Page 152 of 336 FirstFirst ... 52102142148149150151152153154155156162202252 ... LastLast
Results 2,266 to 2,280 of 5035
  1. #2266
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,183

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    I wasn't aware that the Catholic League was an arm of the Republican Party.

    If so, I'm in the wrong party, because I've disagreed with just about everything Bill Donohue says.
    (D)ems (D)eh rules. Someone somewhere says something the (D)himwits think they can make an issue out of that person automagically becomes one of our party leaders or a wing of our party.

    Then there is the flip side of the coin. (D) operative who has 35 visits to the WH says something patently stupid = Whodat?

    Carney: 'I Personally Know 3 Hilary Rosens' That Frequent the WH




    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  2. #2267
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    24,183

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Well.. gee thanks Dave. Your honesty is refreshing. I made my choice some time back but will post your thoughts for others to hear.



    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  3. #2268
    Joined
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    30
    Posts
    2,741

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Colorado further evidence Ron Paul will challenge Romney in Tampa

    TAMPA, April 15, 2012 — The Ron Paul campaign has consistently maintained that it has won far more delegates than is generally reported by the media. The Associated Press projects Romney’s delegate count to be well over 600, more than ten times their projections for Ron Paul. However, Colorado has provided some evidence that the Paul campaign’s demise has been greatly exaggerated.

    Colorado completed its state convention yesterday. Under the headline, “Romney lost Colo. caucuses, gets most delegates,” Real Clear Politics reported the results this way.

    “GOP has chosen 13 Romney delegates and six Santorum delegates. The remaining 17 delegates are unpledged, meaning they are free to choose any Republican candidate for president.”

    That’s technically accurate, but it begs a question from anyone even minimally curious: Who do those 17 unpledged delegates support? Are they undecided, or do they intend to vote for a specific candidate at the Republican National Convention (RNC)?

    According to the Real Clear article, “Many would-be delegates criticized Romney, and some dejected Santorum fans teamed with Ron Paul supporters to push what they called a 'Conservative Unity Slate' to look for a non-Romney presidential candidate.”

    That is also technically accurate, but misleading. Not only did Paul and Santorum supporters “push” the Conservative Unity Slate, they got its delegates elected to go to the RNC.

    Todd King of Lewis, Colorado is one of the elected delegates from that slate. King is a Ron Paul supporter and will vote for Paul for president on the first ballot in Tampa. I asked him how the 17 unpledged delegates break down. This is his statement.

    “13 unpledged delegates, including me, will vote for Ron Paul on the first ballot. One unpledged delegate will vote for Santorum. The remaining three unpledged delegates, also known as the 'delegates at large,' are the state GOP Chairman, the state GOP National Committeman and the National Committeewoman. Those three will likely vote for Romney. They usually vote for the frontrunner so as not to make waves.”

    King said that the Paul delegates ran unpledged in order to win the votes of Santorum supporters who understand that the delegates will vote for Paul at the RNC, but would not be legally bound to do so. If anything changes with the Paul or Santorum campaigns between now and August, both camps would have an opportunity to persuade unpledged delegates to change their minds.

    This paints a much different picture of the real delegate count for Colorado. The final breakdown looks like this:

    Romney – 13

    Paul - 13

    Santorum – 7

    At large – 3 (count these for Romney if he is still the frontrunner in August)

    Remember, this is a state where Santorum won with 40% of the caucus popular vote. Romney came in 2nd with 35% and Ron Paul finished last with 12%. Yet Paul is in a virtual tie for the lead in terms of the actual votes he will get on the first ballot at the RNC.

    There were also 36 alternate delegates elected at Colorado’s convention. These delegates are seated in place of any delegates that cannot make it to the RNC or decide not to go. I spoke with two of them, Bobby Eskenberry and Lloyd Garcia, both from Congressional District 7. They are both pledged to Paul and hope to eventually be seated in Tampa.

    Neither could provide hard numbers, but Garcia believes that almost all of the alternate delegates are Paul supporters. He also believes that if nothing changes regarding Santorum’s campaign, many of his delegates may forego the time and expense of attending the convention, leaving the door open for Paul to win the state when alternates pledged to Paul are seated.

    How many more states are going to turn out like Colorado?

    Santorum won the caucus vote in Missouri by a much wider margin with 55% of the vote. Romney finished second with 25% and Paul was a distant third with 12%. However, early indications are that Paul will win far more delegates at Missouri’s state convention June 1-2. According to Fox News, Missouri’s GOP leadership admits that Paul may get all of the delegates from Missouri.

    The Iowa GOP leadership has previously acknowledged that Paul may win Iowa as well. Iowa holds its state convention on June 16.
    ...Continued on

    http://communities.washingtontimes.c...ll-challenge-/

  4. #2269
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    So, you'd rather throw out the votes of the 11 million people who have voted in the Republican primaries and let the 2,000 delegates at the convention decide the nominee? You'd rather have the few decide rather than the many, just because you disagree with who won?

    Does that seem like a good solution?

    40% of people who voted in Republican primaries voted for Romney. If Ron Paul and his convention supporters pull off some magic trick in Tampa and a guy who only received 10% of the popular vote ends up as the party's nominee, it will be an incredibly sad day in American politics.

    The irony is so hilarious that the Ron Paul crowd who cried and cried about the "GOP establishment" is now basically cheering for a group of 2,000 men to vote to overturn the 40% of American Republicans who voted for Mitt Romney to be their presidential candidate.
    Last edited by Keven; 04-16-2012 at 01:05 AM.

  5. #2270
    Joined
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    30
    Posts
    2,741

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    So, you'd rather throw out the votes of the 11 million people who have voted in the Republican primaries and let the 2,000 delegates at the convention decide the nominee? You'd rather have the few decide rather than the many, just because you disagree with who won?

    Does that seem like a good solution?

    40% of people who voted in Republican primaries voted for Romney. If Ron Paul and his convention supporters pull off some magic trick in Tampa and a guy who only received 10% of the popular vote ends up as the party's nominee, it will be an incredibly sad day in American politics.

    The irony is so hilarious that the Ron Paul crowd who cried and cried about the "GOP establishment" is now basically cheering for a group of 2,000 men to vote to overturn the 40% of American Republicans who voted for Mitt Romney to be their presidential candidate.
    As Ive told you before. The straw polls the media report mean nothing. Also, you act as if there hasn't been rampant reporting of voter fraud. Of course conveniently overlooked by the mainstream media. But you are well aware of how our Republic works.

    What does not seem to be a good solution is nominating someone that cant win. The election hasn't even started yet and Romney steadily has 50+% disapproval ratings. Watching you "go team go" guys willingly march into defeat is mind boggling. Romney is basically a set up candidate. Its like o ya, lets run a 1%er during a time where the nation in general, like it or not. Is not in favor of his ilk. Not to mention, the guy agrees with Obama on just about everything. But lacks all the style. And would also continue the process of stripping out freedoms from us.

    Whats really ironic, is what republicans have become.

  6. #2271
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    As Ive told you before. The straw polls the media report mean nothing.
    In the caucus states, sure. But what about the primary states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Also, you act as if there hasn't been rampant reporting of voter fraud.
    Oh yeah, like Maine. Where everybody said that Romney stole the election, then the recount showed that he won.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    What does not seem to be a good solution is nominating someone that cant win.
    Anybody running against an incumbent president with a 47% approval rating, 9% true unemployment and $4/gal gas can win.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    The election hasn't even started yet and Romney steadily has 50+% disapproval ratings.
    In the latest Gallup poll, Obama vs. Romney has Romney at 45% and Obama at 49% and it's in April.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Watching you "go team go" guys willingly march into defeat is mind boggling.
    And watching you continue to embarrass yourself and support a candidate who only a vast majority of GOP voters agree with is mind boggling.

    Face it, Republicans don't want Ron Paul as their presidential nominee. A majority of them may not want Romney, but 90% of them don't want Ron Paul.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Its like o ya, lets run a 1%er during a time where the nation in general, like it or not. Is not in favor of his ilk.
    Funny, last time I checked Ron Paul's 2012 US House financial disclosure form, he reported about $3 million in assets, mostly in gold investments. Pretty sure that puts him in the Obama/Romney boat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Not to mention, the guy agrees with Obama on just about everything.
    No, he doesn't. That's a complete falsehood. It's a fun thing to say, but it's not true.

    - Romney would grant an ObamaCare waiver for all 50 states and work to repeal it.
    - Romney endorses the Ryan budget.
    - Romney wants tax cuts across the board.
    etc. etc.

    I could go on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    But lacks all the style. And would also continue the process of stripping out freedoms from us.
    Then why did Judge Robert Bork (of "got borked" fame) and Professor Mary An Glendon endorse Romney as being a strict Constitutionalist? Your perception of what Romney is is not inline with reality.

  7. #2272
    Joined
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    30
    Posts
    2,741

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    In the caucus states, sure. But what about the primary states?
    Depends on the state. Pick one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Anybody running against an incumbent president with a 47% approval rating, 9% true unemployment and $4/gal gas can win.
    Amazingly, in most polls. Romney has a larger disapproval rating the Obama. I believe you are mistaken on your assumption.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    In the latest Gallup poll, Obama vs. Romney has Romney at 45% and Obama at 49% and it's in April.
    In a poll released on the 12th by Rasmussen. Only Ron Paul beat Obama in a head to head match up.


    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    And watching you continue to embarrass yourself and support a candidate who only a vast majority of GOP voters agree with is mind boggling.
    I support the only candidate that offers anything different from Obama. Romney is more of the same. What i am embarrassed at is you and the republicans "sheepleness".

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Face it, Republicans don't want Ron Paul as their presidential nominee. A majority of them may not want Romney, but 90% of them don't want Ron Paul.
    You basically acknowledged that Romney can't win. If a majority of Republicans do not want him. Who is going to vote for him?


    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Funny, last time I checked Ron Paul's 2012 US House financial disclosure form, he reported about $3 million in assets, mostly in gold investments. Pretty sure that puts him in the Obama/Romney boat.
    If everyone has taken his advice and invested in gold, we would all be much better off. Not to mention, he acquired wealth by bringing life into this world. And making the same investments he advised others to make.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    No, he doesn't. That's a complete falsehood. It's a fun thing to say, but it's not true.

    - Romney would grant an ObamaCare waiver for all 50 states and work to repeal it.
    - Romney endorses the Ryan budget.
    - Romney wants tax cuts across the board.
    etc. etc.

    I could go on.
    Please do go on, because what you said is meaningless is the grand scheme of things. The dollar will continue to plummet and your freedoms will continue to wither.


    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Then why did Judge Robert Bork (of "got borked" fame) and Professor Mary An Glendon endorse Romney as being a strict Constitutionalist? Your perception of what Romney is is not inline with reality.
    Are you kidding me. Support of the Patriot act, support of the NDAA, support of sopa and pipa and staunchly against gun rights, just to name a few. I could care less what people tell me to think. I look at the facts.

  8. #2273
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Depends on the state. Pick one.
    Any of them. You're living in fantasy land if you think Paul will win anything at Tampa.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    In a poll released on the 12th by Rasmussen. Only Ron Paul beat Obama in a head to head match up.
    That's the exception that proves the rule. In RCP's poll aggregate, Obama is leading Paul by 7 points.

    Source

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    If everyone has taken his advice and invested in gold, we would all be much better off. Not to mention, he acquired wealth by bringing life into this world. And making the same investments he advised others to make.
    That's all fine and good but you didn't respond to my comment.

    Everybody who ran in the Presidential race was a 1%er. Even Rick Santorum and his sob story about growing up poor has an estimated net worth in excess of $1 million.

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Please do go on, because what you said is meaningless is the grand scheme of things. The dollar will continue to plummet and your freedoms will continue to wither.
    What has Mitt Romney said or done that makes you think he would continue the Obama/Bernanke "loose money" strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Invictus View Post
    Are you kidding me. Support of the Patriot act, support of the NDAA, support of sopa and pipa and staunchly against gun rights, just to name a few. I could care less what people tell me to think. I look at the facts.
    Well, now you're making stuff up again. Romney came out against SOPA/PIPA, saying it was a violation of free speech and that it was needless government regulation. Rick Santorum was the only GOP candidate who was for SOPA.

    I guess it's easy for you to look at the facts when you just invent your own reality.

  9. #2274
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Interesting piece from the New York Times. Normally, I disagree with the Times, but Bill Keller is spot on with this one:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/op...=1&ref=opinion

    Long, but worth the read. Very honest assessment of the political middle, Obama and Romney.

    THE other day Rick Santorum, with rigor mortis setting into his campaign, stepped up to a microphone in Mars, Pa. (Yes, really.) His complaint was a familiar one: For too long the Republican “aristocracy” has shoved moderate nominees down the throats of the voters. “There’s one person,” he declared, referring to Ronald Reagan, “who understood we don’t win by moving to the middle. We win by getting people in the middle to move to us.”

    Clearly that strategy didn’t work for Santorum. He stuck to his rightist fundamentalism, he was true to who he is, and the Republican middle remained unmoved. Yet many activists in both parties cling, like Santorum, to the hope that they can win from a position of impassioned orthodoxy. And like Santorum, they are usually wrong. Even Reagan moved to the middle from time to time.

    Centrism is easily mocked and not much fun to defend. Many on the left who find Santorum’s politics repellent would agree with him that moving to the middle is intellectually uninspiring and morally unsatisfying. Even if you are not someone who thrills to the trumpets of moral clarity or regards “uncompromising” as the highest praise, you can see where they’re coming from. The politics of the center — including the professional centrists and trans-partisans of groups like Third Way and Americans Elect — do not quicken the pulse. White bread, elevator music, No Labels, meh.

    The middle matters, though, even if in these hyperpolarized times it doesn’t get much respect. It has been a truism of modern politics, at least since “The Real Majority” was published in 1970, that elections are usually decided by voters who are not wedded to either party, who don’t stay in any ideological lane. These voters are thought to constitute roughly 15 percent of the electorate, give or take a few points. Add enough of them to your loyal base, and victory is yours.

    We are now embarked on a race between two candidates who have, at critical points in their careers, demonstrated an ability to win by building on the middle. Which of them can do it again? Who are these voters? And what do they want?

    Be warned: political science is an inexact science, if not an outright oxymoron. “We’re trying to make this into ‘Moneyball,’ ” said John Sides of George Washington University, who regards most theories about the middle with suspicion. “It’s really still a lot of scouts telling you what’s in their gut.”

    But here are some generalities that pass my own gut check.

    The middle is not the home of bland, split-the-difference politics, or a cult that worships bipartisan process for its own sake. Swing voters have views; they are just not views that all come from any one party’s menu. Researchers at Third Way, a Clintonian think tank, have assembled a pretty plausible composite profile of these up-for-grabs voters.

    Swing voters tend to be fiscal conservatives, meaning they are profoundly worried about deficits and debt.

    They are mostly economic moderates, meaning they are free-marketers but expect government to help provide the physical and intellectual infrastructure that creates opportunity.

    They are aspirational — that is, they have nothing against the rich — but they don’t oppose tax increases.

    They want the country well protected, but not throwing its weight around in the world.

    They tend to be fairly progressive on social issues; they think, for example, that abortion should be discouraged but not prohibited.

    Bruce Gyory, who studies voting trends at the State University of New York at Albany, says the swing voters are predominantly white and suburban, have at least some college, and have decent incomes. In this time of precarious jobs, devalued homes and shriveled retirement savings, they are more anxious than angry, more interested in fixing the future than in affixing blame for the past.

    Swing voters, I think, are looking not for a checklist of promises but for a type of leader — a problem-solver, a competent steward, someone who understands them and has a convincing optimism. We don’t know exactly how they identify that candidate, but it is some mix of past performance (especially for the incumbent), campaign messaging and chemistry.

    Both Mitt Romney and President Obama have some legitimate claim on these voters. They are analytical, pragmatic, upbeat men who won elections by promising to transcend dogma and get things working again. The middle is probably more ideologically attuned to Romney — at least the old Romney — but finds Obama more likable, especially after Romney’s primary-season impersonation of Lurch from “The Addams Family.”

    For now, the playing field is tilting Obama’s way. Voter worry — as measured by the standard poll question about whether the country is on the right track — has been diminishing in recent months as the economy continues its slow convalescence. But that is a tenuous advantage. In February my colleague Nate Silver crunched data from the last 16 presidential elections and calculated that if monthly job growth fell below 150,000, Obama could become an underdog. In March that number was 120,000. Uh-oh.

    It is always tempting to focus on the easier pickings of the base rather than woo the skeptical, show-me middle. But if this race tightens, as elections tend to do, neither candidate should plan on living by his base alone.

    Romney’s obvious dilemma is that he has been herded by his right-wing rivals into positions many in the middle would find alienating. On the economy, he played into the caricature of himself as heartless and out of touch. On foreign policy, he has all but made Bibi Netanyahu his running mate; the middle is not keen on new foreign adventures. He allowed the gender gap to grow into a gulf by assailing Planned Parenthood and refusing to stand up with any conviction to the crude misogyny of Rush Limbaugh. The size of the gap is a result of women swing-voters being repelled by Republican attitudes, and so far his attempts to win them back have been inept at best.

    My hunch is that Romney will manage to shake off most of his extremist accouterments, because they never seemed to fit him. It is true that if elected, as I have written before, Romney would be obliged to tithe generously to the right, by choosing Supreme Court nominees of the Scalia/Thomas persuasion, for example, and by populating regulatory agencies with polluters and plunderers. But those concerns tend not to alter election outcomes. Even with pro-Obama super PACs painting him as a mean-spirited zealot, Romney should be able to recapture the old campaign aura of a moderate Mr. Fixit. He will certainly try. On entitlements and immigration, as Thomas B. Edsall has said, Romney has already incrementally adjusted course toward the middle.

    In the Democratic Party, a battle for Obama’s teleprompter is now under way between the moderates and the more orthodox left. The president sometimes, as in his last two State of the Union addresses, plays the even-keel, presidential pragmatist, sounding themes of balance and opportunity. Then sometimes lately he sounds more as if he’s trying out for the role of Robin Hood.

    The problem isn’t that the Buffett Rule is necessarily a bad idea. It isn’t that “social Darwinism” is a slander on Republicans. (Heck, it may be the only Darwinism Romney believes in.) The problem is that when Obama thrusts these populist themes to the center of his narrative, he sounds a little desperate. The candidate who ran on hope — promising to transcend bickering and get things done — is in danger of sounding like the candidate of partisan insurgency. Just as Romney was unconvincing as a right-wing scourge, Obama, a man lofty in his visions but realistic in his governance, feels inauthentic playing a plutocrat-bashing firebrand. The role the middle really wants him to play, I think, is president.

  10. #2275
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,499

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    I wasn't aware that the Catholic League was an arm of the Republican Party.
    Well neither is Rush Limbaugh...but for whatever reason folks on your side of the aisle seem to care what he has to say. The RNC cares so much about the Catholic league's voice that they felt it necessary to come and and refute their statements. But they are probably "just friends" too right? I'm sure the catholic league has no influence at all

  11. #2276
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    I'm sure the catholic league has no influence at all
    Probably not on Mitt Romney.

  12. #2277
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    17,049

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    Well neither is Rush Limbaugh...but for whatever reason folks on your side of the aisle seem to care what he has to say. The RNC cares so much about the Catholic league's voice that they felt it necessary to come and and refute their statements. But they are probably "just friends" too right? I'm sure the catholic league has no influence at all
    Using your logic of the RNC coming out against the words of the guy at the Catholic League... what does that say about Obambi, Axelroady, Whatsername Shultzy, etc., coming out with guns blazing against what the "just friend" said about Romney's wife's work history?

    You're arguing in circles against your own words.

    Its funny when the claim to "a leader of the party" gets watered down to "some influence". Yeah, I've got me some influence too. Not much, but hey, in my dreams I can be a party leader. I've got my one vote (and maybe that dead uncle's).

  13. #2278
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    17,049

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    Speakin' of dogs, how come we don't see Obambi with his dog anymore? Didn't he buy some uber-rare show dog and parade it about for awhile?

    No more.

    Maybe the pooch will be back for the re-election campaign.
    The dog's back!!!

    Its like clockwork.

    I won't comment on how Bo looks like he's approaching a stranger...

  14. #2279
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,499

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    The dog's back!!!

    Its like clockwork.

    I won't comment on how Bo looks like he's approaching a stranger...
    Hmmm....maybe in response to this?

    I feel my IQ level drop a little every time I read something this woman says.

    Ann Romney defends husband against criticism over placing dog in car-top carrier

    The dog loved it. They wouldn't do it again because of all of the attention it has been getting. You've gotta be kidding me.

    I'm starting to believe my own ••••••••. I've been saying for a long time that I don't think the repubs really want to win this election. They've essentially ignored the tea party this election cycle....and the tea party was the main reason they got the house back in 2010. They've now successfully alienated women and pet lovers. Minorities were never going to vote for him in the first place. What a farce.

  15. #2280
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,499

    Re: The 2012 Election Thread

    Funnily enough this morning I read something that Mitt Romney said that is actually the truth!!!

    "Fox is watched by the true believers," Mr. Romney said.
    Can't argue with that logic.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...860756628.html

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •