Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RedKing]

After three weary weeks in the wilderness, drifting from policy argument to random name-calling...we have finally arrived at the Promised Land, my children: there be some primary shit going down in this hizzy tonight!

So, one last peek at the polls as Michiganders and Arizones head to their polls:

National
Newest Gallup tracking poll shows Romney back on top at +4, suggesting Santorum's momentum may be evaporating in the face of Rick Santorum being Rick Santorum.

Michigan
PPP has Santorum at +1, Mitchell/Rosetta Stone has Romney at +1. Translation: Who the hell knows? Both polls show Romney at 37%, Gingrich at 9%. Either way, the final result is going to be more about narrative than delegate count. MI is proportional (and penalized half its delegates), and I think it's safe to say the final margin of victory is going to be slim either way, so Romney and Santorum will come out of Michigan with roughly the same results. Either way, it's going to be an underwhelming result for Romney in his "home state" to only net around 37%.

If he wins, his narrative will be "It was a tough race, but we won!" while Santorum's will be "we came >< that close to picking off the supposed "inevitable candidate in his own backyard."
If he loses, Santorum will be crowing about the victory, and I have no idea how Team Romney spins it.
Even if he wins, it may be a Pyrrhic victory. Romney's spent a LOT of money trying to salvage Michigan, because of the psychological effect of not carrying your home state, even though delegate-wise it's a small fish.

Arizona:
Most recent polls put the state safely for Romney at +12 to +14. Santorum was recently booed during the last Arizona debate.


End result: I think Romney wins the battle, but loses the war. He'll come out of tonight with a bigger lead in delegates than he started with (due to a Michigan split-decision and a win in Arizona) but his image as the "inevitable" candidate has been shaken to the core. If he fails to win Michigan, it's arguable that he doesn't even win the battle. Big-ticket donors could begin deserting him in droves. Not that they'll flock to Santorum, but more that they'll accept that it just isn't in the cards for the GOP this cycle and target their money at the Congressional races instead.


I may be online during some of the election returns, but instead of watching four guys politely try to beat each other's brains out and score points in front of raucous, screaming crowds of supporters with few rules and those rules inconsistently enforced....I'll be at a hockey game. It's much the same thing, only with 12 guys instead of 4. 

[Nadaka]

Ron Paul may do better than expected in Michigan.

Dearborn Michigan is home to one of the largest Islamic and Arabic communities in the US. Most of their leadership is throwing in support of Ron Paul, based mostly on his stance on foreign relations.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/republican-candidates-avoid-direct-outreach-michigan-muslims-arab-134539124.html

[RedKing]

I noticed the polls were all over the place with Paul in MI. Anywhere from 9% to 16%. Which means "3rd place" or "tied for 3rd place". 
He's still not going to do well enough to pull more than a handful of delegates.

Even though I think Gingrich will get roflstomped in both states tonight, I think he hangs in there until next week, because he's somehow hoping that Georgia becomes the center of the universe and winning there will give him +100 Prestige. 

No idea when Ron Paul decides to drop out and run 3rd party.

[palsch]

Paul isn't going to go third party. Even ignoring the rumours about Rand Paul getting the veep nod, the Pauls have a lot to gain from staying in the Republican party and a hell of a lot to lose if Ron shows it the middle finger.

Ron is the one who gains the most if it gets to a brokered convention. He is likely to hold a decent stash of delegates and may even be able to play the kingmaker. That's a lot more power he can gather within the party ahead of the next cycle, shared between him and his son.


As to the polls, would have to read the cross tabs. I know that back in 2008 a lot of polls were using old or flat out wrong data for their weightings, using traditionally low turnout figures for young voters and minorities so underestimating the candidates those groups overwhelmingly supported. Then it was mostly Obama with a couple of times Paul being under counted.

[Nadaka]

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/02/27/poll-given-choice-between-romney-and-santorum-most-voters-choose-suicide/

[Zrk2]

Those estimates of nuclear costs are based on unrealistic costs and timetables though.  The real world experience has been that they come in over budget and late.  People expect to build plants in 6-7 years and then 2 years later they haven't even broken ground.  The Watts Bar will (hopefully) be finished in 7 years and that was building on a huge amount of previously done work.

And solar energy gives us power at peak hours.  Half the capacity of new nuclear or coal is nighttime capacity when we have excess capacity just because nuclear and coal can't be shut off at night.  So a comparison of watt-hours to watt-hours is misleading.  That is why I brought up watts despite there being less readily available stuff for that.  My original statement is that nuclear was passed in watts, not watt-hours.

What subsidies was I rolling into my green energy calculations?

Perhaps then we should do what propnents of nuclear suggest and use it to generate baseload capacity with more flexible sources being used in peak hours, like solar or biomass or even oil until it runs out.

[mainiac]

Perhaps then we should do what propnents of nuclear suggest and use it to generate baseload capacity with more flexible sources being used in peak hours, like solar or biomass or even oil until it runs out.

But we have baseload capacity out the wazzoo.  American energy needs are leveling off in recent years.  Yes we are going to retire some of that capacity and will need new capacity to meet peak demand.  But we should be meeting that peak demand with wind and solar that works best in those peak hours.

Maybe two decades down the line wind and solar will be a large enough part of our energy portfolio that we need to be worried about baseload capacity and then we start building nuclear for our needs three decades from today.  But over reliance on green energy sources isn't remotely a problem yet.

[Aqizzar]

I can't remember, is this the second or third time multiple pages have been devoted to arguing the economic merits of nuclear power?  Might even be the fourth.

C'mon, where are my exit polls.  I'm F5ing like a madman here.

[Zrk2]

Perhaps then we should do what propnents of nuclear suggest and use it to generate baseload capacity with more flexible sources being used in peak hours, like solar or biomass or even oil until it runs out.

But we have baseload capacity out the wazzoo.  American energy needs are leveling off in recent years.  Yes we are going to retire some of that capacity and will need new capacity to meet peak demand.  But we should be meeting that peak demand with wind and solar that works best in those peak hours.

Maybe two decades down the line wind and solar will be a large enough part of our energy portfolio that we need to be worried about baseload capacity and then we start building nuclear for our needs three decades from today.  But over reliance on green energy sources isn't remotely a problem yet.

However most of our baseload capacity comes from fossil fuels, which we all agree is a terrible long term plan. Why don't we begin replacing oil/gas power stations with nuclear stations so we don't get fucked as oil becomes increasingly scarce and eventually vanishes altogether.

EDIT: In addition weaning ourselves (or yourselves, as I'm Canadian) off oil will reduce the need to invade Middle Eastern countries over imaginary weapons.

[Sirus]

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/02/27/poll-given-choice-between-romney-and-santorum-most-voters-choose-suicide/

Judging by the contents of the other articles on that site, I kinda doubt the authenticity of this one.

[Nadaka]

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/02/27/poll-given-choice-between-romney-and-santorum-most-voters-choose-suicide/

Judging by the contents of the other articles on that site, I kinda doubt the authenticity of this one.

Inconceivable!

[Sirus]

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/02/27/poll-given-choice-between-romney-and-santorum-most-voters-choose-suicide/

Judging by the contents of the other articles on that site, I kinda doubt the authenticity of this one.

Inconceivable!

I'm just saying, can't people link to actual articles instead of Onion wannabes? It isn't like Santorum doesn't say crazy things every other day, there has to be some material out there.

[lemon10]

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/02/27/poll-given-choice-between-romney-and-santorum-most-voters-choose-suicide/

Judging by the contents of the other articles on that site, I kinda doubt the authenticity of this one.

Yeah, its a joke new site, like the Onion.

Also from this site:

...
If you think about it, I am the most Republican candidate of all.  In North Korea, we have no taxes.  We have achieved that through a conservative policy of no jobs.  Also, we have no wasteful “big government” programs providing food, shelter, or safe drinking water.  And am I pro-life?  Well, try this on for size: I believe that life begins at conception and ends at starvation.
...
I think when you look at all the facts, voters of Iowa, you’ll realize that Kim Jong-un is the Republican who most deserves your vote.  And if you’re still not convinced, remember this: at least I’m not Mitt Romney.

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/02/27/poll-given-choice-between-romney-and-santorum-most-voters-choose-suicide/

Judging by the contents of the other articles on that site, I kinda doubt the authenticity of this one.

Inconceivable!

I'm just saying, can't people link to actual articles instead of Onion wannabes? It isn't like Santorum doesn't say crazy things every other day, there has to be some material out there.

Meh, Santorum saying crazy stuff isn't really news or important though, since he says it so often.

[Sirus]

Well, that's true. It's just that he tops himself so often

[Aqizzar]

Goddamn.  MSNBC already has (really crappy) exit polls, Fox News has jack squat.  C'mon, this is why you guys exist.

Michigan isn't actually closed, because it extends across two time-zones.  Arizona won't be done until later tonight, but absolutely every prediction says it'll be Romney by at least 10%.