rights have a looooooooooong way to go.

    My favorite silly moment of the night was when my senator, Barack Obama, chided gays for worrying about semantics about civil unions vs "marriage".

    Pardon me Barry, but I believe the person who is advocating that gays deserve equal rights but wants to keep the word "marriage" reserved for heteros only is the guy worried about sematics. It's the "civil unions" people who are playing a semantical game if they really want gays to have something eqivalent to marriage.

    And his "gays have bigger problems to worry about than marriage" comment was priceless. Really? There is something more important than having your family structure being treated/accepted the same as everyone else's?

    I'm glad Mr Obama was around to tell gays what their priorities should be. Kudos Barry, Kudos.

  • ||

    I think ron is going to get killed. I have no faith in the people of Iowa. Romney is paying a bunch of local republicans as "consultants" to get their phone lists and put them on buses. He is going to place 6th. Iowans just want to bomb mecca.

  • ||

    BTW he has said he is going to stay in it. His only hope is that 10,000 democrats decide they want to donate 35$ to the republican party (which they won't). God I hate Iowans. they eat cow crap.

  • ||

    haha, I read the headline as "Friday Political Thread: Special Apopleptic Edition"

  • Edward||

    If Ron Paul doesn't make it to the top 3, as his campaign staff has speculated, should he quit the race?

    Arggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg!

  • SIV||

    Bill Richardson telling a room full of politically correct Gay Democrats that homosexuality is a choice
    takes balls.


    Run, Bill, Run!

  • ||

    "Reason" should change its name to "Reasons to hate Ron Paul." what the hell.

  • ECS||

    Live blogging does seem like back breaking work . . .

  • ||

    *************
    RON PAUL '08
    *************

    Ron Paul is going to kick ass in Iowa! Three million people live in Iowa. RON PAUL is the only remotely libertarian candidate running in either major party for the past forty years. RON PAUL only needs 1% to get 30,000. Many will vote for RON PAUL who would never otherwise vote in the straw poll

    RON PAUL in 2008

  • ||

    SIV,

    Since gay activists are a minority even within the Democratic Party, it most certainly does not take courage to say things they don't like.

    What this shows about Richardson is, like the Red Sox-Yankess thing, he sometimes says dumb shit he doesn't mean when he tries to play Slick Willie with a controversial question.

  • ||

    There is something more important than having your family structure being treated/accepted the same as everyone else's?

    Uh, yeah, I would think so. If I were gay, bisexual, semisexual, whatever, I would be more worried about other issues -- you know, ones that actually affected people's lives, property, etc -- than getting a govt stamp of approval on my sexual activity.

    Gay marriage != societal acceptance of homosexuality. If the latter happens, it's going to be a long, hard slog of changing attitudes one person at a time. It's NOT going to come as a result of a judge or a legislature labeling homosexual relationships "marriage". If anything, that's actually going to retard the process by creating resentment among those who had been prepared to live and let live despite their moral beliefs about homosexuality.

  • ||

    Because, of course, the only relationship that exists between two married gay people is their sexual activity. That's all that they want recognized.

    They don't form families, raise children, care for each other in their declining years, or any of the other things those of with souls value in the institution of marriage. Nope, it's all about the ass fucking.

  • ||

    Someday, crimethink, you will have a gay couple live in your neighborhood, and if have a soul to go along with your dogma, you'll see the light.

    They're people. It's a family.

  • ||

    Someday, crimethink, you will have a gay couple live in your neighborhood, and if have a soul to go along with your dogma, you'll see the light.

    Perhaps. But govt endorsement of gay "marriages" isn't going to make it happen any faster.

    Let me put it this way: warm, fuzzy, tolerant souls like yourself recognize such relationships as legitimite regardless of what the govt officially calls it.

    Coldhearted, twisted, dogmatic fucks like me aren't going to accept them even if the govt labels them "marriages".

    So, anyone who thinks that govt approval of same-sex "marriages" is going to bring about acceptance of gays is kidding themselves (or has an ulterior motive).

  • ||

    Actually, I'm pretty sure there are gay couples in my neighborhood right now -- it's a pretty heavily "progressive" area. I don't care, it's none of my business. It's not like I'm terrified of the existence of homosexual relationships, anymore than I'm terrified of the unmarried heterosexuals living together next door.

  • ||

    The day that Britney Spears can't drunkenly marry some dude in Vegas and have it annulled a few days later will be the day I consider marriage as eligible for being "sacred".

    the problem with the Dem candidates is that they've got conflicts in pandering.

  • ||

    Someday, crimethink, you will have a gay couple live in your neighborhood, and if have a soul to go along with your dogma, you'll see the light.

    joe, you don't have to hate gays to not want the government to be deciding who is officially married and who is not. You can have friends who are gay couples and feel that way. You can be married yourself and want the government to quit recognizing that you or anyone else is married, and leave that entirely up to individuals.

  • VM||

    eb -

    that's the whole point. Since that doesn't ick out qubblefuq there, he's okay with it.

    But since the only acceptable man on boy action, for him, is in the rectory (ba dum bum) where the older one has a strange collar on, he's again' it.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement