AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Mitt Romney for President
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mitt Romney for President - Page 16

post #601 of 693
2/29/12 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Republicans don't have the opponent they want, so they have been running against an opponent that does not exist. This isn't just about wedge issues. This is an absolute false equivalence if you claim both sides are the same on this.

Bush had higher marks than Kerry, but the Democrats tried to paint Bush as being the less intelligent of the two. The first Bush wasn't anywhere close to being as old and out of it as he was portrayed by Clinton's team. Both sides try to run against the perceived weaknesses of the other candidates. And they often exaggerate those weaknesses.

This is how election campaigns are done. To pretend otherwise is silly.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #602 of 693
2/29/12 at 3:48pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Mitt Romney has long been the pick of the Republican establishment, and they will do whatever it takes to ensure he receives the nomination.

I think it depends on what you mean by "Republican establishment." I also think you're overestimating their power.

Quote:


I would be surprised if that were really the case. Ron Paul is no fool and has always known his chances were slim. His message, however, has gained much more traction this time around than in 2008 because it's becoming more apparent that he has been right all along.

But I seriously doubt he would accept a role in another Administration. It wouldn't help get his message out any more effectively. I could be wrong, but in 2008 he endorsed a third party candidate and I think he'll do something similar this time.

Furthermore, when he is outright asked if he has a deal with the Romney Campaign and he says "no, never" I believe him. http://youtu.be/8lExWb0i4Fw

Then what explains the behavior of the two candidates? Something has to be up. Paul has gone after Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Bachman....everyone. But not Romney. I don't get it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Santorum damaged himself with the snob comment, trying too hard to grab blue collar workers.

Romney will probably be the pick. And will then replay the McCain loss at the polls.

Romney is much different McCain, and 2012 is much different than 2008.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Republicans don't have the opponent they want, so they have been running against an opponent that does not exist. This isn't just about wedge issues. This is an absolute false equivalence if you claim both sides are the same on this.

I realize this is your latest line of attack. The fact is the GOP doesn't need any help in defining Obama. He's doing it all by himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Bush had higher marks than Kerry, but the Democrats tried to paint Bush as being the less intelligent of the two. The first Bush wasn't anywhere close to being as old and out of it as he was portrayed by Clinton's team. Both sides try to run against the perceived weaknesses of the other candidates. And they often exaggerate those weaknesses.

This is how election campaigns are done. To pretend otherwise is silly.

Exactly. This is why I think Gingrich's complaints about negative advertising really came off as whining. Welcome to politics. Each side tries to define the other. Shocker.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #603 of 693
2/29/12 at 4:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I think it depends on what you mean by "Republican establishment."

Those in power.

Quote:
I also think you're overestimating their power.

And I think you're underestimating it.

Quote:
Then what explains the behavior of the two candidates? Something has to be up. Paul has gone after Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Bachman....everyone. But not Romney. I don't get it.

It's amazing how short everyone's memory is on this issue. Remember this? http://youtu.be/jSVi45vfA6o

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #604 of 693
3/1/12 at 12:45pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Those in power.

Got it. Yes, I agree he's their choice. But he's not favored by the conservative media, such as Levin, Hannity and Limbaugh.

Quote:


And I think you're underestimating it.

I don't know. What can they do, really? It still comes down to votes..at least at this stage.

Quote:

It's amazing how short everyone's memory is on this issue. Remember this? http://youtu.be/jSVi45vfA6o

Can't see the video right now. I'll try and get back to it later.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #605 of 693
3/5/12 at 11:37am
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Romney loves him some Affordable Care Act. Funny how in 2009 he advocated specifically for the healthcare reforms that came to pass. Now his own idea he touted several times publicly is a threat to America? Quick, someone check to see if Romney is mentally unstable! Maybe they replaced him with a robot clone! That would explain why the "trees are the right height."

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #606 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:26pm
BR, you might have already posted this, so my apologies if it's old news.

"The discovery of a 2009 USA Today op-ed by former Gov. Mitt Romney, in which he urged President Barack Obama to adopt a mandated approach to purchasing health insurance as part of national reform, has generated enormous buzz leading up to Super Tuesday.
Romney has been arguing for several years now that he never supported the idea of compulsory health insurance on a national level. What Buzzfeed's Andrew Kaczynski unearthed was evidence of clear philosophical comfort both with federal penalties for free riders, and with national -- not state-by-state -- health care legislation."
~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1321818.html

It's a mobile link (was), I'll post the full site once I'm in with my carry out. Someone needs to make Miserable Mitt a bleeding Carry Out.

He is the best of the Repubs ( except where Ron Paul nails him on some issues) , he's no Teapub, but God, is he a blatant phoney liar.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #607 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:35pm
Oh dear God. The country might elect a flip-flopping liar to the Oval office.

Alert the press. Oh wait, they know this...it's just that they only make a big deal about it when there's an R next the person's name.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #608 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Oh dear God. The country might elect a flip-flopping liar to the Oval office.

Alert the press. Oh wait, they know this...it's just that they only make a big deal about it when there's an R next the person's name.



Tell me how Ron Paul will be as his VP? The mother of all flip floppers me thinks.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #609 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Tell me how Ron Paul will be as his VP?

I have no idea. I have no idea whether that's even a real possibility or not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The mother of all flip floppers me thinks.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #610 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:50pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Oh dear God. The country might elect a flip-flopping liar to the Oval office.

Alert the press. Oh wait, they know this...it's just that they only make a big deal about it when there's an R next the person's name.


I have no issue with someone changing a position--I just want a rationale behind the change of heart. Romney has some explaining to do here. You can't see that?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #611 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I have no issue with someone changing a position--I just want a rationale behind the change of heart. Romney has some explaining to do here. You can't see that?

I don't really care what Romney says or does. Frankly, I don't expect almost anything to change from this country's current (bad) trajectory with him in office (or Obama in office). I don't see him as much different than Obama. He can "explain" anything he wants to, I can't say that I'd have any reason to believe him any more than I trust about anything that comes out of Obama's mouth.

In my own view the best (most realistic) hope this country has is a Republican-controlled Congress (House and Senate)...without veto-proof majority and Obama as President (as annoying as it will be to continue to hear his arrogant and smug pontifications for four more years.)

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #612 of 693
3/5/12 at 2:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I have no idea. I have no idea whether that's even a real possibility or not.






Of course it's a real possibility. Ron Paul will accrue seats , notably in the south and Mitt might need some. Ron could be offered a senior post or VP, he could accept in order to further his goals and in the process support Romneys socialist agenda. Sure Romneys capitalist, but these are hardcore socialist laws. Paul knows that.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #613 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:00pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
MJ, you bring up flip flopping and roll your eyes at me. You then pretty much ignore my position on changing positions to instead launch into an unrelated post about your ideal election results. Do I get to roll my eyes at you in return?

SDW, you started this thread and clearly support the alien cyborg clone of Mitt Romney. How do you explain his 2009 comments clearly in favor of the Affordable Care Act?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #614 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Of course it's a real possibility.

OK.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Ron could be offered a senior post or VP, he could accept in order to further his goals and in the process support Romneys socialist agenda. Sure Romneys capitalist, but these are hardcore socialist laws. Paul knows that.

He does of course. His acceptance would suggest he sees an opportunity to shape administration policy away from this socialism + corporatism from the inside.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #615 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You then pretty much ignore my position on changing positions

What do you want me to say about your position on changing positions?


Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Do I get to roll my eyes at you in return?

Since when do you need my permission to do anything?


Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

How do you explain his 2009 comments clearly in favor of the Affordable Care Act?

I haven't read them plus I don't speak for Mitt Romney so I can't explain them any more than I can explain Obama's flip-flops and lies. They are politicians? They'll do and say anything to get elected? They're evil? They have no real values except getting elected? I don't know.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #616 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:08pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Rolling one's eyes at someone is very disrespectful. And you say I'm not civil?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #617 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Rolling one's eyes at someone is very disrespectful.

Frankly, you are undeserving of any of my respect.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

And you say I'm not civil?

Yes, I do. Not always...but often enough.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #618 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

OK.




He does of course. His acceptance would suggest he sees an opportunity to shape administration policy away from this socialism + corporatism from the inside.

Agreed, but that's nonetheless going to entail some serious flip flopping that goes against what Paul has maintained for decades.

Ron Paul will gain a serious wad of delegates in the South. Romney may have to do a deal with him to win the nomination, and even if he doesn't, in order to beat Obama, Ron Paul will have to be offered something substantial just to draw in people to actually go out and vote for Romney, rather than sit in, disenfranchisidely. Ron Paul could well be Romneys golden key to the White House. Take a look at how Ron Paul fairs in a head to head against Obama. He consistently is Obama's main rival.



"How about this for a poll shocker: While everybody in US politics has been preoccupied with the Michigan primary, Ron Paul has sneaked up on President Obama and for the first time leads the incumbent in a head-to-head survey.


That’s right, leads – as in, ahead of, out front, winning, and so forth. According to a Rasmussen Reports poll released Tuesday, at the moment Representative Paul bests Mr. Obama in a head-to-head matchup by 43 to 41 percent."
~ http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...a-head-to-head

I think Romney beats Obama 45-43 or something, but still, Ron Paul could make all the difference for Romney.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #619 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:12pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Frankly, you are undeserving of any of my respect.

So you admit to being disrespectful?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #620 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Agreed, but that's nonetheless going to entail some serious flip flopping that goes against what Paul has maintained for decades.

Not sure I agree. But, I say we cross that bridge when we come to it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Ron Paul will gain a serious wad of delegates in the South. Romney may have to do a deal with him to win the nomination, and even if he doesn't, in order to beat Obama, Ron Paul will have to be offered something substantial just to draw in people to actually go out and vote for Romney

And that offer may entail policy and position changes on Romney's part.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #621 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Not sure I agree. But, I say we cross that bridge when we come to it.




And that offer may entail policy and position changes on Romney's part.

Any political deals of this nature will ultimately corrupt, in Pauls fans eyes, what has drawn them to him, which is admiration for unwavering values and votes in support of liberty and the US constitution. I can see Paul putting his case well in a deal, I can't see him living up to it though. Maybe he'd stay the course till Romneys elected and then back off, i.e. quit whilst he's ahead?

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #622 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Any political deals of this nature will ultimately corrupt, in Pauls fans eyes, what has drawn them to him, which is admiration for unwavering values and votes in support of liberty and the US constitution.

Seems a bit black-and-white. If such a hypothetical deal does entail something that protects or increases liberty and better adherence tot the US constitution, not sure it would be viewed as a negative by reasonable folks.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #623 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Seems a bit black-and-white. If such a hypothetical deal does entail something that protects or increases liberty and better adherence tot the US constitution, not sure it would be viewed as a negative by reasonable folks.

That's the positive, the negative is that Paul is seen as effectively propping up socialist laws.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #624 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

That's the positive, the negative is that Paul is seen as effectively propping up socialist laws.

Yes. I it could possibly be seen that way. Of course this is entirely hypothetical and we don't even have a specific example of any kind of deal to judge.

At this point it's the angels on a head of a pin debate.

Let's discuss this again if it actually happens and we have some real details to work with.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #625 of 693
3/5/12 at 3:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Yes. I it could possibly be seen that way. Of course this is entirely hypothetical and we don't even have a specific example of any kind of deal to judge.

At this point it's the angels on a head of a pin debate.

Let's discuss this again if it actually happens and we have some real details to work with.

Sure.

It goes to the heart of how clever Ron Paul is that we are even discussing this. he has appeal to common sense people where he's driven by his belief in the US constitution, rather than an all too familiar breach of said constition. That makes him an outsider (as we have seen in the debates- the little they dared to air) but it also ironically makes him a safe and substantially positive bet, especially for Romney who's very much viewed as RINO.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #626 of 693
3/6/12 at 12:52pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Romney loves him some Affordable Care Act. Funny how in 2009 he advocated specifically for the healthcare reforms that came to pass. Now his own idea he touted several times publicly is a threat to America? Quick, someone check to see if Romney is mentally unstable! Maybe they replaced him with a robot clone! That would explain why the "trees are the right height."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

BR, you might have already posted this, so my apologies if it's old news.

"The discovery of a 2009 USA Today op-ed by former Gov. Mitt Romney, in which he urged President Barack Obama to adopt a mandated approach to purchasing health insurance as part of national reform, has generated enormous buzz leading up to Super Tuesday.
Romney has been arguing for several years now that he never supported the idea of compulsory health insurance on a national level. What Buzzfeed's Andrew Kaczynski unearthed was evidence of clear philosophical comfort both with federal penalties for free riders, and with national -- not state-by-state -- health care legislation."
~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1321818.html

It's a mobile link (was), I'll post the full site once I'm in with my carry out. Someone needs to make Miserable Mitt a bleeding Carry Out.

He is the best of the Repubs ( except where Ron Paul nails him on some issues) , he's no Teapub, but God, is he a blatant phoney liar.


This is nonsense. Romney does not support a federal mandate and has not supported a federal mandate in the past. The above quotes are filled with weaselly references such as "Romney appeared to support" a federal mandate. It's also got out-of-context references, references to his political opponents attacking him and the like. Romney supports a state's right to impose mandates as they did in Mass. He has never supported a federal mandate, no matter what Rick Santorum and the Huggington Post tell you.

But beyond all that, this is a all a distraction: Romneycare is NOT the same as Obamacare. It shares some similarities, but has many differences. The bottom line is that regardless, Romney wants to repeal Obamacare entirely. You'll have a choice between a guy that wants to repeal it, and a guy who wants to keep it. That's all that matters.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #627 of 693
3/7/12 at 8:26am
Thread Starter 
Oh, look: MSM pans Romney's big night.

Romney won 6/10 contests, including the caucus state of Alaska. His margin of victory in his ACTUAL home state was nearly 50%. He came from behind to upset Santorum in Ohio, who had a 15 point lead two weeks ago. He won twice as delegates, and as twice as many so far. He won Vermont, and got 60% of the vote in Virginia.

And yet the headlines are all similar. They tell of a bruising battle, a weakened Romney, Republicans not wanting their candidates, a fractured GOP, etc. Typical.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #628 of 693
3/7/12 at 8:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And yet the headlines are all similar. They tell of a bruising battle, a weakened Romney, Republicans not wanting their candidates, a fractured GOP, etc. Typical.

I'm no Romney supoporter...but yeah this is pretty typical. The media has been doing its level best to make this look a certain way. They are doing their part for Obama's campaign. That much is obvious. CNN, I think, is probably the worst...a bunch of Democrats telling Republicans what they should do, think and vote for in selecting their candidate.

The overall media (Fox included) ignoring Ron Paul for so long was another example.

It seems the MSM wants to pick the Republican nominee as well as the Democratic nominee.

It's rather amusingly obvious actually.

Thank God for the internet...a new way for information to be shared and consumed and end run around the information gatekeepers.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #629 of 693
3/7/12 at 9:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Oh, look: MSM pans Romney's big night.

Romney won 6/10 contests, including the caucus state of Alaska. His margin of victory in his ACTUAL home state was nearly 50%. He came from behind to upset Santorum in Ohio, who had a 15 point lead two weeks ago. He won twice as delegates, and as twice as many so far. He won Vermont, and got 60% of the vote in Virginia.

And yet the headlines are all similar. They tell of a bruising battle, a weakened Romney, Republicans not wanting their candidates, a fractured GOP, etc. Typical.

Let's all be very quiet about the media bias. As always, Democrats and liberals bring about their own downfall with their inability to see their own biases. They craft all these memes and nonsense and wonder why the public just tunes them out. They end up going to alternative sources of news just to try to get some real news. I'm sure CNN is on day 3 of Rush Limbaugh- SlutGate and they'll continue to wonder why their ratings are in the toilet. All this nonsense is just to fill their air time. The majority of people aren't political wonks, won't tune into the race until after Labor Day and they'll call up the people who they chat politics with, bounce a few ideas around and go cast their votes. Many won't even inform themselves with anything more than looking at their pocketbook.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I'm no Romney supoporter...but yeah this is pretty typical. The media has been doing its level best to make this look a certain way. They are doing their part for Obama's campaign. That much is obvious. CNN, I think, is probably the worst...a bunch of Democrats telling Republicans what they should do, think and vote for in selecting their candidate.

The overall media (Fox included) ignoring Ron Paul for so long was another example.

It seems the MSM wants to pick the Republican nominee as well as the Democratic nominee.

It's rather amusingly obvious actually.

Thank God for the internet...a new way for information to be shared and consumed and end run around the information gatekeepers.

While my candidate of choice clearly doesn't appear to be heading toward the nomination, I do have to say as was noted this morning on Drudge, Paul hasn't won a single state yet. We both understand that the media centers are where the states are bluest and where big money can buy the idiot box. However even where the states are small, where it is a caucus, and where retail politics can win the day, Paul hasn't won even once. I honestly thought Santorum would be gone by now but it appears a lot of Southerners would rather vote for him based off the social issues. If this were a race being covered by an actual media, they would note the religious diversity and how it is historic. Both Gingrich and Santorum are Catholic and a real story that should be covered is how the Democrats have thrown Catholics out of their party. Given the future demography of the United States, that could have major repurcussions.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #630 of 693
3/8/12 at 3:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Bush had higher marks than Kerry, but the Democrats tried to paint Bush as being the less intelligent of the two. The first Bush wasn't anywhere close to being as old and out of it as he was portrayed by Clinton's team. Both sides try to run against the perceived weaknesses of the other candidates. And they often exaggerate those weaknesses.

This is how election campaigns are done. To pretend otherwise is silly.

This is how it works 8 years Republican 8 years Democrat.Bush was push over for Cheney and he stood for zero with his convictions when he was president.
Reply
Reply
post #631 of 693
3/8/12 at 3:43pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

This is how it works 8 years Republican 8 years Democrat.

You're like child version of jimmac. This is his theory.

[quote]Bush was push over for Cheney [quote]

Demonstrate that.

Quote:
and he stood for zero with his convictions when he was president.

That's just absurdly stupid. The last problem in the world he had was conviction.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #632 of 693
3/8/12 at 4:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

This is nonsense. Romney does not support a federal mandate and has not supported a federal mandate in the past. The above quotes are filled with weaselly references such as "Romney appeared to support" a federal mandate. It's also got out-of-context references, references to his political opponents attacking him and the like. Romney supports a state's right to impose mandates as they did in Mass. He has never supported a federal mandate, no matter what Rick Santorum and the Huggington Post tell you.

But beyond all that, this is a all a distraction: Romneycare is NOT the same as Obamacare. It shares some similarities, but has many differences. The bottom line is that regardless, Romney wants to repeal Obamacare entirely. You'll have a choice between a guy that wants to repeal it, and a guy who wants to keep it. That's all that matters.


I think Romney's a pretty independent guy once he's in office. If he believed that mandates made a better state he'd mandate it at the state level. If he was president he would (have) imposed it at the federal level. Do you really believe Romneys all about a states right to choose?

Here's Romney's independent spirit-

"(CNSNews.com) - In a presentation about his health-care reform plan delivered at the Heritage Foundation on Jan. 6, 2006, then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said that for his plan to work it would be necessary to first subsidize health insurance for a segment of the population not already receiving government health-care subsidies and then mandate that everyone in the state buy health insurance.

To do otherwise, Romney said, “would be crazy.”
~ http://cnsnews.com/news/article/romn...e-then-mandate

It's pretty obvious that prior to a black president, Romney one way or the other would have achieved mandates at the Federal level.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #633 of 693
3/9/12 at 6:41am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I think Romney's a pretty independent guy once he's in office. If he believed that mandates made a better state he'd mandate it at the state level. If he was president he would (have) imposed it at the federal level. Do you really believe Romneys all about a states right to choose?

He's had that position for years, so yes.

Quote:

Here's Romney's independent spirit-

"(CNSNews.com) - In a presentation about his health-care reform plan delivered at the Heritage Foundation on Jan. 6, 2006, then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said that for his plan to work it would be necessary to first subsidize health insurance for a segment of the population not already receiving government health-care subsidies and then mandate that everyone in the state buy health insurance.

To do otherwise, Romney said, would be crazy.
~ http://cnsnews.com/news/article/romn...e-then-mandate

It's pretty obvious that prior to a black president, Romney one way or the other would have achieved mandates at the Federal level.

Wait..so you're saying his position is racially motivated? And, to whom is this obvious? I've never seen Romney support a federal mandate at any time. I've seen interviews and statements that people try to twist to mean that he did, but he's specifically repudiated that notion dozens of times. The problem he has is that a good number of conservatives are insisting on ideological purity instead of picking a great leader. This is a mistake, IMO.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #634 of 693
3/9/12 at 6:45am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I'm no Romney supoporter...but yeah this is pretty typical. The media has been doing its level best to make this look a certain way. They are doing their part for Obama's campaign. That much is obvious. CNN, I think, is probably the worst...a bunch of Democrats telling Republicans what they should do, think and vote for in selecting their candidate.

The overall media (Fox included) ignoring Ron Paul for so long was another example.

It seems the MSM wants to pick the Republican nominee as well as the Democratic nominee.

It's rather amusingly obvious actually.

Thank God for the internet...a new way for information to be shared and consumed and end run around the information gatekeepers.

Agreed. You know my feeling on Paul, but he's been ignored. I do wonder about the issue trump raises, though. It can't all be the media when it comes to enthusiasm for Paul not translating into votes. My feeling is that it's just the demographic. Young people are always "supposed" to decide elections, but they never do. They simply don't vote like older people do. They're excellent at attending rallies, however.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #635 of 693
3/16/12 at 6:21am
Thread Starter 
Well...the media (including FNC) are at it again. The headlines from Tuesday's primaries were:

1) Santorum's sweep
2) Romney can't close the deal
3) Gingrich is on the ropes

Meanwhile, everyone seems to ignore one blatantly obvious fact: Romney won more delegates that Rick Santorum did. He won Hawaii and enough proportional delegates to overcome close third place finishes in the South. Massachusetts Mitt Romney came within a few thousand votes of first place...in Alabama and Mississippi. Yes, he's in real trouble folks.

Then there is the Gingrich-driven "we're going tot he convention" line. Not going to happen. Dick Morris analyzed this the other day. The math shows that even with some unexpected setbacks to come, Romney will very likely amass enough delegates by June 6th to get the nomination. Moreover, Santorum may not get many delegates even if he wins his home state. He's also ineligible in some large sections of Illinois.

More media horse race garbage. They'd schedule 14 more debates if the candidates agreed.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #636 of 693
3/19/12 at 11:41am
Thread Starter 
Saw this on Drudge this morning. Hilarious. Bye, Rick!

Santorum endorses Romney.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #637 of 693
3/23/12 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Saw this on Drudge this morning. Hilarious. Bye, Rick!

Santorum endorses Romney.

Oh yeah back in 08'.

You know what I find funny about these guys? One promises to give us a Moon Base and $2.50 a gal. gas. The next has managed to alienate just about every woman in the U.S. And the next is kind like a used car salesman or a game show host that's really out of touch with the average person. I mean he's not concerned with the poor and has even said so!

I wouldn't trust any of them.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #638 of 693
3/24/12 at 4:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh yeah back in 08'.

You know what I find funny about these guys? One promises to give us a Moon Base and $2.50 a gal. gas. The next has managed to alienate just about every woman in the U.S. And the next is kind like a used car salesman or a game show host that's really out of touch with the average person. I mean he's not concerned with the poor and has even said so!

I wouldn't trust any of them.

I could not put it any better myself. they all stink! Romney is a piece of meat with no taste and no real feelings.
Reply
Reply
post #639 of 693
3/24/12 at 5:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I could not put it any better myself. they all stink! Romney is a piece of meat with no taste and no real feelings.


You certainly add some colour to this forum.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #640 of 693
3/24/12 at 6:38am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh yeah back in 08'.

That absolutely does not matter. It shows how Santorum's attacks on Romney's credentials are intellectually dishonest. There really isn't a way to defend this jimmac.

Quote:

You know what I find funny about these guys? One promises to give us a Moon Base

He never "promised" that.

Quote:
and $2.50 a gal. gas.

So? this is entirely possible with the right policies. The price was below $2.50 when Obama took office.

Quote:
The next has managed to alienate just about every woman in the U.S.

I think that's an exaggeration, but yeah...he's pretty nuts on social issues.

Quote:
And the next is kind like a used car salesman or a game show host that's really out of touch with the average person. I mean he's not concerned with the poor and has even said so!

Romney looks nothing like a used car salesman. And the "out of touch" line is one you've tried before. You have nothing to base it upon other than the fact he has money. The "not concerned about the poor" is out of context, you know it.

Quote:

I wouldn't trust any of them.

You mean you wouldn't trust any of them over Obama? Tell me...what has Obama done to earn your trust? He's broken nearly every promise he made. Shall I list them for you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I could not put it any better myself. they all stink! Romney is a piece of meat with no taste and no real feelings.

I'm with Hands...you're colorful if nothing else.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Mitt Romney for President