It’s good to have a president who supports science. Plus, Barack Obama now goes down in history as the first president to shoot a marshmallow across the State Dining Room.

Rick Santorum was a sitting senator who in re-election lost by 19 points, to my knowledge the most in the history of this country for a sitting senator to lose by 19 points. It’s unheard of. Then he goes out and says oh ‘okay’ I just lost by the biggest margin in history and now I’m going to run for president. Tell me, how does that work? … That’s like me saying I just failed a test. Now I’m going to apply for admission to the Wharton School of Finance. Okay? He just failed a test…. And now he’s going to run for president. So, I don’t get Rick Santorum. I don’t get that whole thing.

Despite this, Santorum has an outside chance at the Republican nomination because of the degree of dislike for Romney by conservative Republicans and the lack of a viable alternative. Compared to Newt Gingrich, Santorum looks like an acceptable choice to GOP leaders. (Ron Paul remains irrelevant towards the actual nomination even though he will probably pick up a number of delegates, especially in the caucus states). I’m not all surprised that Santorum is emerging as the non-Romney candidate outside of the south. He is the best shot for the big-government conservative movement which remains obsessed with imposing their archaic religious views upon the entire country.

Beyond the Santorum hat trick, the other news out of last night’s contests is that turn out remains low in a contested battle for the nomination to oppose  a president who many conservatives continue to think is a black foreign-born Muslim socialist who hangs out with terrorists. (Only the first part of that characterization is accurate, but that is enough to get many Republicans to want to defeat him). Public Policy Polling found that “58% of Democrats were ‘very excited’ about voting this fall, compared to 54% of Republicans. Six months ago the figures were 48% of Democrats ‘very excited’ and Republicans at the same 54%. Generally you would expect voters to get more excited as the election gets near.” The poll also found that “The percentage of Tea Party voters ‘very excited’ about voting in November has declined from 73% to 62% since late July.” Perhaps many will remain home in November if the Republicans do not nominate a candidate they find acceptable, while appealing to the Tea Party will lead to further loses among independent and moderate voters. (One caution on this poll is that the poll was conducted for Daily Kos. There is no evidence that this affects the results, but I always feel uneasy about whether pollsters might attempt to please those paying the bill.)

Other recent polls have also been favorable for the Democrats. The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll shows Obama with a clear lead over Romney nationally for the first time. The trend favors Obama as “By better than 2 to 1, Americans say the more they learn about Romney, the less they like him.” Results in battleground states matter more in the electoral college than national polls but as Obama’s support improves nationally, it is also likely to improve in battleground states. The latest Quinnepiac poll shows Obama leading Romney 47 to 43 percent in Virginia. Democrats are also taking the lead in generic polls over preferred control of Congress.

It is still a long way until November and the polls can still change many times between now and then. Unpredictable events can also have a major influence on the election. There is, however, one predicable series of events which will help Obama. Nobody will be able to wrap up the Republican nomination soon, and the more the GOP candidates campaign against each other, the more the approval for all the Republican candidates declines.

When I first heard Joe Biden use his quick pitch for the Democrats last week I was impressed that he could be so succinct: “Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.” Steve Benen linked to a video of Biden saying this above. He also pointed out the significance of the use of this brief elevator pitch:

Democrats have traditionally struggled to craft compelling “elevator pitches” when it comes to their policies, records, and visions. But Biden’s 10-word pitch, a blunt instrument as political rhetoric goes, at least has the benefit of summarizing the points Obama for America hopes to stress: the president and his administration turned the economy around at home, and has scored high-profile national security successes abroad.

It’s seems likely the Democratic campaign will face considerable pushback if officials keep using this pitch out loud — the politicization of the bin Laden strike may prove tricky — but the fact that the likely Republican nominee opposed the policy that got the al Qaeda leader, and was inclined to “let Detroit go bankrupt,” the health of GM and demise of bin Laden at a minimum sets up the contrast the White House wants to see.

In an election year it is more important to contrast Obama’s achievements with his likely opponent, but I also cannot help but contrast this with George Bush’s record. While GM’s problems went beyond those of the economy as a whole, it was Bush who brought us to the brink of a depression. Obama’s policies prevented a depression, while Republicans would return to the same policies which got us into this economic mess. Obama is destroying al Qaeda, while Bush’s policies acted to strengthen it and placed the United States in greater danger. It was also the failure of George Bush to follow the recommendations passed on by the Clinton administration, and his failure to respond to CIA warnings of an imminent threat, which allowed the 9/11 attack to be a success.

There are a number of things which I wish Obama would do differently, but on the major issues of the day there is a clear difference between what Obama has accomplished and what the Republicans would do. There is no problem with Obama which would be improved upon by having a Republican in the White House.

Saturday Night Live opened with science fiction last night, showing Newt Gingrich as president of the moon. Science Fiction isn’t limited to SNL. Blastr presents 18 awesome sci-fi moments from The Late Show with David Letterman.

Some teasers from Steven Moffat about the future of Doctor Who:

Natalie Dormer, who showed during The Tudors that she had no problem with appearing nude,  was interviewed about her upcoming role in The Game of Thrones:

With “Game of Thrones,” you’ve signed on to the biggest craze in the States, I think, probably around the world.

Well, again, all I can say is “Thrones” is just like “The Fades,” in so far as the quality is just there in the script, immediately, before you’ve done anything. When you’re just sitting down reading it, the quality just glares at you from the page.

And I kind of kept away from the show when I was taking the meetings. I wasn’t acquainted with the show before I went in to meet the delightful Mr. [David] Benioff and [D.B.] Weiss [exec producers].

And I’m kind of glad I didn’t, actually, because I think I would have been scared off [laughs], because it was so awesome when I watched it.

And I’m really, really proud to be a part of the “Thrones” family now. I just finished second series before Christmas and I’ll be doing third series in the summer. And I think, again, it’s really bravely written. It’s got a phenomenal cast, and, yeah, it’s a great privilege to be a part of the gang, and it’s a big gang…

Tell me about your character, Margaery Tyrell, as much as you can say. It’s kind of weird, because saying anything, almost like with Sarah, saying anything is sort of a spoiler I think.

Yeah. Well, to be perfectly honest, I would have to agree with you there. So maybe I’ll ease off on that. [Laughs.] It’s really interesting, because both shows have this amazing cult following, you know? … It’s kind of intriguing to be opened up to the sci-fi, super horror or fantasy communities and seeing just how dedicated they are. I’ve never come across fans, like cult fans to these cult shows. They’re just so supportive and they’re so dedicated. And, as an actor, you really feel supported and you want to really push yourself, because there’s just so much enthusiasm.

I heard you’re a good fencer and I was wondering if Margaery is ever going to take up a sword.

Oh, well, you know [laughs], I have a few seasons in me. You never know what’s going to happen. [Laughs.] But Loras, the Knight of Flowers, my brother, is meant to be the greatest night throughout the Seven Kingdoms, so maybe she picked up a little bit, who knows? [Laughs.] We’ll have to wait and see, won’t we?

Give us a tease, a non-spoilery tease about Season 2, even if it’s just from your experience and what you saw.

Oh, a tease. [Laughs.] It’s war. It’s war and it’s serious. It’s the same with “The Fades,” the battle is on, life and death. The battle is coming, so it’s serious now. [Laughs.]

And you’re looking forward to more seasons, right?

Absolutely. Absolutely. Margaery really comes into her own in series [seasons] 3 and 4.

Doc Soto provided a tour of Alcatraz. He doesn’t explain how all those prisoners disappeared.

Our findings here echo those discussed in a prior post that Republicans have moved further to the right than Democrats to the left in the contemporary period. Indeed, as seen below, President Obama is the most moderate Democratic president since the end of World War II, while President George W. Bush was the most conservative president in the post-war era.

On the other hand, in many ways Obama has had success at passing liberal polices in some areas where other Democratic presidents have failed. This success might be partially because of his moderation, and that a more liberal Democrat might have had fewer successes.

Ben Adler has a theory that Gingrich gets his facts wrong because, “Gingrich still seems to live in the last decade that he was relevant: the 1990s.” This theory works for Ben’s current post. I bet that he wouldn’t argue with my belief that, while this might be somewhat accurate in the example Ben discussed, there are also many other statements from Gingrich which have never been true, at least in our reality. Maybe there is some alternative universe out there  in which Gingrich sometimes gets history right.

I have never lived in New York, but simply taking occasional trips there and following the reality-based media which Gingrich seems to avoid, it was clear that Gingrich’s latest attack on Manhattan elites was factually wrong. Ben Adler explained:

On Friday he reiterated his hatred of people who live a more environmentally efficient lifestyle. Speaking in Las Vegas ahead of the Nevada caucus, a contest he is sure to lose, Gingrich attacked “elites” in Manhattan who live in high rises and “ride the subway.”

This is the perfect distillation of Gingrichism on many levels. First it shows the stupidity and ignorance of a man Republicans praise for his intelligence and knowledge. Riding the subway is much cheaper than owning, maintaining and driving a car. The truly rich in New York take cabs, car services or drive more often than the poor. Not everyone in Manhattan, or in a high-rise, is an elite: Gingrich has apparently never ventured north of 96th Street and seen who lives in the high-rise projects in Harlem.

Gingrich still seems to live in the last decade that he was relevant: the 1990s. Back then his despised media elites mostly lived in Manhattan. (Of the ones who live in the city. Plenty of them live in the suburbs and it’s unclear whether Gingrich thinks that makes them real Americans.)

Now, journalists and other underpaid urban professionals increasingly live in Brooklyn and Queens, but Gingrich’s demagoguery is behind the times. It’s also outdated because the reason writers have been largely pushed out of Manhattan is the influx of ever-wealthier bankers, the sort of people Gingrich says we should worship as job creators. It’s time for Gingrich to start loving Manhattan instead of hating it. Then again, some of the financiers work for private equity firms, and since Gingrich is running against a private equity executive, he has decided that those capitalists are inherently different and worse than all others.

Check out the full post for Adler’s suggestions as to future elites which Gingrich might attack.

How about elite disgraced former members of Congress who are backed by wealthy benefactors enabling them to run for president? With all his attacks on elites, Gingrich is an elite even if not elite (or sane) enough to ever get elected president.

Gingrich has scheduled a press conference for tonight, after the Nevada caucus which he is expected to lose. This has led to speculation that he might be withdrawing from the race. Following his threats to remain in the race until the end, I doubt this is the case unless his contributions are drying up. Perhaps this is a means of getting more coverage for attacks on Romney and an attempt to remain relevant until we reach southern primaries which might be more hospitable towards Gingrich. On the other hand, maybe we shouldn’t pay much attention to his past statements that he plans to remain in the race. Sticking to commitments has never been Gingrich’s strong point.

First Herman Cain endorsed Gingrich and now Trump. This should lock up the bat-shit crazy vote for Gingrich, which is the major portion of the Republican vote.

Trump has also been talking about running as a third party candidate again. Most likely this was to receive more publicity but perhaps he might use a loss by his candidate as reason to run.

Update: CNN is now reporting that Donald Trump will be endorsing Romney and not Gingrich per reports yesterday. I think we need to wait for the actual announcement to know for certain what he is doing.

The Whoniverse is commemorating the life of Elisabeth Sladen (Sarah Jane Smith) today, on what would have been her 64th birthday. Here is one of the BBC news reports on her death last year.

“I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair , I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich…. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”

The real dishonesty in this statement is not taking the first sentence out of context but the claim that Romney is concerned about the middle class. His policies actually help the wealthy, not those in the middle.

This is reminiscent of Romney’s recent statement that he likes to fire people. He was actually talking about insurance companies here, but the line still comes off as callous to those of us who own businesses and find firing people to be a very unpleasant experience. I would assume it is even more unpleasant for those on the other side of the desk.

Despite winning soundly in Florida, Romney continues to have the same negatives going into a general election campaign which I discussed following his loss in South Carolina:

The attacks on his years at Bain Capital and his mishandling of the calls to release his income tax returns cast serious doubts as to whether Romney is competitive in a national election. His offers to release a single return from 2010 only raises further questions as to what he has to hide. His tax shelters in the Cayman Islands and speculation that many years he paid far closer to zero percent than the fifteen percent he claims, make him a weak candidate in a year in which many voters from both parties are fed up with Wall Street. It also doesn’t make it easy for Romney to run against Obama after his repeated admissions that the economy is getting better under Obama, even if he tries to deny Obama the credit.

The blogger at U.S. Common Sense just got to discussion of the South Carolina primary today–something I can understand with the difficulties of balancing blogging and work in the real world. What is less understandable is the conservative propensity for creating false equivalencies in his comments on my post:

There was a lot in this short article that I could choose from, but this one covered a sore issue of mine. The author states “[his offer] to release a single return from 2010 only raises further questions as to what he has to hide.” No it doesn’t. For starters, there is no requirement for candidates running in the general election (let alone the primaries) to release their financial records. It has come a common practice over the past few decades, but it isn’t a requirement. And choosing not to release them cannot be taken as an attempt to hide anything. (This is the same logic used by the Obama campaign for choosing not to release the birth certificate and college transcripts early on in the 2008 campaign.)

First of all, saying that no questions are raised due to Romney’s failure to release his tax returns because there is no requirement makes absolutely no sense. The questions are already out there. There is no legal requirement to release the tax returns, but Mitt does look bad in comparison to his father (who had more integrity in his pinky finger than Mitt has in his entire body). George Romney set a much higher bar than his son:

In 1967, Michigan Gov. George Romney set the bar high for tax disclosure by presidential candidates. While running for the Republican nomination, he was “badgered” by a writer for Look magazine to release his most recent tax return.

Romney refused. Releasing a single return wouldn’t prove anything, he told the magazine’s senior editor, T. George Harris. It could be a fluke, or even a cynical manipulation designed to make the candidate look good. What really mattered was how a candidate managed his personal finances over the long haul.

“Stumped by his argument,” Harris wrote in the magazine, “I was not prepared for the move that it eventually led him to make: He ordered up all the Form 1040′s that he and Mrs. Romney had filed over the past 12 years — including those profitable ones when he saved the American Motors Corp. from bankruptcy and became a millionaire on the company’s stock options.”

The false equivalency to Obama’s birth certificate is also ridiculous. First of all, Obama did release his birth certificate. The Birther creation of a demand for the long form was an unjustifiable means of obscuring the truth, which was proven when the long form showed what any reasonable person knew all along–it was no different from the conventional form initially released by the campaign. It was the demands placed upon Obama, not Obama’s actions, which were unprecedented. In contrast, it is unprecedented in recent years for a candidate in Romney’s position not to release more financial information.

There was nothing on Obama’s birth certificate, and nothing which would be found in college transcripts, which would indicate a conflict of interests as might be found on tax returns. The claims about Obama not being born in the United States lacked any credibility. On the other hand, there remains very real reason to question what might be found in Romney’s tax returns. His propensity for tax evasion, already demonstrated in the tax return released, might not be illegal, but it is potentially damaging in a political campaign. There is very real reason to believe that the speculation that in previous years the rate he paid was closer to  zero might be real. There is reason to suspect that possibly criminal tax evasion and evidence of conflicts of interest might be present in his tax returns. Unless Romney comes closer to the standard set by his own father, these questions will continue.  Bill Maher summed up how the average person will view this:

Yes, Mitt finally released his tax returns for one year. It turns out he keeps a lot of his money in the Cayman Islands, in Bermuda, Luxemburg, a Swiss bank account. And he said he’s not trying to evade paying taxes by keeping his money in these places. That’s like saying I got caught with meth and crack, but it wasn’t because I was trying to get high.

Bonus Quote:

“In fact, when Mitt Romney was young, he and his gang controlled their hood’s hedge fund.” –Jay Leno

Florida has violated the Republican Party rule that winner take all contests cannot occur until April, and Romney will take all fifty delegates, pending the inevitable challenge should Gingrich remain competitive. Gingrich does say he will remain in the race until the end, and he appears angry enough with Romney to possibly do so.

It now appears increasingly unlikely that Romney can be stopped despite the opposition of many conservatives. There just is not a viable candidate in the race to oppose him. It is too late for another candidate to enter the race and win as many filing deadlines have passed, but theoretically another candidate could enter and pick up enough delegates to keep anyone from winning a majority, leaving the decision to the convention. It is difficult, but not impossible, to envision scenarios which could still deny Romney the honor of losing to Barack Obama this fall.

Romney leading but having Gingrich remain in the race might be the best possible outcome following the Florida primary. As it is theoretically possible for the nominee of any major political party to wind up winning, we certainly do not want Gingrich to be the nominee. Gingrich is welcome to spend the next several months exposing all of Romney’s faults and continue to damage his image.