Republican candidates for 2012
-
Ty Webb
BG....don't you agree it's a little early for him to be declaring a short list when he is just about to be taken over in polls by Perry
Although I think the Republicans will somehow mess this up and nominate someone like Bachman or Cain -
BGFalcons82
Ty Webb;843727 wrote:BG....don't you agree it's a little early for him to be declaring a short list when he is just about to be taken over in polls by Perry
Although I think the Republicans will somehow mess this up and nominate someone like Bachman or Cain
Nah...it's a good tactic. He's trying to act like he's leading the polls and he's giving the other's followers reasons to vote for him if their guy can be VP. It's valid, even though it is early, like you say. I think Bachmann has a shot at the VP position, but if I were betting, I'd go:
1. Rubio
2. Romney
3. Pawlenty
4. Bachmann or Palin -
coyotes22
-
coyotes22
Hasnt it been Obama PUSHING to get something done by Aug. 2?!?! Yet the Politco is saying its the R's in congress? WTF? We DO face a debt crisis, do we not?coyotes22;845651 wrote:The Tea Party is Terrorist:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60202.html
[LEFT]Their goals were also served by the Republican Party’s success in selling the notion that the country faces an urgent debt crisis. Nearly every economist agrees that we face a long-term debt problem, but there is no reason it must be addressed by Aug. 2.
[/LEFT] -
BGFalcons82
coyotes22;845706 wrote:Hasnt it been Obama PUSHING to get something done by Aug. 2?!?! Yet the Politco is saying its the R's in congress? WTF? We DO face a debt crisis, do we not?
[LEFT]
[/LEFT]
Tax-Cheat Geithner set the date. It was originally back in May, but he found a government trick to steal money from government pension funds and slip in an "IOU" to the pension holders. Just like California giving "IOU's" to state workers. What a great country where theivery is legal as long as you are elected. -
gutcoyotes22;845706 wrote:Hasnt it been Obama PUSHING to get something done by Aug. 2?!?! Yet the Politco is saying its the R's in congress? WTF? We DO face a debt crisis, do we not?
Everyone wants to kick the can down the road. I'm absolutely floored that people don't seem to understand that this is precisely WHY we have a debt ceiling so that, theoretically, we can't just keep kicking the can down the road. Obama and the Dems want to raise the debt ceiling so this isn't an issue until 2013 - or, in other words, people want to put off dealing with the debt for another 2 years while we rack up another $3T in debt.
NO BUDGET and an arbitrary debt ceiling we just raise as we see fit = NO FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY. I mean, I'm reminded almost daily of that famous line by George Carlin, but I'm still shocked at how stupid the average American is on this issue.
Talking to someone the other day, and they say "it's not going to kill the rich to pay a little more in tax"....FINE! Raise taxes. Raise them as much as you want. I guarantee you will still fall well over $1T short of balancing the budget. It almost pisses me off when I hear people talk about taxes on this issue - we have a massive spending problem that raising taxes won't come remotely close to fixing. -
jhay78
Wow- shocking coming from a former Ted Kennedy staffer.coyotes22;845651 wrote:The Tea Party is Terrorist:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60202.html -
gutjhay78;845895 wrote:Wow- shocking coming from a former Ted Kennedy staffer.
Gotta give the Dems credit....With the help of their friends in the MSM, they've successfully framed this as an issue of the rich not paying enough taxes, and that pushing for spending cuts is akin to putting a gun to the head of a beggar and demanding money. That they've been able to pull off something as logically ignorant and crazy as separating the debt ceiling from the deficit and $14T in debt is as much a commentary on their political savvy as it is on the stupidity of America.
I will give Obama credit for finally saying something I agree with in regard to economics - default would be the same as a tax on everyone by raising interest rates. But in typical obfuscation, he is misdirecting and ignoring that the debt spiraling out of control is already going to jack up interest rates for everyone. -
coyotes22
Perry in '12!!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/new-super-pac-to-run-rick-perry-ad-campaign-in-iowa/Perry has repeatedly hinted that he’ll seek the Republican presidential nomination, but has said he’ll wait until after Labor Day to declare his intentions -
Ty Webb
I would vote for Perry if I was a Republicans but I doubt he gets the nominaton
-
bases_loaded
Ty Webb;849808 wrote:I would vote for Perry if I was a Republicans but I doubt he gets the nominaton
The problem with our country everyone.... -
Ty Webb
Why??
Because I have a feeling someone won't win a political nomination?
You guys always bitch about being allowed to voice your opinion...that's what I was doing. Just because you're in love with the guy doesn't automatically mean he is going to get the nomination....much less win the presidency -
BGFalcons82
Ty Webb;850019 wrote:Why??
Because I have a feeling someone won't win a political nomination?
You guys always bitch about being allowed to voice your opinion...that's what I was doing. Just because you're in love with the guy doesn't automatically mean he is going to get the nomination....much less win the presidency
I'm pretty sure basesloaded was interpreting your statement that you would not vote for Perry because he is a Republican. In other words, he sees a problem with Americans that won't vote for whom they like unless they have the correct initial behind their name. If you are saying you can't vote for Perry in the primaries because you aren't a Repub, then it makes sense. Otherwise, I'm on bases' side. -
Ty Webb
I never said I wouldn't vote for Perry because he was a Republican...I said If I was a Republican I would vote for him....Big difference
-
fish82
Ty Webb;849808 wrote:I would vote for Perry if I was a Republicans but I doubt he gets the nominaton
If he decides to run, he'll win it going away. Romney won't see Super Tuesday. -
Ty Webb
fish82;850264 wrote:If he decides to run, he'll win it going away. Romney won't see Super Tuesday.
That would be your opinion.....and would be in contrast to every single poll out right now -
majorspark
Polls are worthless right now. Perry has yet to declare himself a candidate. An undeclared candidate with an significant numbers would be surprising.Ty Webb;850269 wrote:That would be your opinion.....and would be in contrast to every single poll out right now -
Ty Webb
Shouldn't matter......
If he's as great and popular as fish claims he is....he would be leading polls even if he isn't a decleared candidate(which he all know he will be) -
majorspark
Your a young guy. I have seen many a candidate leading in the early polls not make it through super Tuesday. Since you are a big poll guy find me a poll with Barack Obama leading the democrat primary field, let alone any republican frontrunner.
-
Ty Webb
Are you talking 2012?
-
majorspark
2008.
-
fish82
Quite true. That said, me thinks if you compare both our records on political predictions, I come out just a tad bit ahead.Ty Webb;850269 wrote:That would be your opinion.....and would be in contrast to every single poll out right now
-
Ty Webb
Agreed....
But you also know the Republican Partys record of picking unelectable candidates -
fish82
Touche. Although instead of flat "unelectable," I'd say they have a propensity to nominate the "next guy in line," who has "paid his dues." Said candidate has usually proven himself an established loser by failing to gain the nomination previously, and thus generates little if any buzz or excitement among the rabble.Ty Webb;850995 wrote:Agreed....
But you also know the Republican Partys record of picking unelectable candidates
Unfortunately, Romney fits this description to a tee.