Posted on 01/04/2012 2:42:58 PM PST by Syncro
IOWA SHOWS REPUBLICANS DETERMINED TO BEAT OBAMA
January 4, 2012It's been a mixed week for Mitt Romney's campaign. On one hand, Romney won Iowa, but on the other, he was endorsed by John McCain.
Until the first actual votes were cast Tuesday night, it appeared as if some elements of the Republican Party were becoming the mirror image of a liberal mob.
The wild swings -- at least in the polls -- from one populist right-winger to another suggested that some Republicans were determined to change the meaning of "conservative" from "normal person who wants to protect what's best in mainstream America" to "perpetually indignant, restless carper against everything, obsessed with symbolic issues, determined to punish the country for its impurities."
Some Republicans, we were led to believe, would only be satisfied with angry denunciations of Obama as a Kenyan colonialist and demands for Barack Obama's birth certificate -- without ever spending five minutes of calm contemplation to see that he had already produced it.
And if there's anyplace for a zealot to shine, it's in a caucus state like Iowa.
But Romney won -- in a razor-close finish with another plausible candidate, Rick Santorum.
The reason the Iowa caucuses rarely produce the party's eventual nominee is not because Iowans are wacky white Christians, as some in the media have claimed, but because caucuses are ridiculous ways to choose a presidential candidate. It is a process that empowers the pushy and loud, much like a Manhattan co-op board meeting, but, unfortunately, not like anything envisioned by our founding fathers.
Instead of arguing for hours in public with partisans in order to cast a ballot, voters are supposed to put on their shoes, fight off the Black Panthers on the way to their precincts, vote in private and go home.
So the fact that the Iowa caucuses avoided giving the gold to Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul or some other sure-to-lose candidate shows that Republicans are dead serious about beating Obama this fall. Even in Iowa, the only Republican with a chance of doing that won. Read More »
Quotations from Chairman Ann
- When Gingrich addressed his followers after the caucuses, he wore no necktie. What is he? Ahmadinejad? about 2 hours ago
Read the rest at AnnCoulter.Com
Hey Ann,
No one cares what you think anymore you RINO lover.
You are yesterdays news.
Ann has lost her mind
Ann has lost her mind
Sounds like she'd fit right in.
I remember some columnist who used to write under the name Ann Coulter. I think she used to be a conservative.
Don’t recall what happened to that conservative woman. I think she became a Myth Romney shill.
She is toast as a professed conservative.
Ann is delusional if she thinks last night was a win for Mittens. He didn’t add any support to his overprice campaign. It was a failure.
“Ann has lost her mind.”
That is what happens to Log Cabin Faggot-Lib pushers.
This (Mitt.McNuttly) is almost as bat-crap crazy as Ron Paul.
He's the terrorist that was involved in the 1979 hostage taking in Iran.
(And I think that the terrorist dictatorship regime of Iran is the only one in the Mideast that Obama put his stamp of approval on.
The others he turned over to his Muslim Brotherhood buddies---You know, the creators of terrorist groups surrounding Israel.)
Now he is President of Iran and still a terrorist.
Maybe Ann can compare notes with Biden, who declared that the tea partiers are like terrorists.
The Romney/Christie, liberal lover, top defender of the establishment, Ann Coulter is now calling all of us “Right Wingers”???
Has she lost her damn mind?
Why do you post her columns?
15 Trillion N.Virginia, Scam-Banking + “Insurance” lobby.
Round 1
I agree completely. There are a few other hot chix, I'd add to my own personal "you are dead to me" list.
Read more? No, thanks. You have joined Glenn Beck and George Will in my special shark-jumping pool. Let me introduce you to Julia Roberts, Alec Baldwin and the Dixie Chicks.
Ann, rather than trying to jump a shark, is quite successfully jumping a whale.
Mitt got 25% of the IA votes, while the anti-Mitt got 75% of the IA votes. Sounds like a landslide to me... with Mitt getting trounced.
Ninety five pound blondes don’t scare me.
Ann has turned into Peggy Noonan. She even uses the insult “right winger,” just like the NY Times would.
Btw, how much did you pay for Annie's endorsement?
THAT is the quintessential ideology of a republican blue blood elitist.
LLS
: > )
Note to Ann Coulter: Maybe you should let your hair grow out brown. After all, the harsh chemicals used to bleach your hair is clearly affecting your reasoning ability.
Dear Ann,
You have gone off the deep end.
Sincerely,
A Right Winger
Ann is unapologetic about her position, that is for sure. I wonder how much hate mail she gets.
Shut up and go have another cocktail with your GOP-E pals, Ann.
Don’t give her columns readers.
PLUS, what was the COST per VOTE for Mitt? Anyone seen that? I saw a cost per vote for Perry somewhere....
Man, never thought I’d see the day that Ann typed “right-winger” in an article of hers in the exact same way that Alan friggin’ Colmes would too. Sad.
There, Ms. Coulter, fixed it for you.
It's amazing the degree of deep seated hatred in the vitriolic comments that people post there.
Yes, some death threats.
She has excellent security of course.
What an extraordinary thing for a "right-winger conservative" to say. Similar to Newt saying that Paul Ryan's budget plan was "right-wing social engineering."
The only way either of these comments make sense is if neither speaker - Newt or Ann - is a right-wing conservative anymore.
Fixed it.
It's a wash.
IMO it's important to post her columns here at Free Republic.
what was the COST per VOTE...
Perry, $400
Robney, $160
Santorum, less than $1
Here are the vote getters in the last several caucuses, FWIW. In instances where there was a non-incumbent, it picked the nominee exactly 50% of the time. Ann used the word :rarely” to describe how often the nominee was the same as the winner. That is a lie. Rush was doing it too. Not sure what his game is though.
2008 – Mike Huckabee (34%), Mitt Romney (25%), Fred Thompson (13%), John McCain (13%), Ron Paul (10%), Rudy Giuliani (4%), and Duncan Hunter (1%)
2004 – George W. Bush (unopposed)
2000 – George W. Bush (41%), Steve Forbes (31%), Alan Keyes (14%), Gary Bauer (9%), John McCain (5%), and Orrin Hatch (1%)
1996 – Bob Dole (26%), Pat Buchanan (23%), Lamar Alexander (18%), Steve Forbes (10%), Phil Gramm (9%), Alan Keyes (7%), Richard Lugar (4%), and Morry Taylor (1%)
1992 – George H. W. Bush (unopposed)
1988 – Bob Dole (37%), Pat Robertson (25%), George H. W. Bush (19%), Jack Kemp (11%), and Pete DuPont (7%)
1984 – Ronald Reagan (unopposed)
1980 – George H. W. Bush (32%), Ronald Reagan (30%), Howard Baker (15%), John Connally (9%), Phil Crane (7%), John B. Anderson (4%), and Bob Dole (2%)
1976 – Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan
Sad, so sad.
Early menopause. Hot flashes. The broad has lost her freakin’ mind.
yep..
how long before she starts a leftest website...
maybe ... The CoulterPost?
No, then I might mistake her for Maureen Dowd.
Sorry Ann. You done screwed the pooch. And lost a reader.
(I posted this without reading the article :)
It depends on your definition of "win". If it means something other than "received the most votes", then yes.
These RINOs like Ann Coulter are so eager to replace the devil they know(Obama) with another devil they know(Romney).
FAIL!
Were you referring only to YouTube videos and the commenters there, or to FR?
If you were not referring to death threats on FR, my apologies, that’s how it read at first.
Mea culpa.
Ready to throw me into the bugzapper were ya?
SHUT UP, ANN, YOU RINO LOVER!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
