Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I see why Dick likes Romney
#21
If Romney wins all the states that McCain carried in 2008 and North Carolina (which is what is currently projected), he would still be short 64 electoral votes; big challenge. But, it's doable if he manages to win the majority of the EVs that are currently up for grabs. Employment & Economy is by far the top priority issue in voter polls. The White House will be releasing the latest numbers on Friday, and six more reports before the November election.

If the employment/economic trends over the next six months stay stagnant or worsen, I think it could be a big advantage for Romney in snaring available EVs. If instead the numbers reflect noticeable improvement in employment and economic health, Obama's lead will widen and it could be somewhat of a blow out, imo. Debate performance and positions on taxes will be the other two determining factors for grabbing those open EVs, imo. Or, maybe, these are just the factors that will push me off the fence. Still undecided. Smiley_emoticons_slash
Reply
#22
If Romney would acknowledge that Government has screwed the pooch and it's their fault that things are fucked and Government will be retracting back to it's intended role and giving the country back to the people like it was supposed to be.

He would win.

People are fucking tired of being the golden goose that everyone in Washington is after.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams
















Reply
#23
(05-30-2012, 03:16 PM)IMaDick Wrote: If Romney would acknowledge that Government has screwed the pooch and it's their fault that things are fucked and Government will be retracting back to it's intended role and giving the country back to the people like it was supposed to be.

He would win.

People are fucking tired of being the golden goose that everyone in Washington is after.

If this is true, Dick, then why do you think that Ron Paul wasn't embraced by a larger portion of the population and given more sufficient media coverage?
Reply
#24
(05-30-2012, 04:33 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:
(05-30-2012, 03:16 PM)IMaDick Wrote: If Romney would acknowledge that Government has screwed the pooch and it's their fault that things are fucked and Government will be retracting back to it's intended role and giving the country back to the people like it was supposed to be.

He would win.

People are fucking tired of being the golden goose that everyone in Washington is after.

If this is true, Dick, then why do you think that Ron Paul wasn't embraced by a larger portion of the population and given more sufficient media coverage?

Ron Paul was geared towards a smarter audience. It's just to bad most Americans are blind.
He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
Reply
#25
I'm still voting for Paul, even if that turns out to be a vote for Obama.
Reply
#26
Hillary could have won.
He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
Reply
#27
(05-30-2012, 04:38 PM)Maggot Wrote:
(05-30-2012, 04:33 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:
(05-30-2012, 03:16 PM)IMaDick Wrote: If Romney would acknowledge that Government has screwed the pooch and it's their fault that things are fucked and Government will be retracting back to it's intended role and giving the country back to the people like it was supposed to be.

He would win.

People are fucking tired of being the golden goose that everyone in Washington is after.

If this is true, Dick, then why do you think that Ron Paul wasn't embraced by a larger portion of the population and given more sufficient media coverage?

Ron Paul was geared towards a smarter audience. It's just to bad most Americans are blind.

I think Paul's statements coincide pretty closely with Dick's perception of what voters want.

Paul truly didn't get the level of media coverage that the other early hopefuls did, imo. He and his supporters sure are good at the grassroots, though. I think for a lot of people, too much fundamental change like that proposed by Paul, even if they acknowledge that things are broken, makes them nervous.

I read that the Libertarian focus (and part of Paul's motives for staying in the race this far out) is to increase their party's election presence/visibility and ticket viability in future elections. Don't know if that's true, but I hope so. I'd like to have a real Libertarian option down the road.
Reply
#28
(05-30-2012, 04:51 PM)Maggot Wrote: Hillary could have won.

She still could, if she'd get her fucking shit together and go after him.
Reply
#29
(05-30-2012, 04:46 PM)Ma Huang Sor Wrote: I'm still voting for Paul, even if that turns out to be a vote for Obama.

I may vote for him too if he's still on the ticket and neither of the others resonates with me by then.
Reply
#30
When Paul gives his endorsment to Romney it will be with strings attached like his delegates. Romney should use the good things that Ron Paul said. I don't think Paul went after him like he did the others during the debates. I think he knew .
He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
Reply
#31
(05-30-2012, 06:34 PM)Maggot Wrote: When Paul gives his endorsment to Romney it will be with strings attached like his delegates. Romney should use the good things that Ron Paul said. I don't think Paul went after him like he did the others during the debates. I think he knew .

Paul went after Santorum like a bat outta hell in the last debate and took out the ads mocking Santorum's voting record vs. his public declarations right around that time. I too think he was looking ahead.
Reply
#32
I'd vote Hilary but she won't run again. She got screwed by power brokers in order to get Obama in. Now she's too old, or will be after Obama's second term.
Thank god I am oblivious to the opinions of others while caught in the blinding splendor of my own cleverness.
Reply
#33
Rand Paul and Hillary would be a good matchup.
He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
Reply
#34
(05-30-2012, 07:56 PM)Donovan Wrote: I'd vote Hilary but she won't run again. She got screwed by power brokers in order to get Obama in. Now she's too old, or will be after Obama's second term.

Don't be bitter. Both of us have experienced post menopausal women.

Well I have, anyway. You should be so fucking lucky.
Reply
#35
(05-30-2012, 09:06 PM)Maggot Wrote: Rand Paul and Hillary would be a good matchup.

I love your posts, jsyk. Awesome input.
Reply
#36
The May job and employment report was just released; negative. Hiring slowed (to less than half of the projection) and the unemployment percentage rose. Bad for Obama and good for Romney in terms of working the undecided voters, imo.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/01/news/eco...&hpt=us_c2

Regarding Paul endorsing Romney and Romney capturing most of that vote; I think Paul has planned to negotiate with Romney near the finish line, depending on how Paul's own bid progressed. But, interviews over the past couple of days indicate that Paul's supporters would be unwilling to get behind Romney (which I guess could be bluffing so that they can guarantee more of their agenda gets incorporated by RNC if Romney is desperate for those votes at the finish line). I can't figure out the Paul campaign strategy, but right now, his supporters continue to rile the Romney camp.
Reply
#37
(05-30-2012, 07:56 PM)Donovan Wrote: I'd vote Hilary but she won't run again.

Bite your tongue. She'll be around 68 or 69 in 2016. Reagan was 69 when he took office and women typically outlive men.

Hillary, 2016!
Reply
#38
(06-01-2012, 01:37 PM)username Wrote:
(05-30-2012, 07:56 PM)Donovan Wrote: I'd vote Hilary but she won't run again.

Bite your tongue. She'll be around 68 or 69 in 2016. Reagan was 69 when he took office and women typically outlive men.

Hillary, 2016!

If were going to have a woman President we should have one that can do Playboy after Her impeachment.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams
















Reply
#39
(06-01-2012, 11:18 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: The May job and employment report was just released; negative. Hiring slowed (to less than half of the projection) and the unemployment percentage rose. Bad for Obama and good for Romney in terms of working the undecided voters, imo.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/01/news/eco...&hpt=us_c2

Regarding Paul endorsing Romney and Romney capturing most of that vote; I think Paul has planned to negotiate with Romney near the finish line, depending on how Paul's own bid progressed. But, interviews over the past couple of days indicate that Paul's supporters would be unwilling to get behind Romney (which I guess could be bluffing so that they can guarantee more of their agenda gets incorporated by RNC if Romney is desperate for those votes at the finish line). I can't figure out the Paul campaign strategy, but right now, his supporters continue to rile the Romney camp.

I had heard that Paul would hold them hostage to a Federal reserve shakedown.
He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
Reply
#40
(06-01-2012, 02:00 PM)Maggot Wrote:
(06-01-2012, 11:18 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: The May job and employment report was just released; negative. Hiring slowed (to less than half of the projection) and the unemployment percentage rose. Bad for Obama and good for Romney in terms of working the undecided voters, imo.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/01/news/eco...&hpt=us_c2

Regarding Paul endorsing Romney and Romney capturing most of that vote; I think Paul has planned to negotiate with Romney near the finish line, depending on how Paul's own bid progressed. But, interviews over the past couple of days indicate that Paul's supporters would be unwilling to get behind Romney (which I guess could be bluffing so that they can guarantee more of their agenda gets incorporated by RNC if Romney is desperate for those votes at the finish line). I can't figure out the Paul campaign strategy, but right now, his supporters continue to rile the Romney camp.

I had heard that Paul would hold them hostage to a Federal reserve shakedown.

Last time I read the Constitution Private companies were not supposed to make our money.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams
















Reply