I have to admit I didn't see this Santorum surge coming. Even if Mitt wins the nomination, that someone like Rick is can reach 18, passing our friend Paul who stuck below 15, says there are serious issues in our electorate, as if we didn't know already. I mean are people so tweaked about voting for the Mormon that they'll put a stop to contraception?
What will be interesting if SC keeps things undecided, whether the people of Florida will fall in love with Santorum in any sizable numbers.
"As long as the mind keeps silent in the motionless world of its hopes, everything is reflected and arranged in the unity of its nostalgia. But with its first move, the world cracks and tumbles: an infinite number of shimmering fragments is offered to its understanding." - Albert Camus
The campaign season is now in full swing as the Republicans seek to find the man who will challenge Obama, and then things will really heat up on the blogosphere. This brings to mind a general topic of interest: discussing how we discuss things. A particular incident on a recent thread when admonished advice of KISS: Keep it Simple, Stupid.
This general rule of thumb can serve one well. Some of us do have the tendency to complicate matters more than they need be. Keeping things simple can be a more effective means to a successful outcome, no less true when we get enmeshed in political discussions. Yet...if we are to actually have productive and meaningful political discussions in the coming year, we would also benefit from heeding the principle of KICS, or Keep it Complex, Sillyhead.
I have been clean and sober for just over a month now and have made the commitment to travel down the recovery path once again. Nearly a decade ago I had tried this before and after a couple of years of a week here and a month there I was able to achieve about a year of continuous sobriety before going "back out." Consequently I saw new year arrive last night sober for just the second time in some thirty five years (except for those times I had fallen asleep before the midnight hour).
I don't bring this up seeking some kind of congratulations (or pity), nor to wag my finger at all those out there who enjoy their libations in whatever preferred form. The reason I bring this up can be seen in the word "libation" itself. While we now use the word to merely describe any of the intoxicating beverages (and other substances) we consume or the consuming of such, it originally referred to the pouring of a liquid offering as a religious ritual or the liquid so poured. Like the word libation, our celebrations have tended to lose their role to help orientate us in the world once the event is over. They have become just merely another event in which we participate.
Herbert Blau wrote in Taking Up the Bodies:
We lack the ritual forms with the clear events; when we have the clear events we distrust the forms.
Oops. Mitt seems to have lost his momentum. Newt closes the lead to 2 percentage points. What Virginia blunder? Meanwhile Ron Paul continues to flat line at 11%.
The mixed reactions from those on the Left regarding Ron Paul seems to me to come the collision between two very strong perspectives or attitudes.
On the one hand, liberals believe in a strong role of the government when it comes to ensuring an equitable and just society. We don't believe anybody should be left behind and those who would lessen the common good for their individual benefit should be thwarted. We believe it does take a village and a corporation shouldn't dump toxic waste into the nearby river because it is cheaper.
The conundrum arises because in the modern world, the village has to operate in many or most cases through the state. Whether it is educating our children, enforcing environmental laws, assisting those in poverty, or dealing with our global neighbors, it is the state - local, state and federal - that has take at least the lead role in the matter.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Rep. Ron Paul are running neck-and-neck in Iowa, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum is surging and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich collapsing just four days before the state's Jan. 3 caucuses, according to a new NBC News-Marist poll.
Romney drew the support of 23 percent of likely caucus-goers in Iowa – identified based on interest, chance of voting and past participation – ahead of Paul, at 21 percent.
With days to go before the Iowa caucuses, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is surging to a statistical dead heat with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Rep. Ron Paul, according to a new Newsmax/InsiderAdvantage poll.
The Iowa contest is now in “total and complete chaos, ” declares Insider Advantage chief pollster Matt Towery, who says this weekend’s final campaign push will be decisive.
Mitt continues his climb. 30% is within his site. Can he do it? The fallout of Newt's Virginia blunder may showing up now. There is no movement on the candidates below, except for Huntsman who has climbed back to 2%. The None/Any/No Opinion is at 16%. Iowa approaches.
What does this mean for the progressive movement in this country? Are a lot of people really liberals who just don't know it? Are we really a center-right country like the pundits keep trying to assert?
I would say that Huntsman does seem to me to represent that mythical average American, not quite liberal, not quite conservative. Sort of like Obama. In the end, I think this shows more about how people perceive theirs and the candidates ideologies, rather than reflecting actual alignments.
Nate Silver has some interesting thoughts on the dynamics of this year's GOP caucuses.
The most interesting thing about the latest polls in Iowa (which are the basis for our forecasts) is that they essentially show a four-way tie for third place among the Republican presidential contenders, with Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry all projected to receive between 11 and 14 percent of the vote.
Newt and Mitt are converging with a quarter of the support each. This leaves half of the field "open." The Virginia debacle doesn't seem to have wounded Newt too badly in the public national opinion so far (the delegate loss is another matter). This is the third straight day Mitt has gained a percentage point, so the question is whether he can continue this and move past the 25% percent mark. With all of the candidates totaled together, there is still 21 percent of the voters not accounted for. At this point one would have to believe many are waiting to see how the fir
Frontloading HQ has an interpretation - Mitt still in charge. Surprise, surprise. This is in large part due to a number of the Super Tuesday contest have a Winner-Take-All allocation if the winner gets over 50%, which Mitt will achieve if the Bachmanns and Santorums drop out. But even if it is just Mitt vs. Ron vs. Newt, the likelihood of any of these three getting 50% is very low - in my humble of projection opinion.
Christmas is over and we now move on to the New Year celebration. With a general consensus as to its secular nature, we are fortunately not subjected to wringing hands about any wars against it. We do, however, have to deal with the seemingly unending ‘Best of 2011’ lists and talk about resolutions for the new year (as well as the Mayan prophecy about the end of world).
Newt continues to show his plummet has ended and is leveling out with a quarter of the support. Mitt takes another uptick, narrowing the gap between him and Newt to 3, yet has yet to get back to his recent high point of 25 back in early December. Will Newt's latest blunder in Virginia begin to chisel away at his support? Now that the sprint to the Iowa finish line has begun, will the stump speeches ignite the tea party support for him? And will more exposure to Mitt begin to undermine his current showing of a mini-surge?
Recent blogs by myself and others has me pondering the notion of nations and the forces that hold them together and tear them apart. And this pondering inevitably leads to remembering Professor Peter Sugar. I only took one class from him during my time at the University of Washington in pursuit of a degree in history. Yet he had a profound impact on how I see the world and the relationship between that world and myself (and others).
In spite of the diversity of the country and our best intentions, we do find ourselves in a community of folks that lean one particular way or another. I have spent most of my adult life in the Northwest urban areas. As a consequence, it was easy to believe the folks who will say, when the topic turns to God, "I'm spiritual, not religious" were quite common. As my recent years in the Mid-West and Gallup's newly released finding from their religious identity poll attest to, this is not really the case when we scan the contours of the American nation. Gallup summarizes the findings this way:
A little evidence that Newt, while suffering under the blistering gang tackle in Iowa, has been able to solidify a base of support in Iowa.
Some interesting points from ARG [emphasis mine]:
Among likely Republican caucus goers saying they will definitely participate in the caucus, Gingrich leads with 22%, followed by Romney at 20%, Paul at 17%, Perry at 10%, and Bachmann at 8%.
Another day passes and Newt remains as the front runner. Mitt has been able to recover half of his drop from yesterday, and close the gap between him and Newt from 6 to 4 percentage points. But it seems that Newt's plummet has ended and he leveling out ahead of Mitt. Or so it might seem.
