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

Your myopia is a joke; you think and believe only liberal mothers think that way. You need to get out of your cloister more often to learn about the real world.

That's a tried and tested farmerman gambit JT. I think he used it for about the three hundred thousandth time this very morning if my memory is not playing tricks with me.

What a post says is completely independent of how pissed the poster is at the time of posting.

That's true soz but much as I admire rjb I have to say that his contributions have not been very interesting as they have mainly consisted in what anybody alert to these matters knows already from watching TV.

The subtext of all this tooing and froing he has scrupulously thought fit to avoid being conscious of. It's almost as if one studies a lady person well past the age of consent in terms of her make-up and the cut of her clothes rather than in terms of the living, pulsating flesh beneath.

This was just on TV, Spendius, re Maine: Romney @ 39%; Paul @ 36% followed by Santorum at 16% and Gingrich at 6%.
Via NBC.

Yeah--it was on here too. It was the strip on the screen bottom when I arrived home from the pub.

Personally I wouldn't take too much notice of a result like that. How many voted? Under what circumstances?

No delegates won, of course.

True, you are, like, hopeless on cut and paste.

That would indicate that Finn's a raging alcoholic.

I think that the Maine results, insignificant as they are, will be seen as a setback for Romney.

why, because he didnt match up to 2008? Lets see what the field looked like in 2008 . Remember, the GOP was done as a party with an incumbent so they were really out in force. This year its more a Beauty contest (electability may be all they want-anyway, Maine is waaay more liberal in its GOP makeup so thats why the spread is as it is)
Just my random synapsing going on.

True enough, FM. But I would bet that the media tomorrow will be all over how close Maine was.

After the Japanese had surrendered, on the day Japan surrendered, the US carried out a 1000 plane bombing raid. In that raid, the brave US pilots were also dropping leaflets saying that Japan had surrendered.

In the scheme of dirty US deeds, it's hard to place this one. And it really shows the Truman bullshit about dropping the A bombs for what it always is when a US president speaks - pure, unadulterated bullshit.

Kinda makes your discussions on Repugs choice for war criminal in chief seem awfully bloody trivial, doncha figure, RJB?

What she said...

Schoen and Caddell’s Shocking New Plan

---

Caddell & Schoen Want Obama Gone

RJB, cut-and-paste really is easy:

Find something you want to use.
Hold down the left mouse button and run the mouse over it to highlight it in blue.
Right click on "copy".
Go to a reply box for a topic.
Look up above the reply box for the "BBC Codes" .
Put your cursor on "Quote" and click the mouse, and you'll see two "Quote"s in square brackets appear in the reply box.
Make sure the cursor is between those two "quote"s and the brackets.
Right click on "Paste"
You're done. Write the rest of your post (NOT between the brakets, and post it.

re H2O.
Rush and Boortz and Fox are obviously getting more and more desparate, because Obama's approval rating keeps rising, and the Republicans keep sinking, despite everything they can do. Probably BECAUSE of everything they're doing,

re spendius

?

No, they just have better information than you and your sources.

Obama's liberal media will not allow the truth to be told about the fool they have invested so deeply in and people like yourself (the collective dumbmasses) never question anything the state media tells you.

You are the fools.

Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell have this really interesting idea: Barack Obama should not run for reelection. For his own good. Don’t yet see what’s so exciting about this? There’s a twist – Schoen and Caddell are Democrats. Technically. Mainly they appear on pro-Republican opinion forums as the Democrats who are saddened by "their" party’s latest outrage. But still – Democrats! Who want Obama not to run again!

Sure, they proposed this idea last year in the Washington Post. (“The best way for him to address both our national challenges and the serious threats to his credibility and stature is to make clear that, for the next two years, he will focus exclusively on the problems we face as Americans, rather than the politics of the moment — or of the 2012 campaign.”) And then again in November in The Wall Street Journal. (“The kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern — not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.”) And then again today in Politico. (“Obama has been unable to build consensus and, with the polarizing campaign he is now running, will be unable to govern effectively even if reelected.”)

But I think there’s far more to be said about this fascinating idea. What if Schoen and Caddell were to write daily dispatches reporting from the ground about efforts among Democrats to challenge Obama in the 2012 primary, or to just cede the 2012 election? Certainly such Democrats exist – and if not, Schoen and Caddell could conduct man-on-the-street interviews with each other. They could compile their dispatches into a blockbuster alt-history, imagining a world in which Obama has decided not to run in 2012, thus devoting his energies to raising war bonds to launch a second invasion of Normandy to conquer Europe from Germany, whose grip on power is slipping under the feeble leadership of Adolf Hitler’s ailing son.

There’s just so much to this idea, I feel readers are being deprived by only being able to read Schoen and Caddell reviving it every few months. Any op-ed page editor who lets a single day go by without hearing Schoen and Caddell peddle their idea is depriving their readers.