A Mormon, a fascist, and another Mormon walk into a bar in New Hampshire…
…and the first Mormon wins. Which everybody knew he would. The fascist comes in second and the second Mormon comes in third. There is an Abbot and Costello routine in there somewhere.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Romney will be the nominee and he will lose the general election to Obama and can we please just fast forward through this whole stupid year.
28 Responses to “A Mormon, a fascist, and another Mormon walk into a bar in New Hampshire…”
-
quixote says:
Well, the Mittbot came out at the low end of acceptable. Now if he could lose SC, and then some more back and forth, until nobody is really out front, and then there’s a brokered convention, and then the aliens land and provide a really good candidate.
Could happen, right?
January 11th, 2012 at 12:13 am EST -
Violet Socks says:
The part about the aliens landing sounds possible.
-
Unree says:
Does anyone remember a duller presidential election year? Voters in both parties seem to think their frontrunner dude is the lesser evil.
Young’uns probably think 1984 was a snooze — morning in America, popular preznit Reagan cruises to his second term — but as I remember it, it was pretty interesting. Mondale spoke about raising taxes. Sounded good to me. Other people disagreed. Okay. Even though I hated Reagan back then, I could see why Republicans supported him.
But George Bush in 2004? That was the beginning of the end. Millions of votes and no real support, no enthusiasm.
Here we stay. Obama or Romney in 2012. How can voters muster the energy to show up?
-
Carmonn says:
I just hate looking at the vote totals. Please explain to me again why it’s “undemocratic” to allow states where people actually live to decide elections?
-
ralphb says:
Yes, aliens please.
-
anna says:
Hey Violet, do you think Mitt will pick a woman as his veep?
-
Violet Socks says:
I have no idea, Anna. Mittens probably needs to pick a running mate who will appeal to the Christianists, the Focus on the Family crowd.
-
Sameol says:
As horrible as it will be for the country, after Romney’s audacity in bringing up job cuts, I’m starting to think this race might be mildly entertaining. How does one run against one’s doppelgänger without it being equally amusing and horrifying.
-
tallbacka says:
Do you yanqui pigdog imperialists really care about the families of the candidates? Family members are paraded around, and competitions are held at the start of debates who has the most children(Dr Paul has delivered 4000 BABIES!!)I can’t think of a western country where the wife/husband and children are so visible in the campaign.
-
Violet Socks says:
tallbacka, I’m not sure what you’re responding to, but if it’s my reference to “Focus on the Family,” that’s the name of an organization. An ultra-conservative Christian supremacist organization.
-
tallbacka says:
I wasn’t really responding to anything, it was more lika a general observation/question. It seems that the family members of candidates participate in capaign events and commercials much more in the US compared to other western countries. Here in Sweden nobody knows(or cares) anything about politicians’ spouses/children.
-
Carmonn says:
That reminds me, with all of this lauding of Hitchens at Feministe and elsewhere, anyone remember that piece where he fretted his adorable brow about whether Michelle Obama was sufficiently subserviant or whether we might be potentially leading into a disaster of Bill and Hillary proportions? Obama had disappointed him in some way (I think he was having some kind of fit over Rev. Wright) and because it “wasn’t in Barack’s nature” Hitchens was forced to conclude, after analyzing her college thesis, that Michelle was the malevolent influence leading him down the path to Black Nationalism and we all had to be vigilant for any signs of equality in their relationship. Good times!
We have to focus on the spouses because we can slam a female candidate for “pimping out her family” in a way a male candidate supposedly would not, and if it’s a male candidate we have a convenient scapegoat in the power-mad shrew.
-
Violet Socks says:
with all of this lauding of Hitchens at Feministe and elsewhere
Really? Lauding Hitch at Feministe? Dude was a misogynist. Katha Pollitt wrote a piece after his death that I pretty much agreed with; the encomiums for that vile man were incredible given his outspoken misogyny and explicit anti-feminism.
But it’s kind of the way William Buckley is spoken of nowadays as if he were some kind of highbrow reasonable conservative. Buckley was just a white supremacist who used big words.
-
Violet Socks says:
Also, along those lines, I think the way white men treat Hitchens respectfully is the same thing that happens when white men revere Buckley as a charming intellectual and when white men talk about Ron Paul as if the Jim Crow/women-are-state-property/immigrants-are-vermin stuff somehow didn’t matter and could we please talk about the important stuff not those unfortunate side issues.
-
KendallJ says:
Violet,
Why are you so convinced that Obama will win re-election? I’m not so sure with all the indys running from him and the banksters love moving over to mittens.
-
tinfoil hattie says:
Really? Lauding Hitch at Feministe? Dude was a misogynist.
Yup. Lauding of Hitchens AND how funny-funny Bill Maher is. Feminists who protested against the post about how hilarious Maher is (even though he’s a misogynist, too! They’re so torrrrrrnnn!) are the REAL problem.
Bleccccch.
-
Violet Socks says:
Why are you so convinced that Obama will win re-election?
Because I think Republican voter turnout will be very depressed with Romney as the nominee. He’s the wrong religion and most Republicans don’t believe he’s really a conservative. Or to put it a different way: they don’t believe he is really to the right of Obama. And they’re correct; he’s not. Obama and Romney are really just two flavors of the same thing.
Democratic turnout will also be depressed because of Obama’s record, but I don’t think to the same extent. Basically, we’ll have two men running who are extremely similar politically. One is a Mormon with plastic hair, and the other is the first black president who, in spite of everything, remains personally admired.
For politically minded left-leaning independents, the baggage Romney brings (basically the entire batshit crazy Republican party) will be enough to keep them voting for Obama, despite his huge betrayals.
-
Sameol says:
Feminists who protested against the post about how hilarious Maher is (even though he’s a misogynist, too! They’re so torrrrrrnnn!) are the REAL problem.
I know it’s been Misogynist Appreciation Month at Feministe, but I couldn’t believe it when they started actually MOCKING you guys. For suggesting. On a feminist website. That being a misogynist might actually be a major character flaw.
And Maher also has a history of being inappropriate with his employees. It’s acceptable to tell your assistant to bring you a pizza with a side of cum? Hey, it’s just a joke. At least we found out that if he’s anti-vaccine, that will make him unwelcome–Vaccines are a feminist issue!
-
Carmonn says:
There’s a post up now calling out a little girl and linking to a HuffPo piece with thousands of comments of predictably vile attacks on her. I certainly don’t agree with the kid, but she’s a *child.* Really, the only way to frame the issue is around attacking a child? It feels unnecessary and wrong.
-
gxm17 says:
I’m with KendallJ. I think a Romney win is possible. The Republican base didn’t turn out in 2008 either. If the youth vote and Democratic base stay home, if people like me (a lifelong Dem) vote third party (which is what I plan to do), and enough of the moderate/independent middle vote Romney, then I think we’ll see another first: a Mormon president. Which would, for me, only accentuate the depth and breadth of America’s misogyny and sexism. We’re all about breaking glass ceilings as long is a man is doing the breaking.
-
Nessum says:
It’s acceptable to tell your assistant to bring you a pizza with a side of cum?
Eeewww! It’s beyond (at least my) comprehension, how this thoroughly unpleasant dude ever got to the position where he’s at. Always detested him. But then I do seem to have a problem with almost all male stand up “comedians” [snort!]. Even Jon Stewart with his never ending obsession with the/ his own “male reproductive organ”.
And what’s up with Steven Colbert? Wouldn’t it be not only funnier, but also much bolder to run as a “mock-alternative” to Obama rather than to Romney?
… Or is it just me having lost my sense of humour alltogether?
-
Three Wickets says:
Basically there are few if any men in national politics or the mainstream media who aren’t old fashioned chauvinists. Most are to-the-core sexists, and the age of Obama is allowing them to express themselves more freely. And whether we’re talking about Maher or Stewart or Colbert or Sullivan, in the end they all want the same thing: to fellate Obama. What is amazing to me is how many women on the left are eager to play along.
-
Teresainpa says:
I could actually vote for the other Mormon. Of course he couldn’t be the nominee, he’s human. I like Huntsman even if he is a conservative because he is a conservative with a brain and a heart and common sense. He is not doctrinaire. He seems to be a problem solver.
Oh well……
Will Romney beat Obama? It all depends on what is going on in the economy next fall. Somehow the republicans seem to be choosing the man who is less human than Obama. Romney is a strange robotic creature who made his dog ride on the roof if the car in a cage. I am not sure how I see him winning unless Obama really hits bottom in the polls again. But maybe Mitt will find his human parts and put them on. -
Susan says:
Huntsman may not come across as offensively as the rest of the GOP lunatics but he’s just as dangerous to women’s economic well-being. He’s the only candidate who’s embraced Paul Ryan’s assault on Medicare that would change it to a voucher system that is not tied to increases in medical costs. He the very wealthy son of a billionaire businessman and his first job out of college was as a vice president in daddy’s business. Somehow, I don’t think he gives a shit how a woman who spent her life working as a waitress will pay her medical bills when she’s seventy years old and the “Medicare” voucher amount hasn’t increased in five years.
-
Susan says:
So, Violet, I’ve been in moderation status for about three years. Is this a permanent state?
-
Violet Socks says:
Susan, I don’t know why your comments are always caught by The Filters. God knows what they’re thinking. They might have you confused with somebody else. When I have some energy I will try to clean some old things out, maybe that will fix it. I really have no idea. I’m sorry.
-
Susan says:
No apology is necessary. I don’t remember exactly what I said but I was posting under JeanLouise and we disagreed about something. You thought that I went too far.
There was no intent to deceive you by using a different name. I stopped posting for awhile and when I started again, I had forgotten that I had posted here as JeanLouise.
-
Violet Socks says:
Well, I don’t think that explains it either. I just searched through comments by JeanLouise, and I never put her/you in moderation either. So I don’t know what The Filters are doing. Truly, they baffle me. It’s like a HAL situation here.
Some IP addresses get automatically flagged because they look like spam, but I don’t have control over that. It’s the Akismet anti-spam killer, which does some kind of black box secret thing. I also have some other filters going, and some anti-sneak filters to keep cheeto dicks and nutjobs out…and so sometimes there are false positives.
