The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@realjohnboy,

He's wilted under the conservative backlash.

He's a liar, and not a very good one.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Beating Obama was far and away the primary concern for NH primary voters.

That's fine and dandy Finn, but this is why I related conservatives challenge to the challenge liberals faced with Kerry in 2004. Trust me, defeating Bush was more important than seeing Kerry lead the country to Democrats in 2004.

That alone won't win an election, and you probably already know this. I don't fault you for your wishful thinking. Do you think that the degree of desire conservatives have now is greater than that of liberals in 2004?

A
R
T

1 Reply

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Do you think capturing or killing bin Laden was not a high priority of the Bush Administration?

I think it was one of the very highest priorities, which is very pertinent.

It was a high priority, yet they messed it up. Obama did not.

Put it another way -- if it was such an easy, green-lighting kind of thing, why do you think Bush was unable to do it?

I didn't realize Obama was out in the field hunting down bin Laden.

As I've indicated, I give him credit for killing bin Laden, to suggest that Bush "messed it up" when his administration tried is ridiculous. A good bit of the intelligence that led to bin Laden's death was obtained during the Bush Administration which used all those horrible torture tactics, but I guess we can ignore that if Obama shines.

A higher priority than capturing and killing a single man was to prevent additional terrorist attacks on US soil after 9/11. The Bush administration quite competently accomplished this goal, while, in far less time, under the Obama administration we saw at least three major attemps: Underwear Bomber, Times Square Bomber and Major Hassan at Fort Hood. Only one proved successful but we can thank only Luck, not Obama's intelligence initiatives, that the other two didn't go as planned.

I'm glad Osama was killed, but I would prefer that those who died at Fort Hood were still alive.

0 Replies

@failures art,

failures art wrote:

Do you think that the degree of desire conservatives have now is greater than that of liberals in 2004?

A
R
T

Obviously

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

2) It is widely accepted that primary voter participation in a year when only one party is seeking to anoint a candidate drops.

Cool. Whomever you Pubbies settle on can be called "the anointed one."

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

failures art wrote:

Do you think that the degree of desire conservatives have now is greater than that of liberals in 2004?

Obviously

Heh. Touche. Well, I'm saying that you're being hasty. You might want to step back. Why do you believe this? Favorable bias, and the fact that 2004 is 8 years ago may make this seem "obvious" to you, but it might not be so.

Face it, the GOP is the underdog. If we're going to have an honest talk about this election, you should be frank about this. There's nothing about such an admission that says they can't win, just that they will be on the defensive more than Obama. Perhaps in your mind, you think that Obama will be sweating bullets about ACA, when confronted in a debate with Romney--he won't.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Hmm, I can't agree with this. But that's likely because I've read quite a lot about how harmful snake-oil salesmen really were.

What makes you think I haven't? Reading things is one thing; buying into them is another. I suspect the same is true, vice versa about the harm from bossy regulators that you've read stories about.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I can't agree with this. But that's likely because I've read quite a lot about how harmful snake-oil salesmen really were.

What makes you think I haven't? Reading things is one thing; buying into them is another. I suspect the same is true, vice versa about the harm from bossy regulators that you've read stories about.

I suspect not. I believe that the 'onerous' burdens put on businesses by regulations are exaggerated as much as possible by those who are seeking to make higher profits, and really could care less about safety, the environment or even basic decency.

You can't compare that to snake-oil salesman, who in many cases lead directly to people's deaths... the truth is that none of us individually are qualified to know whether a drug does or does not work, or what the harmful side-effects are! There is a great societal service served by an independent agency that tests and evaluates drugs for their safety and efficacy; it not only saves us all tremendous amounts of time, it saves lives, too.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

I'm not going to derail RJB's thread any further, so I started a new thread to discuss government regulation of ineffective drugs.

That new thread seems to be getting some traction. Check it out!

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

ok, sorry.

Back to electoral politics: Romney's Bain problems are really coming into the fore today. My sampling of Conservative websites finds a decidedly mixed reaction from both writers and commentators; though most believe that 'creative destruction' is an integral part of the free market, and don't have a problem with Mitt, they also realize that this is a tough sell in places where many have been laid off, and Bain was involved with some deals that look shady at best.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Back to electoral politics: Romney's Bain problems are really coming into the fore today. My sampling of Conservative websites finds a decidedly mixed reaction from both writers and commentators; though most believe that 'creative destruction' is an integral part of the free market, and don't have a problem with Mitt, they also realize that this is a tough sell in places where many have been laid off, and Bain was involved with some deals that look shady at best.
Cycloptichorn

Bain and it's ilk is not where I would have been comfortable working in my business career. Bain did have some "successes." Staples and Dunkin Donuts, I believe. But they also had some "failures" where everybody lost jobs and money...except Bain.
I think it is a good idea for the Repub candidates to back off slamming Romney for "crony capitalism."

0 Replies

This may be comical for some of you.

Globalist Puppet Mitt Romney

0 Replies

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/E/O/4/Romney-Flip-Flopping.jpg

0 Replies

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/Q/N/4/Bride-of-Mitt.jpg

0 Replies

Good finds, Snood.

0 Replies

It seems to me the anti-Romney neocons in the GOP are just shooting themselves in the foot by attacking Romney. The more they attack his "liberalism", the better he begins to look to the undecided independents who're dissatisfied with Obama but wouldn't vote for Perry or Gingrich even if they were the last men standing.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

You are making the case that Republican interest is down from 2008, but even if this is the case why would non-Republican interest be up?

There is no competitive race for the Democrats so more independents and Democrats voting on the Republican side.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The total number of participants increased from 2008 to 2012 by 10,522 voters or 4.5%

If your premise is correct, that Republican participation in 2012 waned from 2008 we must conclude that non-Republican participation increased.

Does that make sense to you?

You are making the case that Republican interest is down from 2008, but even if this is the case why would non-Republican interest be up?

Are you serious? Some commentators I heard on NPR this morning estimated that a huge percentage of the vote in the NH primaries came from non-Republicans who registered to vote Republican just this one time, in the primaries. (There are a number of states, NH included, where you can do that and then, after the primary, re-register as an independent for the general elction.)

Why? Because any number of so-called and sometimes self-styled liberals are very unhappy with Barrack Obama. Since he will, no doubt, be the Democrat candidate in November, they're looking for an alternative. Most of them probably voted for Houseman who came in an unexpectedly strong 3rd. But Romney, for them, is OK also.

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Bain was involved with some deals that look shady at best.

What's that Cyclo? Looks like a shady smear to me.

Give us the beef eh? Otherwise you look shady full stop.

0 Replies

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know