If I vote for President at all, I will likely vote Green, although I could possibly see myself voting for the Justice Party candidate instead.

so maybe there should be a new poll asking which of the current crop of potential candidates is going to self-destruct (via racist remark, sex scandal, etc).

It's basically random. You get some, like Edwards, where the black swan is already a matter of record but is just being ignored by the mainstream press, and others, like Romney, who are obviously prone to saying the wrong thing at the wrong time, but on the whole it's really just a crapshoot.

This is just my opinion, pleases don't get mad:

Hillary Clinton is just so awesome the GOP can't find anything to criticize her for.

I'd say instead that the GOP is so out of touch that they literally can't comprehend which criticisms might actually work.

As insufferable as Bloomberg and his brand of politics are, surely people realize how ridiculous it is to compare soda cup restrictions to fascism (even jokingly).

Yes, it's silly to call Bloomberg's attempts at various petty public health rules, "fascism". (Otoh, I think it's quite fair to call them "nanny statism".) But it's also hard to see them as any sincere effort to truly improve public health. If the man was serious, he has the resources and talent to do far more than push a seemingly endless series of minor regulatory reforms.

It seems to me that education and publicity could do more to improve health than bureaucracy, and to the best of my knowledge, Bloomberg completely ignores those avenues. Which makes him appear to be possessed of a strong "your betters know best" attitude that is repugnant to the majority of Americans.

All off which add up to make him a terrible choice for VP, to my mind.

But he is trying to get New Yorkers to eat healthier, and that is commendable. 

No, he's trying to force New Yorkers to eat healthier.

Mr. Bloomberg could use his (presumed) executive talent and billions in personal wealth to inform and educate the public on nutrition. Such an effort could lead to improved diet and food quality across the U.S. and the world. Instead he's acted like some sort of medieval prelate and  pursued an endless series of petty nanny-state regulations, which I don't find commendable at all.

What's always puzzled me about the 2000 election is how the House of Representatives was never mentioned as being an option, when it seemed like the most legitimate way to resolve the issue. Declare Florida's votes invalid due to dispute and a exceedingly poor election process, which leaves the Electoral College tied. The election goes to the House, where Bush wins via an obscure but unquestionably Constitutional result.

Can we just put Coulter in the professional troll category and be done with it?

Please, yes. It's obvious at this point that she says such things only for the free publicity they give her.

The Republicans would be better off with Marc Racicot or someone like him.

Just my 2 cents, but I think Racicot would be pure poison for the Montana Republican's at this point. After leaving the Governor's mansion, he immediately moved to DC and became a lobbyist for Bracewell & Giuliani, representing among other companies, Enron.

if Schweitzer gets in, then our chance of holding this seat is probably greater than when Baucus was the nominee.

Yep. The seat is basically Schweitzer's if he wants it. He's still very popular in Montana. The only remotely viable Republican candidate would be Rehberg, and if he could lose against Tester in 2012, he'll be flatted by Schweitzer.

Edited to add: Any suggestion of former Governor Marc Racicot as a candidate probably shouldn't be taken seriously. After his less-than-stellar term of office ended, he couldn't move to Washington D.C. fast enough, where he started a lucrative lobbying career. That choice will not play well in MT.

Well, we are a stupid, spoiled, racist, dumb-**** of a nation...  this surprises anybody? 

Yes, we are a forgiving nation, regardless of the other adjectives you might care to use, my friend.

Forgiving is definitely the word. I think Obama and Bush are both good men who have tried to do what they think is the best for this country, whether they have succeeded or not is a different story.

I'm kind of on the opposite side of the equation - I don't think either of them should have a 50% popularity rating. Both are egotistical products of the establishment who never ought to have been elected in the first place. (Not that their various opponents were better.) They've both succeeded in selling out the country to Wall Street. I guess as a nation of dumb-****'s, we're getting the government we deserve.

Christie. The conservative wing is too crowded right now, but I expect that to sort itself out. The primary will be carnage.

Indeed. But fascinating and extremely fun to watch. Hopefully they'll be a decent Intrade replacement up somewhere by then.

Besides the obviously correct answer of "Pat Buchanan's house",  I'd say the Mountain West as well: Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana.

Are you sure that's really Glenn Beck in the video? I didn't pay close attention, but I didn't hear him say, "buy gold" even once.

The only way Rand has a chance is if there's a massive disaster that can been clearly seen as the fault of the status quo: an unsuccessful large-scale war, or national economic collapse.

All the candidates for Kerry's open Senate seat have suspended their campaigns.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/boston-marathon-explosions-massachusetts-politics-90093.html?hp=f3

“While traveling in South Carolina on Saturday, Rick Santorum became ill and was admitted to the hospital for a gastro-intestinal illness and dehydration,” said Virginia Davis, spokesperson for Patriot Voices, Santorum’s political action committee, in a statement.

“He is feeling better today but remains in the hospital and is unable to travel to Iowa on Monday, April 15 for previously scheduled events.  He is expected to resume a full schedule later this week and looks forward to returning to Iowa soon," she added.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/293789-santorum-hospitalized-cancels-trip-to-iowa#ixzz2QXkTtzUb

It never began.

This. It was just the conservative movement flexing its muscles under a different name.

Yep. I was back in school (getting my 2nd degree) when the Tea Party got started. I attended one meeting on campus and it was full of exactly the stuff he complains about in the article: the racism, the pro-Republican hypocrisy, the social conservative bigotry, the anti-science echoes of the Know-Nothings; it was all there right from the start.

I still think North Korea are bluffing. Surely they aren't that stupid to provoke the threat of war?

I agree that they're bluffing, but that doesn't make the situation danger-free. If both sides keep ratcheting up the tension, eventually someone will make a mistake or have an accident, and then we're back to potentially looking at a real war.

Edited to add:

The U.S. has now announced a new tit-for-tat policy.

"American officials described the new “counterprovocation” plan as calling for an immediate but proportional “response in kind” — hitting the source of any North Korean attack with similar weapons."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/world/asia/us-and-south-korea-devise-plan-to-counter-north.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

Democrats will be favored.  The GOP is so, so weak in CO these days.

That may be changing after this gun control bill passes.

You're delusional if you think this will have any impact on next year's races.

I've never even shot a gun before and these bills make me furious.

It's difficult to exaggerate the enormity of the Democrats' political miscalculation here.  Of all the hornets nests the Democrats could have kicked, guns may be the grand-daddy of them all in this state.

I don't think it's much of a miscalculation.  Virtually everyone who might be offended by the recently passed gun control laws was never going to vote Democrat under any circumstances anyway. I know a number of Libertarian and Republican pro-gun folks, and none of them have a problem with these laws; as long as it doesn't really impact their recreation shooting or hunting, they don't care.

It's actually cheaper overall to let inmates spend life in prison than the costs of appeals and carrying out the execution.

This, plus the possibility of being wrong, combine to make the death penalty completely unsupportable as an alternative to life without the possibility of parole.

Based on the rate of global warming, how long until Earth is uninhabitable and becomes something akin to another Venus? How long does Earth have left? Is there any chance of halting this or at the very least, greatly slowing it's progression? Have we gone past the point of no return?

Earth is going to be fine. Us pesky humans are likely going to cook our own industrial civilization to collapse within another century or two.  And once we've done that, the global environment will slowly return to a more stable state. Sure, they'll be a mass extinction along the way, but in the long run it won't bother Earth at all. Human civilization is what's going to suffer most from global warming :-/

This party just can't help themselves can they?

Do they ever plan on winning another national election?

Apparently not. The party establishment just doesn't get it. Lukewarm apologies will never make up for this kind of behavior. If they do want to win, the Republicans' only choice is to make an example of people like Congressman Young - boot him from the party, cut his funding, take his plum committee positions. But the Republicans are unwilling to face the potential short-term backlash for that. I guess they're happy holding onto the House via a mix of gerrymandering and red states while they slowly lose the Senate and the fail to gain the Presidency. Maybe they're just going to wait 20 years for all the old bigots to die off?

Yeah. It's a pity intrade is gone. I'd love to see their numbers right now.

I think that nominating Santorum (or someone else from the far social-conservative / tea-party right) could actually end up being good for the party. After the resulting Democratic landslide in the Electoral College, the GOP would finally have the reason and hopefully the willpower to marginalize the right-wingnuts for once and for all.

I fully expect the damage to continue. Same-sex marriage may have become accepted reality by 2015, but I'm certain the Republicans will have one (or more) outspoken demagogues denouncing it on the campaign trail. And unless said demagogues are slapped down good and hard by the party establishment the general perception is going to be that the GOP still endorses bigotry and hate.

Sadly, there may not be a good way out for the GOP at this point. If they move towards the center enough to end their rejection by more moderate voters, they may take enough losses from the right-wingnuts they've cultivated (via sitting it out or going 3rd party) that they still can't win.