Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Uh. Holy Shit.

Santorum won Minnesota. And Missouri. And maybe Colorado.

I guess the Republicans in those places really hate ladies. And gays. And gay ladies.

Wow.

24 comments:

  1. This was so depressing. After George W. Bush, I no longer believe that a candidate is unelectable so this is terrifying news.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm embarrassed to have been born in MN right now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The republican electorate is so lost in the dark their sitting in Santorum again... and the rest of the world has another reason to laugh at us

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK. The NY Times website right now is a sight to behold. The first headline reads, "Court Strikes Down Ban On Gay Marriage in California." Then next to it, is the headline, "A Big Night For Santorum."

      Go NYT! The Onion couldn't have done it any better themselves.

      Delete
  4. OK. The NY Times website right now is a sight to behold. The first headline reads, "Court Strikes Down Ban On Gay Marriage in California." Then next to it, is the headline, "A Big Night For Santorum."

    Go NYT! The Onion couldn't have done it any better themselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I appreciate you alerting us to this, but I feel like two comments and an email might be overkill. Believe it or not, we're really diligent.

      Delete
    2. Time was of the essence. Sorry to take up so much of yours. And you really felt the need to say this? How Santorumy of you.

      Delete
  5. Just remember, the further right the primaries go, the more they have to contradict themselves when they come back to the middle in the general.

    *PLUS* As long as the republican primary is still in dispute, they're spending money fighting among themselves that they won't have to spend in the general.

    Frothy-Guy winning is a *GOOD* thing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Remember to tweet links to this website. It helps keep the "Google problem" alive.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The entire Minnesota turn out was less than even 4% of the number that voted for McCain alone in 2008. So what's going on here is explained by Ron Paul also beating Romney. Basically Santorum and Paul have fanatical people backing them. Thus in a low turn-out they can win.

    But to win when the turn out is only a few %? I mean people just must really hate Romney and Newt not to show up at all.

    Indeed you'd sort of think that maybe at least 1% of those McCain voters would make it a point to show up to vote against a man who promises us belligerent foreign adventures, environmental destruction, religious intolerance, regulation of life partners, and global warming.

    What the heck is going on? It's very frothy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Respectfully, I don't think it makes sense to compare votes for McCain in November 2008 with votes in tonight's caucuses. The voter turnout in tonight's Minnesota caucus looks like it will be about 12% less than it was 4 years ago (which is lower but not much to write home about). The percentage of voters who turn out for caucuses is always a small fraction of those who show up for the general election. John King and Blitzer made the same mistake repeatedly when referring to Colorado's caucuses tonight... again very smaller voter turn out than four years ago, but not much (looks like about a 7% or 8% difference).
      Peace & Frothiness!

      Delete
  8. Maybe the folks in CO, MO, MN are more liberal than we thought and really do prefer a frothy mix of lube and fecal matter over the current GOP candidates?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think they hate Gingrich (who doesn't?), can't warm up to Romney (who can?), and think Paul is just too far out of the box. That leaves Santorum. Dear God, take pity on Republicans. Haven't they suffered enough? OK, maybe they haven't.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Far out of the box? http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/426187_10150528668580509_668380508_9186213_1157863050_n.jpg

    Ron Paul is the only republican candidate that doesn't want to ban gay marriage, and unlike Santorum he won't be banning condoms either.

    You guys should make a point and go vote for him in the open primaries. Or at least like his pages, posts and videos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah but Ron Paul wants a ban on government (except when they're telling women what to do with their junk), so f that s.

      Delete
    2. And there's also the slight problem of him being a racist bigot.

      Delete
  11. Step back from the ledge, folks. Look at the numbers. Yeah, he won. But how many people actually voted? Less than the population of St. Louis.

    61000 people voted for the Frothy One. That's all. The total turnout for ALL THREE STATES was about 222,000.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Don't worry, it's non-binding. They count delegates next month, so while Santorum got the headline this morning, it doesn't mean jack. Super Tuesday (March 6th?) is the one to watch.

    I love this site.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think we'll be OK. I still cannot believe the depths to which the GOP has fallen, in terms of actual adult, cogent candidates. What is a funny thing, also, is that the Twin Cities were named the Gayest a while back. Gawker went nuts about that one. But here is a fine foto from yesterday; enjoy:

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/caucus-click-a-glitter-bomb-for-santorum/

    ReplyDelete
  14. You do have to keep in mind that MN is the place that elected Joan-of-Arc-Complex Michele Bachmann. However, the rest don't have any excuses.

    I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So many funny headlines this week:

    santorum sweeps

    santorum shakes up

    santorum pulls off

    santorum labels Romney 'well-oiled weather vane'‎ = ( santorum and oil in same headline )

    santorum scores

    santorum oozes out of asshole and drips onto carpet

    okay, i guess i made up that last one

    ReplyDelete