The SC Election Day & Results Thread

[Joe Republic]

I've been masochistically tuning into Fox News briefly for the results of the last three contests, and I liked how they not once but twice mentioned that Paul had now come in fourth right after coming in third in New Hampshire.  He finished second there, of course.

At least they showed his rambling lecture speech in full, however.  Not only that but they cut off Sarah Palin after approximately 45 seconds of her "analysis" to do so. 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Why did Santorum do so well in the Charlotte suburbs?

Well York County was the home of down-market televangelists Jim & Tammy Bakker, in which they built their religious Disneyland. You are probably too young to remember them. My brother and I visited that particular Disneyland about 3 months after it closed, but alas could not talk our way in for a viewing of its attractions. We commiserated with a nice black lady at the gate about just how sad it all was, that the dream had died.

York County just ain't Romney country. So with him so anemic there, that left a bigger chunk of the anti Romney for Santorum to share as a guess, and some chunk of the anti-Romney are also anti-Newt.

Uh, the Bakkers were liberals, at least Tammy. She was known as very gay-affirming and even was during their televangelist period, when gays weren't too accepted even in mainline churches (or secular circles that matter since they were basically at the time serving as an AIDS scapegoat.) Their son now pastors one of those progressive hipster churches I love so much in NYC that has the motto "Grace + Provocation + Love" and campaigned for the gay marriage passage in NY.

[Sam Spade]

As expected, Romney was consistently 3rd and 4th in pretty much every historical SC mill town that I remember.

[minionofmidas]

Why did Santorum do so well in the Charlotte suburbs?

Well York County was the home of down-market televangelists Jim & Tammy Bakker, in which they built their religious Disneyland. You are probably too young to remember them. My brother and I visited that particular Disneyland about 3 months after it closed, but alas could not talk our way in for a viewing of its attractions. We commiserated with a nice black lady at the gate about just how sad it all was, that the dream had died.

York County just ain't Romney country. So with him so anemic there, that left a bigger chunk of the anti Romney for Santorum to share as a guess, and some chunk of the anti-Romney are also anti-Newt.

Uh, the Bakkers were liberals, at least Tammy. She was known as very gay-affirming and even was during their televangelist period, when gays weren't too accepted even in mainline churches (or secular circles that matter since they were basically at the time serving as an AIDS scapegoat.) Their son now pastors one of those progressive hipster churches I love so much in NYC that has the motto "Grace + Provocation + Love" and campaigned for the gay marriage passage in NY.

"decisions early on to accept all denominations and to refuse no one regardless of race, creed, sexual orientation, or criminal record" (quote wikipedia, emphasis mine)

That is indeed quite progressive for a 70s evangelical.

Though "liberal" is probably best understood in its original sense given his economic stances... at the time. Not today. He's still preaching today, you know. wikipedia again: "the first time he actually read the Bible all the way through was in prison, and it made him realize he had taken certain passages out of context — passages which he had used as "proof texts" to back up his prosperity teachings. He wrote:

    The more I studied the Bible, however, I had to admit that the prosperity message did not line up with the tenor of Scripture. My heart was crushed to think that I led so many people astray. I was appalled that I could have been so wrong, and I was deeply grateful that God had not struck me dead as a false prophet!"

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well I'm not sure if he'd qualify as progressive like Tammy or his son today, I doubt he campaigned for gay marriage like them.

Incidentally the Bakkers were expelled from a local Assembly of God college, North Central University (the core of the most Republican precinct in Minneapolis, "only" 60% for Obama) because they violated the code of conduct by getting married without the university's permission. Yes that was banned back then (no longer is of course, but the current code still makes the place look comparable to prison.)

I actually know a gay man who went there for one year. He later dropped out and enrolled in a United Church of Christ seminary in South Dakota. I also read a few months ago about another guy who was outed and left there and is now in a UCC seminary...probably not an uncommon pattern.

[CatoMinor]

Did Ron Paul really say his campaign has experienced "steady growth" throughout these contests? 21% to 13% is steady growth. Mmmmmhmmmm.

He doubled his 08 results in Iowa, tripled in New Hampshire, and quadrupled in SC.

And in between that 21% and 13%, you forgot to mention the 23% in NH where he did twice as well as your guy Santorum.

[Keystone Phil]

Did Ron Paul really say his campaign has experienced "steady growth" throughout these contests? 21% to 13% is steady growth. Mmmmmhmmmm.

He doubled his 08 results in Iowa, tripled in New Hampshire, and quadrupled in SC.

Which says what? "I'm more relevant than I was in 2008 and that isn't saying much."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And my guy won a state. Yours won't win a single state that is seriously contested.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

*Tied a state

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well that's sure picking and choosing. So if the election was between Santorum and a horde of libertarians and the fight was all in a state like North Dakota, Santorum would be the "loser" because he didn't contest a state he couldn't win?

Also, despite this, MY guy is ahead of your guy in actual votes so far

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2012

Ron Paul: 160,877
Rick Santorum: 155,256

Whoops!

[Keystone Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

*Tied a state

Tied? Uh, no. The vote was not literally tied and the Iowa GOP certified him as the winner. You might want to do a little reading up on the situation.

Amazing how when Romney wins by eight votes, it's a win. Santorum wins by 35? "Yeah, we'll call it a tie."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So is that going to be your excuse for your guy losing almost all of the contests? "He isn't in sync with the party so cut him so slack for not doing as well!"

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow! Great! Three contests down and you're ahead by what? Five thousand votes? Wait until Florida passes then I can claim some mandate. Of course, that won't count because Dr. Paul won't be competing. Now whose picking and choosing?

[Keystone Phil]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/01/rick-santorum-iowa-caucuses-official-winner/1?csp=34news

Bye bye.

[Lief 🗽]

...oh my god. Neither of your candidates are going to win. Both will be luckily to have 100 delegates by the time this is over with.

[Eraserhead]

...oh my god. Neither of your candidates are going to win. Both will be luckily to have 100 delegates by the time this is over with.

MY GUY SUCKS LESS THAN YOURS!!! ARRGH!

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you bothered to check even a couple of my posts, you would find that when it was said Romney "won" by eight votes I called it a tie, and when Santorum "won" by 35 I still called it is a tie. This is because anyone with the remotest understanding of statistics knows that when the results are that close, calling it either way is silly since human error will account for more lost ballots than that. It's already been said that eight precincts were off and over a hundred had somewhat incorrect tallies. Calling it anything other than a "tie" is silly.

In all practical terms, when its that close, recounts (unless they find a thousand vote discrepancy or something) are worthless at that stage. They may as well flip a coin. But the media needs to treat politics like a sports game so they pick the arbitrary winner.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My guy will be winning several more contests than yours, who is due to be dropping out shortly. Furthermore, thus far, my guy has more delegates than yours and is due to be winning more from Iowa than yours too (seeing as how the "victory" you're bragging about is a non-binding straw poll)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nah, even after Florida odds are he'll still be ahead, and after Nevada there isn't any practical chance he'll lose his lead. Furthermore, Paul will still be ahead in delegates because he presently has three pledged delegates, whereas Santorum only has one. Even if Santorum did exceptional in the Florida primary, he's never going to win and thus gets no delegates out of the deal.

[TheGlobalizer]

MY GUY SUCKS LESS THAN YOURS!!! ARRGH!

[Keystone Phil]

MBD, a known joke poster, refuses to live up to his guarantee that he'd leave if Santorum won Iowa. A bitter, sore loser child. Nevermind the fact that if Paul won, he'd be slobbering over the MANDATE FOR LIBERTY!!!! And in keep with his joke routine, he blames the media for picking a winner.

Furthermore, MDB, your guy might be the winner in several uncontested states. I've conceded this point already. But this idea that Paul will still have more votes than Santorum after Florida even after you trolls admit that he won't be contesting the state is truly laughable. You're so set on proving me wrong that you can't even keep your Tard Talking Points straight.

Santorum was certified as the winner in Iowa, MDB. Accept it. Get move it. Man up and live up to your pledge instead of being such a child.

[All Along The Watchtower]

CONGRATS PHIL!!!

Your guy will probably end up endorsing the Fat Lying Hypocrite Future Leader of the Civilizing Forces!

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The straw poll is what he won, not the actual election (Which occurs quite a while from now). With 25%-25%-21%, the delegates would be split up 7-7-7 going directly by percentages (were it a higher difference than it would be different), and could go anywhere later on. However, seeing as how Santorum will likely have long since dropped out by the time of the delegate selection stage (or will have lost relevance to Gingrich, who his state convention delegates will back), AND that Paul's supporters notably stuck around to vote in the actual binding vote rather than the straw poll, makes it seem very unlikely that Santorum will come ahead in terms of delegates.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's not contesting the state, but Gingrich is and Gingrich is eating Santorum's support. I still think Santorum will come third, but I like how you think being ahead in actual votes over the course of exactly one primary before falling (and staying) behind for the entire remainder of the election is a success.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"ACTUALLY READING POSTS IS FOR LOSERS, UNBACKED ASSUMPTIONS FTW!"

Again, when the count is that close, its a "tie" and miniscule difference is irrelevant. If you bothered to get even a basic understanding of statistics you'd understand that pretty quickly. I said it was a tie even when Romney was said to have won, so stop lying already.

[Keystone Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL! The most hilarious moving of the goal posts ever! So this whole time we were all wasting our time on following Iowa because the actual election is at the convention. And your claim on January 3rd about having to leave that night if Santorum won was just a typo? I've heard it all now.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So the 2000 election was just a tie, right? No winner? WA Gubernatorial 2004? Just a tie, no winner? Who cares if it's statistically a tie? Santorum was declared the winner. I didn't ask for your pledge to leave. You were cocky and made it on your own. Now live up to it.

Keep moving those goal posts, baby. Sore. Loser.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I find this whole argument very cute just because neither candidate is going anywhere.

[RI]

Yeah, I like Santorum and hate Paul, but they really need to stfu.