2012 U.S. Elections - Page 5

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvfox 

If Romney wins we are all in trouble especially the Middle Class and Poor and Seniors.He is an elitist and has no warmth or compassion for anyone except the rich and corporations.He is a double talker and a flip flopper.Poor choice for the GOP Party to have him run in 2012.
 

The poor and middle class need a strong economy, which is what Romney is focused on and will be focused on.  Your comment on him lacking compassion and warmth is unsupported and subjective.  Also, "GOP" stands for "Grand Old Party," so "GOP Party" is redundant.  

Obama thinks regular use of executive orders is ok...now:

I'm sure many of his supporters agree. Because this time it's different. Obama is justified in using executive orders.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

Obama thinks regular use of executive orders is ok...now:

 

 

I'm sure many of his supporters agree. Because this time it's different. Obama is justified in using executive orders.

Whether he is or not is immaterial.  It's all political crap.  He wants to run against a "do nothing Congress."   That's his only hope of winning reelection.  

I hope so.  I'd rather see an Obama-Paul debate than an Obama-Romney one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

I hope so.  I'd rather see an Obama-Paul debate than an Obama-Romney one.

Paul has many good ideas and is a man of principle, but I don't see him being a great debater.   

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 

Paul has many good ideas and is a man of principle, but I don't see him being a great debater.

I actually have not seen much of Ron Paul. A little, not a lot. I've read a fair amount of his writings. He definitely does better in writing from what I've seen.

Some folks are like that. They can make their case better in writing than in a live verbal debate.

Some folks are just very eloquent at reading off a reflective piece of glass but are otherwise apparently quite dumb.

Furthermore, in this superficial age of visuals. Paul stands no chance against the bare-chested Obama striding strongly on the beach. It's sad, but a reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

 

I actually have not seen much of Ron Paul. A little, not a lot. I've read a fair amount of his writings. He definitely does better in writing from what I've seen.

 

Some folks are like that. They can make their case better in writing than in a live verbal debate.

 

Some folks are just very eloquent at reading off a reflective piece of glass but are otherwise apparently quite dumb.

 

Furthermore, in this superficial age of visuals. Paul stands no chance against the bare-chested Obama striding strongly on the beach. It's sad, but a reality.

I agree.  At this point Paul is REALLY the invisible man.  As for verbal vs. written communication, I think you're right about that...both with Paul and with people in general.  Also agreed on the Obama point.  Actually, a related issue came up today on a talk show I was listening to (don't remember which...I was flipping through).  The topic was how Romney and Obama (as well as Palin, Rubio) benefit from their looks....at least somewhat...while guys like Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie certainly don't.   Seems pretty obvious to me that it happens (whether it should or not).  I believe there are studies showing how attractive people usually end up being more successful. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazzguru 

Again, we agree on the lack of media coverage.   That said, some of these people amuse me.  They are what I call the PaulTards, with their little cardboard signs and such.  I see them (signs) around my house at times.  They are right next to the INFOWARS! signs (literally).   

In all seriousness, my question is why all this enthusiasm doesn't translate into votes.  Paul is arguably doing worse than he was in 2008.  It can't all be the media.  As for me, I've said many times I like a lot of what Ron Paul has to say.  I have great respect for his views on liberty, freedom and limited government.  Where I just can't support him is on foreign policy and his quest to end the Fed, which I think is unrealistic.  

5 Reasons Why Conservatives Should Root For a Romney Defeat

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

5 Reasons Why Conservatives Should Root For a Romney Defeat

I can't disagree with that article more.  

Mitt Romney's strange statement

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

Mitt Romney's strange statement

That's not strange.  It's an appeal to Ron Paul supporters.  And it's a bit of a warning as well:  Don't muck this up by going kamikaze.  Your guy can't win no matter how many delegates he finagles at the state conventions.  All you'll do is weaken the nominee.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 

That's not strange.  It's an appeal to Ron Paul supporters.  And it's a bit of a warning as well:  Don't muck this up by going kamikaze.  Your guy can't win no matter how many delegates he finagles at the state conventions.  All you'll do is weaken the nominee.  

A warning? Mafia-style? 

Anyway, while Romney is going to get the nomination, he's not going to win the election. And that's probably a good thing...long-term.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

A warning? Mafia-style? 

 

Anyway, while Romney is going to get the nomination, he's not going to win the election. And that's probably a good thing...long-term.

No, not mafia style.  Obviously.  As for not winning the election, I've love to know what you base that on.  It's certainly not a good thing, because we'll have Barry Soetoro for another 4 years.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 

Obviously.  As for not winning the election, I've love to know what you base that on.  

I base is on the fact that I don't think he's going to win. Plus Team Obama will cheat, probably successfully. I suspect Romney will cheat also, but less successfully.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 

It's certainly not a good thing, because we'll have Barry Soetoro for another 4 years.  

It's not certainly not. It would depend on other things. First, the President doesn't exist in isolation. He must interact with Congress. What could work well for the country is a Republican controlled Congress and Obama as President.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

I base is on the fact that I don't think he's going to win. Plus Team Obama will cheat, probably successfully. I suspect Romney will cheat also, but less successfully.

 

 

 

It's not certainly not. It would depend on other things. First, the President doesn't exist in isolation. He must interact with Congress. What could work well for the country is a Republican controlled Congress and Obama as President.

1.  Got it.  I just don't think that even cheating can save Obama.  He's painted himself into the left corner.  Moderates and independents are bailing on him in droves.  He's got African-Americans, single women, gays, liberals and leftists left. That's it.  The real key to the election is Reagan Democrats and center-right independents.  These groups pulled the level for Obama last time.  Additionally, turnout will be key.  You're not going to see the kind of turnout in key Obama demographics this time.  Meanwhile, the conservative desire to get rid of Obama is overwhelming.  Even center-right moderates are chomping at the bit to vote him out.  Other than electoral politics, it also depends on the economy or possibly an uncontrollable geopolitical event.  

2.  An Obama Presidency is bad, period.  Granted, it would be less bad if the GOP controlled Congress, but it would still be bad.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 

 

1.  Got it.  I just don't think that even cheating can save Obama.  He's painted himself into the left corner.  Moderates and independents are bailing on him in droves.  He's got African-Americans, single women, gays, liberals and leftists left. That's it.  The real key to the election is Reagan Democrats and center-right independents.  These groups pulled the level for Obama last time.  Additionally, turnout will be key.  You're not going to see the kind of turnout in key Obama demographics this time.  Meanwhile, the conservative desire to get rid of Obama is overwhelming.  Even center-right moderates are chomping at the bit to vote him out.  Other than electoral politics, it also depends on the economy or possibly an uncontrollable geopolitical event.  

 

2.  An Obama Presidency is bad, period.  Granted, it would be less bad if the GOP controlled Congress, but it would still be bad.  

1. Maybe. Probably not though. I'm betting there are enough Republicans and conservatives that don't trust Romney (a Massachusetts Republican) it will cost him the election. Now I could be wrong in that he could "pivot" again back to his "moderate" with "progressive" ideas approach as he did in MA. This could pick up independents but piss off even more conservatives. But now we're back to the vanishingly small difference between him and Obama becoming no real difference and a president we have no idea what he's actually going to do (forget what he says he's going to do) and a (probably) Republican-controlled Congress more likely to rubber stamp his plans because he has an "R" next to his name where they would have resisted Obama's (because he has a "D" next to his name.)

2. You must always look at the president in context. Arguable a Romney presidency with a Republican could be worse than an Obama Presidency with a Republican Congress.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

1. Maybe. Probably not though. I'm betting there are enough Republicans and conservatives that don't trust Romney (a Massachusetts Republican) it will cost him the election. Now I could be wrong in that he could "pivot" again back to his "moderate" with "progressive" ideas approach as he did in MA. This could pick up independents but piss off even more conservatives. But now we're back to the vanishingly small difference between him and Obama becoming no real difference and a president we have no idea what he's actually going to do (forget what he says he's going to do) and a (probably) Republican-controlled Congress more likely to rubber stamp his plans because he has an "R" next to his name where they would have resisted Obama's (because he has a "D" next to his name.)

 

2. You must always look at the president in context. Arguable a Romney presidency with a Republican could be worse than an Obama Presidency with a Republican Congress.

1.  The polls really don't support that contention.  Conservatives are behind Romney because we are desperate to defeat Obama.  As for them being nearly the same, that's simply false no matter how many times you repeat it.  Romney will at least get us on track to get our fiscal house in order.  

2.  Spoken like a true Paul supporter.  I simply don't share that view at all.  Obama has been an absolute disaster.  He's doing plenty of damage as the head of the executive branch, even though the GOP controls the House.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDW2001 

 

1.  The polls really don't support that contention.  Conservatives are behind Romney because we are desperate to defeat Obama.  As for them being nearly the same, that's simply false no matter how many times you repeat it.  Romney will at least get us on track to get our fiscal house in order.  

 

2.  Spoken like a true Paul supporter.  I simply don't share that view at all.  Obama has been an absolute disaster.  He's doing plenty of damage as the head of the executive branch, even though the GOP controls the House.  

1. Ahhh...but you repeating that it is false is valid. :-/

2. Of course you don't. Doesn't mean I'm wrong of course.

Romney wants to add $2.1 trillion in defense spending while cutting taxes even more.  He wants to start a war with Iran.  Are you kidding me?  Fiscal house in order?  

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

Romney wants to add $2.1 trillion in defense spending

Supposedly. Then again, defense is one of the government's only constitutionally mandated responsibilities.  

"Even more."     Once again you demonstrate the idiotic belief that we're not taxed enough, and that revenue is a zero sum equation.  

No, he wants to confront Iran from a position of strength.  Peace Through Strength prevents war, it doesn't start it.  The best way to start a war is to do what Obama is doing...portraying the U.S. as weak.  

Not at all.  Romney has a history of being fiscally competent.  Obama has a track record of fiscal insanity.  

Rationally Defending Ron Paul: Detractors and Supporters Beware