1
   

FIRST A2K STRAW POLL White House 2008

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Mar, 2007 06:03 pm
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 03:14 am
Foxfyre wrote:
The original intent and language has been so corrupted by the courts, however, that I would advocate it being chucked and replaced with a different law with the same intent but less able to be manipulated by socially activist courts.

You must be talking about Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the case where the Supreme Court upheld the core points of Roe v. Wade, but backpedaled about their extent.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 08:00 am
<b>Alex Trebek</b> wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
The original intent and language has been so corrupted by the courts, however, that I would advocate it being chucked and replaced with a different law with the same intent but less able to be manipulated by socially activist courts.

You must be talking about Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the case where the Supreme Court upheld the core points of Roe v. Wade, but backpedaled about their extent.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 10:32 am
Rudy said that, as president, he would seek advice from his wife, and include her in cabinet meetings.

Does anyone know what her background is? I heard she was a hair stylist.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 01:44 pm
WASHINGTON - Shattering previous records, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton collected $26 million for her presidential campaign during the first three months of the year and transferred an additional $10 million from her Senate fundraising account, aides said Sunday.

The New York senator's total included $4.2 million raised through the Internet. The campaign did not specify how much of the $36 million was available only for the primary election and how much could be used just in the general election, if she were the party's nominee.

The amount outdistanced past presidential election records and set a high bar by which to measure the fundraising abilities of her chief rivals.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 09:01 am
Here is Doonsbury on "multiple-choice" Romney.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 09:04 am
edgarblythe wrote:
WASHINGTON - Shattering previous records, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton collected $26 million for her presidential campaign during the first three months of the year and transferred an additional $10 million from her Senate fundraising account, aides said Sunday.

The New York senator's total included $4.2 million raised through the Internet. The campaign did not specify how much of the $36 million was available only for the primary election and how much could be used just in the general election, if she were the party's nominee.

The amount outdistanced past presidential election records and set a high bar by which to measure the fundraising abilities of her chief rivals.


I was pretty impressed with Clinton's numbers and then totally surprised that Romney came close to matching her. He has nowhere near the name recogniztion.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 09:26 am
fishin wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
WASHINGTON - Shattering previous records, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton collected $26 million for her presidential campaign during the first three months of the year and transferred an additional $10 million from her Senate fundraising account, aides said Sunday.

The New York senator's total included $4.2 million raised through the Internet. The campaign did not specify how much of the $36 million was available only for the primary election and how much could be used just in the general election, if she were the party's nominee.

The amount outdistanced past presidential election records and set a high bar by which to measure the fundraising abilities of her chief rivals.


I was pretty impressed with Clinton's numbers and then totally surprised that Romney came close to matching her. He has nowhere near the name recogniztion.


Religious folks give moolah.

He still has zero shot tho

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 09:38 am
I still recall Carter coming out of nowhere to win the presidency. As I recall, all he had going was a great smile.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 09:40 am
I voted for Clinton. If however, she does not make it to the general election and Rudy does my vote will go to Rudy. I am as fed up- with left wing democrats as I am with right wingnuts. It is time the radicals on both sides of the political spectrum be put out to pasture and some sanity be infused into our political process.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 09:43 am
Unfortunately, it appears that Romney has gone radical. Romney, in office, might turn out worse than Bush. In any event, Romney is a moving target.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:01 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Religious folks give moolah.

He still has zero shot tho

Cycloptichorn


It goes deeper than religious people having money. He has a tactic that many of his competitors can't use and it's working.

There is no way in h*ll I'd vote for him but his ability to attract money is still impressive.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:04 am
fishin wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Religious folks give moolah.

He still has zero shot tho

Cycloptichorn


It goes deeper than religious people having money. He has a tactic that many of his competitors can't use and it's working.

There is no way in h*ll I'd vote for him but his ability to attract money is still impressive.


What is that tactic?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:05 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
fishin wrote:
I was pretty impressed with Clinton's numbers and then totally surprised that Romney came close to matching her. He has nowhere near the name recogniztion.


Religious folks give moolah.

That doesnt seem a very convincing argument, since Brownback, the ueber-religious candidate, got all of, what? $ 1.5 mil?
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:06 am
Surprisingly (to me), Romney takes an early lead in the race for funds.

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/us/politics/03money.html?pagewanted=print]Today's New York Times[/url] wrote:
Romney Reaps $20 Million to Top G.O.P. Rivals

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

The New York Times suggests that Romney is using the rolodex he built up as an investment banker at Bain Capital.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:06 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:

What is that tactic?

Cycloptichorn


This older Boston Globe article explains it better than I could.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/06/11/romney_strategy_pays_off_quickly/
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:08 am
nimh wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
fishin wrote:
I was pretty impressed with Clinton's numbers and then totally surprised that Romney came close to matching her. He has nowhere near the name recogniztion.


Religious folks give moolah.

That doesnt seem a very convincing argument, since Brownback, the ueber-religious candidate, got all of, what? $ 1.5 mil?


Holy ****. Would you believe that when I read Romney, I thought in my mind 'Brownback?'

Crazy, sorry for the error.

As to Romney - he has plenty of name rec amongst the base. But he's a mormon, and therefore doesn't have much of a shot at winning.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:11 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
As to Romney - he has plenty of name rec amongst the base. But he's a mormon, and therefore doesn't have much of a shot at winning.

That's what they said about Kennedy and his Catholicism.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:13 am
Thomas wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
As to Romney - he has plenty of name rec amongst the base. But he's a mormon, and therefore doesn't have much of a shot at winning.

That's what they said about Kennedy and his Catholicism.


Mmm hmmm. Catholicism is light-years more acceptable than Mormonism.

I understand religious tolerance, and all the counter-arguments that could be made; but I feel that people underestimate the amount of anti-Mormon sentiment held by many in America. Polling data seems to show that this holds up, as well...

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'd be overjoyed to see Romney get the Republican nod. He will lose to either Obama or Hillary (shudder)

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Apr, 2007 10:13 am
Thomas wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
As to Romney - he has plenty of name rec amongst the base. But he's a mormon, and therefore doesn't have much of a shot at winning.

That's what they said about Kennedy and his Catholicism.


Yet, he is the only mainstream candidate who has had only one wife.
0 Replies
 
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/26/2024 at 12:29:49