32
   

The 2012 Presidential Election Discussion Thread

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 12:03 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:
Here's 3o companies
NOT here ARE 3O companies?????



failures art wrote:
that spent more on lobbying than they did on taxes.

A
R
T
R u implying that thay shoud have spent MORE
on taxes than on their exercise of freedom of speech?????





David
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 10:35 am
Per Gallup, Republican enthusiasm for the upcoming election has dropped markedly.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151403/Republicans-Less-Enthusiastic-Voting-2012.aspx

And it's not hard to understand why. They are now left with no good choice for their nominee.

Cycloptichorn
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 10:40 am
@Cycloptichorn,
The choices remain about the same, it's just that the campaign process has pointed out the serious flaws in each. Earlier, there was more optimism.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 10:46 am
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:

The choices remain about the same, it's just that the campaign process has pointed out the serious flaws in each. Earlier, there was more optimism.


Well, it's important to point out that the two candidates left standing (Romney and Gingrich) are both considered to be RINOs in many ways by the party's activist base - the people who actually work hard and donate a lot of money to see someone elected. They are most decidedly not jazzed by choosing between these two.

Earlier on, there was hope on their part that someone else could get the nod - Perry, Bachmann, Cain. Now that all seems like a long shot, it's got to be depressing for them. Hell, I know it is - reading right-wing blogs these days is a pretty glum exercise, and their comment sections are worse, with half the members claiming they'd never vote for Newt due to his past and half claiming Romney is practically a Liberal and the wrong guy to go up against Obama.

Cycloptichorn
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 10:53 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Right, my point is that Perry, Bachman, Cain were there as choices, and people were more optimistic about them back when they didn't actually know that much about them! Smile

However, Perry, Bachman, Cain (and Trump and all the rest) are now better known, and people don't like what they see. The optimism was about what those sorts of candidates could be like, but they're not turning out to be like that.

It's gonna happen with Gingrich too, he's the latest flavor of the day, not equivalent to Romney.

I guess the only one left is Paul, who may well get some sort of a boost after Iowa.

Oh and Huntsman, that's already starting, and might be the surge between Gingrich and Paul. No hard predictions there.

But the dynamic is really just:

Romney? No. So who else?

How about [insert name here].

Ooooh, [isn] looks really good!

Take that Romney, ha! Look, other people like [isn] too! [isn] could really do it! Yeah!

<at this point, [isn] starts getting more attention in general>

Whoa, [isn] said/ did WHAT?

Whoa, I didn't know that about [isn]. Hmm.

Geez, [isn] is fading fast. Looking like a loser, gotta say.

OK so who else?

Romney? NO.

Etc., etc.

Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 11:01 am
@sozobe,
My family full of Republicans hate Romney and swear up and down that Obama will clobber him if it comes down to that. And, of course, I think they are right.

Here's a write-up at NRO about Axelrod's comments yesterday, regarding Romney's latest attacks against Obama; sort of a preview of where this thing is headed. I've bolded a few parts that I think could work out quite well as a message:

Quote:
Axelrod: Romney Speech ‘Deeply Offensive to Many Middle-Class Americans’
December 7, 2011 6:06 P.M.
By Patrick Brennan

Today in New York, Obama strategist David Axelrod took questions from reporters at a Bloomberg forum. NR was there. Right up front, Axelrod noted the “juxtaposition of the president’s speech yesterday with the one Mitt Romney made today.” He argued that the president’s detailed speech in Kansas, derided by many conservatives, “was a very thorough explication of his views on what the great challenges facing this country [and] his view on the economic challenges facing the country.”

He then attacked Romney’s speech, which presented the concept of an “entitlement nation,” as “deeply offensive to many middle class Americans.” He argued that Romney’s “suggestion was that somehow it was lack of effort that was prompting them to fall behind, not natural economic forces [or] policies that conspired against them,” suggesting it was “a perspective formed by [Romney’s] own experiences at Bain.” Axelrod said, “There’s a fundamentally different view of what is going on this country . . . a real sharp distinction that you can tell from these two speeches . . . that will help frame the debate.”

Next, Axelrod addressed the state of the Republican party, which “has split into two parties . . . the Tea Party and the Martini Party,”
“the right-wing populists/social-conservatives . . . and the old center-right corporate Republicans.” He continued, “By orientation, Romney is more of the Martini Party sect. He’s spent the last six years banging on the door of the other, trying to win admission, abrogating one fundamental principle after another. They’re just not buying it . . . there’s a sense that they don’t really know what he stands for and they want a more authentic exponent of their view.”

Finally, Axelrod also cast doubt on Romney’s ability to campaign on his business experience, scoffing at “the notion that someone . . . would be a strong compelling candidate in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania when [he has] a history of closing down plants and outsourcing jobs in order to maximize [his] own profit.”


The comment section is awesome to read, so much slavering invective flying around.

The 'tea party and the martini party.' You just know they focus-grouped the hell out of that one.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 11:39 am
@sozobe,
Well said.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 02:36 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

failures art wrote:
Here's 3o companies
NOT here ARE 3O companies?????

Oh yes, I believe you're correct. A conjunction is not proper in such a case since "here're" isn't used.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

failures art wrote:
that spent more on lobbying than they did on taxes.

A
R
T
R u implying that thay shoud have spent MORE
on taxes than on their exercise of freedom of speech?????
Yes. Companies aren't people.

A
R
T




David
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 02:48 pm



The choice will be between Newt and Mitt.

Newt is a real conservative that upsets the republican elite.

Mitt is barely a conservative... he is basically Obama light.


Newt can defeat Obama in a landslide election, Mitt's victory is not as certain.
failures art
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 03:03 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

Newt is a real conservative that upsets the republican elite.

You're kidding right? He's the archetype establishment Republican. There could be no person more republican elite than him.

A
R
T
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 03:24 pm




Newt is the best conservative to deal with the man-child caused disaster
he and the republican party will inherit from Obama after the 2012 election.
jcboy
 
  5  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 03:45 pm
@H2O MAN,
Some people grow more intelligent as they grow older, you seem to be going backwards in time which would explain the mullet haircut.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 03:49 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

Newt is a real conservative that upsets the republican elite.

You're kidding right? He's the archetype establishment Republican. There could be no person more republican elite than him.

A
R
T


100% right, and it's stunning to me to see the lengths of self-deception various members of the GOP are willing to go to, in order to support anyone but Mitt.

And it's hardly just me that thinks so. I mean, look at what this frothing bitch has to say about it -

Quote:
"Newt Gingrich is the 'anti-Establishment' candidate only if 'the Establishment' is defined as 'anyone who remembers what happened the day before yesterday,'" - Ann Coulter.


Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 03:54 pm
@jcboy,



The irrational and childish responses by you, cyclotroll and others
only confirms that I am on the correct path... sucks to be you.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  5  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 04:21 pm
A response to Rick Perry's latest ad



Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 06:02 pm
Another political "BLESSING", Gingrich's own sister who is a gay activists promises to work against her brother and any other republican candidate so Obama is elected.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/12/07/WATCH_Rachel_Maddow_Interviews_Candace_Gingrich/
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 06:16 pm
@jcboy,
Maybe Newt will pray for his sister to change. Prayers works wonders, because god answers all prayers to save souls.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 06:52 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Per Gallup, Republican enthusiasm for the upcoming election has dropped markedly.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151403/Republicans-Less-Enthusiastic-Voting-2012.aspx

And it's not hard to understand why. They are now left with no good choice for their nominee.

Cycloptichorn
And no one good to make the choice!!!
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 07:02 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:




The choice will be between Newt and Mitt.

Newt is a real conservative that upsets the republican elite.

Mitt is barely a conservative... he is basically Obama light.


Newt can defeat Obama in a landslide election, Mitt's victory is not as certain.
dream land for water man
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Dec, 2011 08:38 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
He bitches that it's not that gays can serve openly in the military but kids can't openly celebrate Christmas. Yup, the fake "War on Christmas" which he calls "Obama's war on religion." Wow, how do you respond to such blatant stupidity? He really doesn't deserve an intelligent rebuttal.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/25/2019 at 11:48:56