Archive for December, 2011

Hello, folks.

As Stendhal guessed in his last post, vacation time did indeed coincide with a dwindling of blog posts to zero. But we’re back, and ready to get things rolling again. Preposterous though it may seem, the Iowa caucus is on January 3, i.e. next Tuesday, i.e. 5 days from now!

So what do you think will happen? If you read this blog, we require that you post a prediction. If you don’t, then we’ll… do nothing about it. But come on and join the fun! Here’s my rundown of the also-rans:

Cain – Withdrew from the race. Name might still appear on the ballot, though? Expect a low single-digit but nevertheless hilarious turnout for him.

Huntsman – Whether he might become a viable national candidate for the nomination remains to be seen. I guess not, but even if he is, he will do poorly in Iowa. It has one of the most conservative GOP bases, and he all but conceded it months ago and essentially has not campaigned there.

Bachmann – Her campaign is in disarray, her campaign manager has defected to the Paul campaign, and her peak was months ago. She’s toast.

Gingrich – Peaked too soon, it seems. I never understood his bounce in the polls, and I’m going to assume that his high unlikability will make it difficult for him to win any elections.

Perry – I’m unsure where I stand on my most disliked candidate. The consensus is that he peaked too soon and disastrous debate showings have doomed him. However, he does have a ton of money in his campaign, and his social stances are well in line with Iowa voters. I suspect this will land him somewhere in the middle.

That leaves us with the candidates I expect to finish in the top 3: Romney, Paul, and… Santorum.

Romney: The consensus from months ago was that Romney could survive a poor showing in the conservative state, as long as he followed it up with a convincing win in the more moderate New Hampshire, and then continued to pick up votes as the weaker candidates dropped out and he would emerge as the consensus pick. However, now it seems he is in it to win it in Iowa.

Paul: Expect a full freak-out if he wins. But he really might! His supporters are among the most passionate, and Nate Silver points out that some polls might be underestimating his support. He did well in the Ames straw poll, nearly winning it, and with as many candidates in the field as there are, he might emerge victorious.

Santorum: Hell, why not? Every other candidate has had the anyone-but-Romney surge except poor Rick and Hunstman, so why not Rick, and why not now? He has basically lived in Iowa for months, and has campaigned in all 99 of its counties. His conservative social values are most in sync with what Iowa GOP voters want, too. He’s not nearly as likable, but he might end up as this year’s version of Huckabee.

Final prediction:

1) Rick Santorum

2) Mitt Romney

3) Ron Paul

4) Rick Perry

5) Newt Gingrich

after that… who cares?

Read Full Post »


I’m in East Asia, and Linus is in St. Louis, so posting will probably be slightly less than normal, which is to say, nonexistent.

Happy Atheist Winter Holiday!

Read Full Post »

Yeah, it’s been a while. Here’s the latest from Linus and me, as we discuss the current ups and downs of the Republican primary.

We discuss:

  • Newt-mentum and its sustainability
  • The anti-Mitt Republican bubble
  • Mitt Romney’s problems — health care or Mormonism?
  • A dark horse entering the race late in the game?
  • A chance for The Honorable Dr. Ronald Paul, M.D.?
  • What are Obama’s odds?

Read Full Post »

Here’s his new ad:

Luckily, his poll numbers are in the basement because he’s too stupid to string sentences together.

Read Full Post »

I do love mashed potatoes.

Read Full Post »

This morning there was some surprising news that unemployment had dipped from 9.0% to 8.6%. That’s a huge decrease. When you take a look, you see that the country has continued its trend of losing some jobs in the public sector, but adding even more jobs to the private sector.

However, that only tells part of the story. Another huge factor in today’s news is that the Labor Force Participation Rate declined to 64.0% (66-67% is supposedly normal). In other words, it becomes easier to say fewer people are unemployed if fewer people are looking for work.

So what might cause this? The first, most depressing possibility is that those who have been unemployed for a long time might have given up, and by doing so take themselves out of the market of who “counts” towards unemployment. If that’s the case, then the decrease in unemployment doesn’t really reflect a stronger economy. But there are other possibilities in play: (1) More boomers might be retiring, (2) More women might be choosing to stay at home instead of work, (3) More young people might be choosing not to work, particularly by staying in school for longer or going to additional graduate programs.

More possibilities are explored here.

Read Full Post »