Republican candidates for 2012
-
gut^^^LMFAO.
For starters, I'm not sure what that's supposed to be an indictment of. My only guess that it's supposed to imply he would have preferred Paul, and then Santorum. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out why.
Second, this HAS to be fake. You'd have to be the dumbass of the century to wire tap Obama or record a cell phone conversation without his knowledge.
Unless, maybe this is an intentional leak trying reverse pyschology. Make people think he feels Romney is the tougher opponent when he's really afraid of Santorum. Yeah, that's the ticket! -
Cleveland Buck
It was an open mic. And no one gives a fuck about his preference, the key part was talking about the fraud used by the GOP against Paul.gut;1109344 wrote:^^^LMFAO.
For starters, I'm not sure what that's supposed to be an indictment of. My only guess that it's supposed to imply he would have preferred Paul, and then Santorum. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out why.
Second, this HAS to be fake. You'd have to be the dumbass of the century to wire tap Obama or record a cell phone conversation without his knowledge.
Unless, maybe this is an intentional leak trying reverse pyschology. Make people think he feels Romney is the tougher opponent when he's really afraid of Santorum. Yeah, that's the ticket! -
gut
What fraud? I can't imagine Paul ever had a chance to begin with. That'd be like knee capping the one-legged man in a foot race.Cleveland Buck;1109351 wrote:It was an open mic. And no one gives a **** about his preference, the key part was talking about the fraud used by the GOP against Paul. -
majorspark
Not to mention Ron Paul is accusing Obama of assasinating US citizens.HitsRus;1109301 wrote:Does this sound like something Paul would align with?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/153566 -
2kool4skool
It sounds like conspiracy theory garbage.HitsRus;1109301 wrote:Does this sound like something Paul would align with?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/153566
Regardless, we know neither side is similar to Paul at all in regards to foreign policy, but perhaps the various Republican contenders frothing at the mouth about bombing Iran has turned off some who closely align with Paul's foreign policy views. -
ptown_trojans_1
Here is a good question I just thought of that needs to be asked to all 4 R's.
How do they plan to deal with the Senate in order to handle the debt problem?
Will they compromise with D's on taxes? Will they touch SS and Medicare?
How will they get past 60 votes?
Otherwise, anything debt wise and balancing budget wise they mention is pure BS.
President Bush made a lot of promises, but his domestic policy died in Congress.
Obama has made simliar broad domestic changes, but aside from the healthcare law (which is awful), he has no real successes. -
dwccrew
They'd never ask Ron Paul, they only ask him about 2 questions a debate.ptown_trojans_1;1109434 wrote:Here is a good question I just thought of that needs to be asked to all 4 R's.
How do they plan to deal with the Senate in order to handle the debt problem?
Will they compromise with D's on taxes? Will they touch SS and Medicare?
How will they get past 60 votes?
Otherwise, anything debt wise and balancing budget wise they mention is pure BS.
President Bush made a lot of promises, but his domestic policy died in Congress.
Obama has made simliar broad domestic changes, but aside from the healthcare law (which is awful), he has no real successes. -
Footwedge
Don't know who will win in November...Bush the 43rd had an approval rating of 48% in November of 04....and he won quite easily with more than half of Americans not in his corner. Today, Obama is at 45%...with 8 months to go.gut;1108555 wrote:And Romney is actually a great foil to Obama's biggest failings - he has a proven track record in Massachusetts, and he's got a great background in business/investment. Seems like it's not a difficult message to convey. Certainly much more palatable to moderates/Dems than the other Repubs. The primary voters who prefer the others right now, they're not staying home and they ain't voting Obama because, ultimately, Obama eats at much of their core much more so than Romney fails to be their ideal candidate. Which means Romney stands to gain far more than he will lose vs. the rest of the field. That's why this "electability" issue seems a bit bogus to me - guy DID get elected gov of one of the most liberal states, after all.
I completely disagree people are voting for the others in hopes to get some white knight to enter in the 11th hour. Those others aren't electable - they each appeal strongly to a special "interest" group, but lack broad appeal. Really just strikes me as people pounding the table to get Romney to embrace more of their values. Not going to happen in the general and would be bull**** if it did. Those people will begrudgingly pull the lever for Romney because the simple fact is Obama is for far too much that they are not - they are the strongest ABO base. -
Footwedge
Those that do vote for one or the other will go 60% Romney and 40% Obama....just my guess.believer;1108567 wrote:True but the wild card is the Paulbotoid vote. It'll be interesting to see if most of the Paulists will pull the lever for Willard, write-in their hero's name, or simply abstain. -
HitsRus
I cannot see how any liberatarian can subscribe to a leftist agenda. The best hope for a liberatrian movement is within the Republican party which is naturally more conservative by nature. Sure they might seem "the same" as democrats to some (untrue)...but it would be easier to simply bring the "R"s back to their roots than expect fundamental change in the Dems. I suppose some 'hot button" issue Paul supproters...those that are antiwar or for legalization of marijuana might...might end up voting for Obama, but if you are truely a Paulbot you follow your leader. It should be interesting to see who, and if Paul eventually makes an endorsement of a mainstream candidate. -
Cleveland Buck
No one is interested in following their leader. It is about once again being free. Free from oppressive government, free from violations of our civil liberties, free from oppressive taxation (which includes theft via inflation). If Ron Paul got up there and endorsed Romney, I'm sure some Paul supporters would vote for Romney, but not most of them. Most of them would be crushed that Ron sold us out.
-
pmoney25
I am for the movement plain and simple. If Paul were to bolt, I would still be for the movement. It is bigger than one person -
fish82
Today's Rasmussen:
Romney 48
Obama 43
Santorum 46
Obama 45 -
jhay78
Newt says he's staying in it no matter what happens in Alabama and Mississippi. I'm not sure if he really means it and is the most stubborn guy ever or if he's trying to drum up a positive attitude. He's won his own backyard states of SC and GA and has gotten rocked everywhere else, as in 3rd or 4th. I would think most who are turned off by Romney would like to see Newt drop out. -
believer
Quite true. I don't know why Newt keeps hanging on except that he thinks he'll at least have a voice in the GOP convention.jhay78;1111839 wrote:Newt says he's staying in it no matter what happens in Alabama and Mississippi. I'm not sure if he really means it and is the most stubborn guy ever or if he's trying to drum up a positive attitude. He's won his own backyard states of SC and GA and has gotten rocked everywhere else, as in 3rd or 4th. I would think most who are turned off by Romney would like to see Newt drop out.
This is just a situation where none of the top 4 GOP candidates are attractive as stand alone's.
If only we could take Willard's business acumen and elect-ability, pepper that with Paul's economic common-sense, toss in a little of Rick's social conservatism, and salt it down with Newt's communication skills we'd have an ideal GOP candidate. -
Ty Webb
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
RealClearPolitics has President Obama leading 227-181 with toss ups remaining.
Of the remaining tossups I think it's pretty safe to say President Obama will win PA,which would put him at 247. Of the tossups remaining I think he has a pretty good chance at winning Colorado,Iowa,and Nevada..which would give him 268 which means who would only have to win 1 of the remain 6 toss ups to win re-election. Those 6 are:
Ohio(18)
Florida(29)
Missouri(10)
New Hampshire(4)
North Carolina(15)
Virginia(13)
The most likely win on that list is New Hampshire,which would give the President a win with 272 electoral votes.
I do believe he will lose North Carolina,Virginia,and Missouri,which would give the Republican candidate 219.
I believe Ohio and Florida will be extremely competetive and could go either way. Florida could go againist Romney if he is the nominee because Hispanic voters simply dont like him and Ohio could go againist him because he has come out strong against the Auto bailout which has helped millions of workers in Ohio and Michigan. So the final tally(IMO) could either be 319-219 for President Obama or he would eke out a win with a final tally of 272-266 -
sjmvsfscs08Romney + Rubio = guaranteed Florida, New Mexico. Virginia, North Carolina, and Missouri will go red. Bank on it.
Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Iowa will go Obama. The likelihood is in that order of best to worst.
Nevada has the worst economy in the country, and a slew of Mormons and Hispanics. Chalk it up to Romney/Rubio.
So....Ohio and New Hampshire.
Ohio's economy is recovering, so that helps Obama. But Kasich is seeing his approval numbers improve steadily, so that helps Romney. Consider it an Obama lean.
BUT, New Hampshire loves Romney, does it not? He was their neighbor to the south for decades. Say it goes Romney.
That would be a 269-269 tie, and the US House of Representatives gets to decide the election.
Boom. Craziest election in history. -
majorspark
Crazy it would be. Its happened before back in 1824. It would be interesting to see how todays politicians would react to such a scenario.sjmvsfscs08;1116451 wrote:That would be a 269-269 tie, and the US House of Representatives gets to decide the election.
Boom. Craziest election in history. -
Ty Webb
Many friendly polls my friend-manybeliever;1116582 wrote:Webby, where have ya been man? Guess you were waiting for an Obama-favorable poll, eh?
IMO,from what I've read and heard about Rubio.....his ego is WAY too big to accept the No.2 spot
I also believe that Romney is going to struggle to get a top tier VP pick because alot of them will look at the tough situation Romney may be in for the general and many of them will wait till 2016 to run for the nomination. Plus,if Romney picks Rubio,one of his big arguments againist President Obama will go right out the window. It may have the same effect picking Palin did for McCain -
Ty Webb
I was just looking at a list of potential GOP VP nominees and a name stuck out as a name I hadn't thought of but got me to thinking about how he would help whomever the GOP nominee is:
Gov. Brian Sandoval of Nevada -
stlouiedipalmabeliever;1112148 wrote:Quite true. I don't know why Newt keeps hanging on except that he thinks he'll at least have a voice in the GOP convention.
This is just a situation where none of the top 4 GOP candidates are attractive as stand alone's.
If only we could take Willard's business acumen and elect-ability, pepper that with Paul's economic common-sense, toss in a little of Rick's social conservatism, and salt it down with Newt's communication skills we'd have an ideal GOP candidate.
That's a pretty good wish list, right up there with "If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle".
Unfortunately you have to pick your poison this time. -
stlouiedipalmaTy Webb;1116650 wrote:Many friendly polls my friend-many
IMO,from what I've read and heard about Rubio.....his ego is WAY too big to accept the No.2 spot
I also believe that Romney is going to struggle to get a top tier VP pick because alot of them will look at the tough situation Romney may be in for the general and many of them will wait till 2016 to run for the nomination. Plus,if Romney picks Rubio,one of his big arguments againist President Obama will go right out the window. It may have the same effect picking Palin did for McCain
Let's not forget that Rubio co-authored Missouri Senator Blunt's amendment to the Transportation bill, the one which would have made it possible for an employer to deny health care if it offended his/her morals.
I think that, given the colossal screw-up of John McCain's team in not vetting Palin in 2008, whoever wins the nomination will be ultra-careful in scrutinizing his running mate. -
Manhattan Buckeye
As opposed to the poison we picked in '08. In a race with 100 runners, you don't need to be the first to defeat the last, 99th place still wins over 100th. Unfortunately for all of us we picked the 100th and are suffering for it.stlouiedipalma;1116721 wrote:That's a pretty good wish list, right up there with "If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle".
Unfortunately you have to pick your poison this time. -
stlouiedipalma
You can spin it any way you want, but if you hate Obama as much as most on this site, then come November you'll get into bed with one of these guys and do whatever he wants.Manhattan Buckeye;1116745 wrote:As opposed to the poison we picked in '08. In a race with 100 runners, you don't need to be the first to defeat the last, 99th place still wins over 100th. Unfortunately for all of us we picked the 100th and are suffering for it.
And you'll love it, until the morning after when you see what they really look like.