Main Menu

Colbert PAC announcement resonates

Announcing a new political ad, The Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow Super PAC leader Jon Stewart said in an email to contributors:

"Tragic new reports show that South Carolinians can sometimes go for several minutes at a stretch without seeing a single political ad," said Jon Stewart, President For Life For Now of The Definitely Not Coordinating with Stephen Colbert Super PAC." Even more tragically, we discovered that one visionary leader wasn’t having his voice heard: Stephen Colbert. Now I can proudly say: He’s still not having his voice heard, because we do not coordinate with any candidate or campaign."

drconspiracy[1]Tell me about it. I had 4 messages on my answering machine today from political candidates (and that’s just the ones while I was out for an hour or so). I’ve had 6 calls from Romney in 2 days! I believe in freedom of speech, but that freedom ends when the fist of the robocaller reaches the nose of the ringer on the telephone inside my house.

I do so hate telemarketing.

The ad itself provides an innovative solution to those, like me, frustrated by being unable to vote for Colbert in the Republican Primary where no write-in candidates are allowed. Our option is to vote for Colbert through a proxy vote for Herman Cain. Brilliant.

, ,

20 Responses to Colbert PAC announcement resonates

  1. avatar
    US Citizen January 17, 2012 at 2:08 am #

    Worse… do not call lists don’t apply to political calls, only to marketers.

    If someone finds info contrary to this, I’d be interested to hear it. In California anyway, this is apparently how it goes.

  2. avatar
    G January 17, 2012 at 2:20 am #

    ROTFLMAO!!! Ah, thanks for the heads up on their new advert!

    I heard his Vote for Herman Cain message on his show tonight in his “The Word” segment. LOL!

  3. avatar
    The Magic M January 17, 2012 at 4:21 am #

    > I do so hate telemarketing.

    Thank Ceiling Cat, that is illegal in my country. Political parties can get my address from the city’s registration office, but they may not call me (nor may any commercial entity) without my express previous consent.

  4. avatar
    donna January 17, 2012 at 8:40 am #

    New Stephen Colbert Super PAC Ad: ‘Vote for Herman Cain’

    A new Stephen Colbert Super PAC ad was just released, encouraging South Carolinians to vote for Herman Cain in Saturday’s primary: ”He’s such an outsider, he is not even running for president.”

    It must be said, however, the Herman Cain in this ad looks an awful lot like … Stephen Colbert.

    Watch the ad here.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/new-stephen-colbert-super-pac-ad-vote-for-herman-cain/

  5. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 17, 2012 at 9:19 pm #

    Awesome idea–I bet Cain gets a significant number of votes! It would be great if he could come in 3rd or 4th…

  6. avatar
    Majority Will January 17, 2012 at 9:28 pm #

    Slartibartfast: It would be great if he could come in 3rd or 4th…

    Nice of you pull for him but . . .

    His wife is probably still peeved with what Cain did to the 1st and 2nd.

  7. avatar
    Majority Will January 17, 2012 at 10:02 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Awesome idea–I bet Cain gets a significant number of votes!It would be great if he could come in 3rd or 4th…

    Never mind that. Cain endorsing Newt the Philandering Grinch is funny and ironic enough.

  8. avatar
    G January 18, 2012 at 3:34 am #

    Well, we haven’t seen an official “endorsement” from Cain yet – just several hints from him that he planned to make one before SC votes… with clues in his recent statements that he’s leaning towards Newt.

    It actually wouldn’t be that surprising a choice for Cain to make – he seemed to get along best with Newt during the campaign – including when they had their little two-man “Lincoln-Douglas style debate” at a local TX Tea-Party fundraiser.

    Right now, Newt is benefitting from some momentum off of Monday night’s FNC Debate, which he clearly won from the audience’s reaction. (Although Paul can also be seen as a winner from the online twitter feed results they showed).

    Newt also received a semi-endorsement from S. Palin on Tuesday – asking voters in SC to vote for him in that race to keep the race going…

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/17/10178071-palin-urges-sc-voters-to-support-gingrich-in-primary

    That too could give Newt a boost. I provided just that link, but there are several stories covering this that are all towards the top of hot trending political stories at the moment.

    A lot will rest on Thursday’s debate to set the final public “momentum” stage here. I suspect that if Cain goes through with making an endorsement, he does it after that debate. None of these folks seem to have the cajones to put their bets out there until after they see where the momentum is already headed…

    Poor Rick Santorum. After getting the big nod from the big Conservative gathering in TX last weekend, he still hasn’t been able to convince enough SC Deep Reds to back him over Newt. …And Perry keeps trying to stay relevant.

    The other major story that could help Santorum is the final certification of the IA Caucus results – reports continue to surface and be mentioned that there were errors in the original ballot counting and that Santorum actually won IA. If the final certification results reflect that, it would be a boost to Santorum and do some damage to Romney’s “inevitability” as well.

    However, that final certification in IA isn’t due until Jan 20th – only 1 day before SC votes… so even if that gives Santorum the win, that doesn’t give much time for him to capitalize on it and the timing of the story means it could easily get lost in a weekend news dump and also might not get much notice. As IA is considered “old news” by many, the focus on what is happening in SC will be so heavy in the final day before voting that it could easily get lost in that shuffle as well. Which really puts Santorum in a tough spot – he needs a strong performance in SC in order to continue on from there.

    Majority Will: Never mind that. Cain endorsing Newt the Philandering Grinch is funny and ironic enough.

  9. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 12:11 pm #

    Well, it *did* become official today in the IA Caucus ballot certification:

    RICK SANTORUM WON IA. Romney came in 2nd. Therefore, Romney has beens stripped of the IA win on his record and only has NH to hang his hat on.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/19/mitt-romney-iowa-win-recount?newsfeed=true

    If this gets covered at the GOP debate tonight (8-10pm on CNN), it might be able to still have quite an impact on the dynamic in play.

    In other big news: Rick Perry to drop out and ENDORSE GINGRICH!

    So, a *huge* day for both Santorum & Gingrich (who are contesting each other for the “Conservative Alternative to Mitt” role).

    And a bad day for Romney & of course Rick Perry. Romney has actually had a week’s worth of bad days as Monday’s debate has shifted focus to his taxes and income stream and it becomes clearer and clearer on why he didn’t want anyone to see that info in the first place (pays around 15% in taxes, has a number of off-shore accounts in tax-free havens).

    Romney has also continued to demonstrate his “tin ear” on the issues and keeps making himself look more and more out of touch with his reactions and statements. He seems to be the symbol of everything that is wrong with Wall Street greed ran amuck. His weird statement in which he casually mentioned that he only made a small amount of money on the side for “speaker fees” and then gave a creepy laugh, has come across particularly onerous, considering he made over $374,000 last year in just that.

    And finally, Stephen Colbert will have a public even in SC on Friday, in which Herman Cain (yes, the real one) is his guest on the podium. Colbert has been pushing that a vote for Herman Cain in SC is a vote for Stephen Colbert to officially get into this race…

    So, the heat is on in SC and this race is shaping up to be as interesting and unpredictable as IA!

    G: Poor Rick Santorum. After getting the big nod from the big Conservative gathering in TX last weekend, he still hasn’t been able to convince enough SC Deep Reds to back him over Newt. …And Perry keeps trying to stay relevant.
    The other major story that could help Santorum is the final certification of the IA Caucus results – reports continue to surface and be mentioned that there were errors in the original ballot counting and that Santorum actually won IA. If the final certification results reflect that, it would be a boost to Santorum and do some damage to Romney’s “inevitability” as well.
    However, that final certification in IA isn’t due until Jan 20th – only 1 day before SC votes… so even if that gives Santorum the win, that doesn’t give much time for him to capitalize on it and the timing of the story means it could easily get lost in a weekend news dump and also might not get much notice. As IA is considered “old news” by many, the focus on what is happening in SC will be so heavy in the final day before voting that it could easily get lost in that shuffle as well. Which really puts Santorum in a tough spot – he needs a strong performance in SC in order to continue on from there.

  10. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 12:45 pm #

    Wow…all sorts of popcorn worthy developments in the GOP Primary race today.

    Add to the mix that Newt’s 2nd ex-wife is giving a “tell-all” to ABC to air tomorrow, with excerpts to leak later today…

    You can get an idea of what that might entail from her last “tell-all”:

    http://www.esquire.com/features/newt-gingrich-0910

    Boy, SC is sure getting interesting!

    http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/step_forward_the_winner_of_the_gop_iowa_caucus/

    And yes, today happens to be National Popcorn Day to boot!

    http://www.popcorn.org/AboutUs/Media/NationalPopcornDay/tabid/115/Default.aspx

    G: Well, it *did* become official today in the IA Caucus ballot certification:
    RICK SANTORUM WON IA. Romney came in 2nd. Therefore, Romney has beens stripped of the IA win on his record and only has NH to hang his hat on.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/19/mitt-romney-iowa-win-recount?newsfeed=true
    If this gets covered at the GOP debate tonight (8-10pm on CNN), it might be able to still have quite an impact on the dynamic in play.
    In other big news: Rick Perry to drop out and ENDORSE GINGRICH!

  11. avatar
    gorefan January 19, 2012 at 1:00 pm #

    G: Wow…all sorts of popcorn worthy developments in the GOP Primary race today.

    Did you see this

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/fliers-target-santorums-wife-at-antiabortion-forum-111395.html

    It is amazing how low people will sink.

  12. avatar
    Arthur January 19, 2012 at 1:10 pm #

    Didn’t see that one coming. And I’m not being sarcastic. I didn’t see it coming.

    G: In other big news: Rick Perry to drop out and ENDORSE GINGRICH!

  13. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 1:44 pm #

    Hot pink flyers & trying to to attack Santorum’s position with that story? *Ick*.

    Yes, the story of his wife’s prior boyfriend is a weird and ironic one for Santorum… but it really has nothing to do with his very clear and consistent position on the issue and although it is an “interesting” story to say the least, it is about her prior life and has no real connection to his ability or qualifications to run for office.

    For those who don’t know this weird story, a synopsis: Rick Santorum’s wife had a live-in boyfriend for a number of years before she got with Rick. This prior boyfriend happened to be a very pro-choice advocating doctor who even performed baby deliveries and abortions. Even weirder, he happened to be well over twice her age. The oddest (but utterly coincidental) detail is that it turned out that *he* was the doctor who delivered her when she was born! They didn’t realize and discover that until long after they had met, so it doesn’t deserve any of the creepy charges that I’ve seen some making about it… just bizarrely ironic, that’s all.

    Obviously, her views became much more conservative when she got with Rick and started a family with him. Such changes are not that uncommon and simply happen in life when different people hook up and decide to start a life together.

    gorefan: Did you see this http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/fliers-target-santorums-wife-at-antiabortion-forum-111395.htmlIt is amazing how low people will sink.

  14. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 1:53 pm #

    I didn’t see that coming either… at least not *before* SC. The pressure on Rick Perry to drop out and endorse either Santorum or Gingrich has been on him every since IA.

    Up through yesterday, he was making vocal pushback and vowing *not* to get out of the race before letting SC voters weigh in with their ballots.

    Obviously, something must have changed for him to suddenly reverse position and give into the arm-twisting pressures today.

    I am surprised to see Gingrich be his choice too, considering that his state of TX was where the big “Conservative Coalition” meeting was held last weekend and came to a consensus vote to back Santorum…

    I can only assume it is because Gingrich currently appears to have the greater momentum and the pressure is really on now admist the Deep Reds to get in line behind one choice to take down Romney.

    Tonight’s debate performance is therefore critical for both Newt & Santorum. If one clearly outshines the other, we could see a quick collapse of support for the perceived “loser” of that to all shift to the “winner”. With Newt having the “Big Mo” at the moment, Santorum can’t just have a “good debate” tonight – he needs to outshine Newt. However, even if he succeeds, he needs Newt to self-destruct in order to get all the Deep Reds to consolidate behind him in time for SC’s votes on Saturday. If Newt holds his own *and* Santorum has a strong night, the Deep Red vote could remain deeply divided between the two…

    Arthur: Didn’t see that one coming. And I’m not being sarcastic. I didn’t see it coming.
    G: In other big news: Rick Perry to drop out and ENDORSE GINGRICH!

  15. avatar
    Slartibartfast January 19, 2012 at 2:10 pm #

    I agree with what you said about Newt and Santorum* (and I agree that his wife’s prior boyfriend is completely irrelevant and I think that whoever raised the issue should be ashamed), but I think that Ron Paul is also an important element in the race’s dynamic. Once the race is John Doe v. Paul (and I think it will be Mittens in the end) he will be crushed like a bug, but as long as there are one or two others in the field he will play a significant role in shaping the race. As I see it, Paul has both the highest floor and the lowest ceiling of support of any of the candidates–in other words, he’ll probably do well enough to continue in a 3+ way race (and the more the better), but he wont get much, if any, additional support as others leave the race.

    * I apologize for the vulgarity.

    G: If Newt holds his own *and* Santorum has a strong night, the Deep Red vote could remain deeply divided between the two…

  16. avatar
    Arthur January 19, 2012 at 2:17 pm #

    In the abstract, I agree: Mrs. Santorum’s past has nothing to do with Rick Santorum’s candidacy. However, in the context of Mr. Santorum’s views on marriage and abortion, his wife’s background is important. As a young woman, she lived with a doctor with whom she was not married. Funamenalists call that adultery, a mortal sin. Moreover, that doctor, thirty years her senior, occassionally performed abortions. Had they the power, fundamentalists (Rick Santorum included) would have imprisoned the man Mrs. Santorum loved. While his wife never had to pay a penalty for how she or her lover lived, Santroum would deny other people the same freedom.

    G: Yes, the story of his wife’s prior boyfriend is a weird and ironic one for Santorum… but it really has nothing to do with his very clear and consistent position on the issue and although it is an “interesting” story to say the least, it is about her prior life and has no real connection to his ability or qualifications to run for office.

  17. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 2:50 pm #

    Very salient points!

    Ron Paul is definitely a big factor here and in many ways, benefits even more than Romney from the field remaining divided.

    I think you are correct that Paul needs this to remain at least a 3-way contest for as long as possible…for the very reasons you stated. I think everyone is evaluating his “ceiling” as much lower than it actually is. (Even amongst the GOP, polls have frequently shown support levels in the whole 60’s range of percentages on questions about being tired of the wars.) His opposition to the neo-con ideology is his biggest area of bitter divide within GOP circles. So there is easily 30-40% of the GOP that will *never* vote for him, regardless.

    But *all* of the 4 main candidates remaining now truly have their own unique and different appeals…and therefore will each have different segments and factions within the GOP that are for them, can “accept them” and who would be resistant to voting for them under any circumstances. How much that last category holds up over time (against the GOP & Conservative orthodoxy and desire to “get in line” behind whoever they are told to support) remains to be seen. Perception of “viability” seems to be the dominant meme in their party at the end of the day…but perception is fluid and changes in fortune can shift fairly quickly. Plus, they have such a strong overriding “anybody but Obama” meme going. So I think the expectations of perceived ceilings on *all* of these candidates have yet to be truly tested in this race…and those ceilings could change as the dynamics of the race play out.

    Of the 4 candidates – Newt’s dynamic is the most diverse and can convince certain portions of Conservative / Tea Party, Establishment and “Transformation” factions to each view him as “one of their own”…

    Obviously, Santorum is solidly Deep Red Conservative (with some blue collar appeal), Ron Paul the Libertarian / Tea-Party / “Transormation” choice and Romney the Establishment guy.

    But yes, Paul’s true chances require the race to have at least 3 total participants remaining at this stage in order for him to continue to build momentum and rack up delegates. In order for him to be more than just a factor and have any real shot, he has to win at least one of the Feb contests leading into Super-Tuesday. He actually does stand a reasonable shot of surprising folks and pulling that off. (See my prior analysis on that for why). If that happens, the dynamic could change his “ceiling” and even give him a shot at being a credible threat in a 2-way race… But yeah, 4 in SC is still great news for Paul, even if he places 4th as a result. He needs there to still be 3 in FL (also a tougher one for him) and for everyone to remain focused on that and perhaps only be thinking of NV after that. The rest of the Feb states are Paul’s true test in this race and will show whether he can raise his game beyond just some delegate caputuring…

    Slartibartfast: I agree with what you said about Newt and Santorum* (and I agree that his wife’s prior boyfriend is completely irrelevant and I think that whoever raised the issue should be ashamed), but I think that Ron Paul is also an important element in the race’s dynamic. Once the race is John Doe v. Paul (and I think it will be Mittens in the end) he will be crushed like a bug, but as long as there are one or two others in the field he will play a significant role in shaping the race. As I see it, Paul has both the highest floor and the lowest ceiling of support of any of the candidates–in other words, he’ll probably do well enough to continue in a 3+ way race (and the more the better), but he wont get much, if any, additional support as others leave the race.* I apologize for the vulgarity.

  18. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 2:54 pm #

    Your point is well-taken. I agree that you’ve identified a very valid and relevant aspect to this issue, as it relates to both his policy positions and the impact that such would have had on people that fit into his own life’s story…

    Arthur: In the abstract, I agree: Mrs. Santorum’s past has nothing to do with Rick Santorum’s candidacy. However, in the context of Mr. Santorum’s views on marriage and abortion, his wife’s background is important. As a young woman, she lived with a doctor with whom she was not married. Funamenalists call that adultery, a mortal sin. Moreover, that doctor, thirty years her senior, occassionally performed abortions. Had they the power, fundamentalists (Rick Santorum included) would have imprisoned the man Mrs. Santorum loved. While his wife never had to pay a penalty for how she or her lover lived, Santroum would deny other people the same freedom.

  19. avatar
    G January 19, 2012 at 2:56 pm #

    😉

    If others don’t get it, then they need to Google it…

    Slartibartfast:
    …and Santorum*

    * I apologize for the vulgarity.

  20. avatar
    sfjeff January 19, 2012 at 4:20 pm #

    I agree with G.

    I am opposed to guilt by association. While it may well be true that the voters will decide to condemn his wife’s previous life by voting against him, I think claiming that his wife’s past associations are relevant to Santorum are as irrelevant as the Birthers who keep trying to dig up stuff about Obama’s mother or grandparents or his siblings.

    Now- skeletons from a candidates own past are fair game. But skeletons from his families or friends past? No guilt by association please.

    Arthur: In the abstract, I agree: Mrs. Santorum’s past has nothing to do with Rick Santorum’s candidacy. However, in the context of Mr. Santorum’s views on marriage and abortion, his wife’s background is important. As a young woman, she lived with a doctor with whom she was not married. Funamenalists call that adultery, a mortal sin. Moreover, that doctor, thirty years her senior, occassionally performed abortions. Had they the power, fundamentalists (Rick Santorum included) would have imprisoned the man Mrs. Santorum loved. While his wife never had to pay a penalty for how she or her lover lived, Santroum would deny other people the same freedom.