[quote]Mufasa wrote:
(Oh, Boy…or should I say “Oh, Newt…”)
ANY President…even if it was Saint Reagan…would have seen the issuance of more Food Stamps than any of his predecessors, when faced with the worst economy since the Depression.
Mufasa[/quote]
You’re right, he shouldn’t run against Obama, and the actual state of the economy under Obama. Even when the Obama machine begins the driving granny off the cliff narrative, Republicans should be looking to make excuses on his behalf. GoP candidate: “Don’t blame Obama, right Obama? You might as well vote for him. I mean, we’ve got nothing to say.” Obama: “That’s right GoP candidate. Now, explain to us why you want orphans and grandmothers to eat dog food out of the can.”
Unemployment wasn’t supposed to go over 8%, Mufasa. Remember that? Remember when Bush’s spending over 8 years was ‘unpatriotic.’ Yet, Obama has nearly matched that in 3 years. [/quote]
I’m missing the point you’re trying to make, Sloth.
Bad economies = more people needing assistance.
Mufasa[/quote]
Bad policy = deeper and prolonged pain.
Over 8% unemployment, still. He made the claim about how his policies would limit unemployment. Crony Mal-investment into Solyndra in 11 others. Job crushing regulations flying out of his administration. And what looks to be him ignoring another of his own commission/councils. Or, do you really think he’ll unshackle himself and his leftist party from an economy killing hyper-environmentalism? Will he really Drill, Baby, Drill? He is the foodstamp President. That’s just a fact.
Assistance (in all it’s forms) = bad economies (and destroyed families) eventually. We’re there. An oversimplification that happens to also be very true at bottom.
I don’t know if the GOP needs to do some “Soul Searching” in relation to whom they want to face the President…but if they do, they most likely need to start soon.
Looks like the ex wife interview thing had zero effect.[/quote]
Yes, it appears that about 42% of the Christian right in SC voted for Gingrich. I guess telling off the moderator is far more important than being faithful to your wife (either of them).
I think Bill Clinton started something and now Newt Gingrich is going to finish it.
We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter.
And to add one more thing, being wealthy now harms your chances.
As I said, down is up and up is down. If we are not living in the last days I’d be surprised.
Looks like the ex wife interview thing had zero effect.[/quote]
Yes, it appears that about 42% of the Christian right in SC voted for Gingrich. I guess telling off the moderator is far more important than being faithful to your wife (either of them).
I think Bill Clinton started something and now Newt Gingrich is going to finish it.
We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter.
And to add one more thing, being wealthy now harms your chances.
As I said, down is up and up is down. If we are not living in the last days I’d be surprised. [/quote]
They had to weigh Gingrich’s past, his conversion story, and the rest, to Romney-care paying for elective abortions. Like it or not, Zeb, Romney has a serious credibility issue on social issues as important as the pro-life position. You can argue why it shouldn’t be the case, but it is. You have to admit that much.
Looks like the ex wife interview thing had zero effect.[/quote]
Yes, it appears that about 42% of the Christian right in SC voted for Gingrich. I guess telling off the moderator is far more important than being faithful to your wife (either of them).
I think Bill Clinton started something and now Newt Gingrich is going to finish it.
We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter.
And to add one more thing, being wealthy now harms your chances.
As I said, down is up and up is down. If we are not living in the last days I’d be surprised. [/quote]
They had to weigh Gingrich’s past, his conversion story, and the rest, to Romney-care paying for elective abortions. Like it or not, Zeb, Romney has a serious credibility issue on social issues as important as the pro-life position. You can argue why it shouldn’t be the case, but it is. You have to admit that much. [/quote]
They accepet the Gingrich conversion but not the Romney abortion conversion?
Looks like the ex wife interview thing had zero effect.[/quote]
Yes, it appears that about 42% of the Christian right in SC voted for Gingrich. I guess telling off the moderator is far more important than being faithful to your wife (either of them).
I think Bill Clinton started something and now Newt Gingrich is going to finish it.
We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter.
And to add one more thing, being wealthy now harms your chances.
As I said, down is up and up is down. If we are not living in the last days I’d be surprised. [/quote]
They had to weigh Gingrich’s past, his conversion story, and the rest, to Romney-care paying for elective abortions. Like it or not, Zeb, Romney has a serious credibility issue on social issues as important as the pro-life position. You can argue why it shouldn’t be the case, but it is. You have to admit that much. [/quote]
They accepet the Gingrich conversion but not the Romney abortion conversion?
No, I think it goes deeper than that.
[/quote]
Where life is concerned, yes, I think it’s a bigger hurdle.
Looks like the ex wife interview thing had zero effect.[/quote]
Yes, it appears that about 42% of the Christian right in SC voted for Gingrich. I guess telling off the moderator is far more important than being faithful to your wife (either of them).
I think Bill Clinton started something and now Newt Gingrich is going to finish it.
We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter.
And to add one more thing, being wealthy now harms your chances.
As I said, down is up and up is down. If we are not living in the last days I’d be surprised. [/quote]
They had to weigh Gingrich’s past, his conversion story, and the rest, to Romney-care paying for elective abortions. Like it or not, Zeb, Romney has a serious credibility issue on social issues as important as the pro-life position. You can argue why it shouldn’t be the case, but it is. You have to admit that much. [/quote]
They accepet the Gingrich conversion but not the Romney abortion conversion?
No, I think it goes deeper than that.
[/quote]
Where life is concerned, yes, I think it’s a bigger hurdle. [/quote]
No what I mean to say is that it has nothing to do with either issue. I honestly think people simply voted on emotion after Newt’s strong debate performance. This is the GOP right and they hate Obama. And Newt gave it to the media etc. etc. But as I said on another thread what plays well for the GOP meat eaters does not mean that the general electorate will eat it up.
[quote]ZEB wrote:<<< We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter. >>>
[/quote]We’ve been living in that world for a long time now ZEB. I should not have to defend my family values creds, but given the rotten choices we have yes. Gingrich may be the best we can do overall this election as pathetic as that is.
[quote]ZEB wrote:<<< We now live in a world where cheating on your wife just doesn’t matter. >>>
[/quote]We’ve been living in that world for a long time now ZEB. I should not have to defend my family values creds, but given the rotten choices we have yes. Gingrich may be the best we can do overall this election as pathetic as that is.
[/quote]
Next to Ron Paul Gingrich is the worst possible candidate to face Obama. He is the only Speaker of the House to be removed for ethics violations in modern times. And he has even more baggage than that. Just because Romney and Santorum are leaving him alone for that don’t think for a second that the democratic party will do the same. And as far as his weight and gray hair (which I’ve mentioned repeatedly) Jon Stewart, David Letterman and the other comedians that are in bed with the democratic party will have a field day with him. By the time the election rolls around he’ll be a laughing stock. His current 56% negative ratiing will probably top 60%.
If you had said Santorum sure he has a fighting chance. But Mitt Romney has the best chance of ridding us of Obama.
Hopefully he get his act together in Florida and go on the offensive.
I must admit, this has been a wild week. I expected Santorum to take this or at least do a LOT better. I must admit, I can see where Zeb and Trib are coming from. “Values voters” choosing Newt over Mitt is understandable to an extent (although from all accounts Mitt is a good family man), but Newt over Santorum?!? This is quite surprising to me.
I think Zeb may be right, cheating on your wife doesn’t matter anymore (for politics).
I think something needs to be clear. (And it’s just my opinion).
This was a “FUCK, YEAH! Take-it-to-the MSLM/Damn Obama” vote.
In other words, I think that this had VERY little to do with whom people felt would make a good President; and EVERYTHING to do with whom they felt could “stick-it-to” the President and the Media.
Newt is an Attack Dog of the highest order; and will come out spitting, growling and baring fangs if backed into a corner.
Newt is an Attack Dog of the highest order; and will come out spitting, growling and baring fangs if backed into a corner.
Mufasa[/quote]
Mufasa, there will be a billion dollar Obama-pittie going for the jugular of the republican nominee. So they, the republicans, can either choose the poodle, or their own pit-bull.
Newt is an Attack Dog of the highest order; and will come out spitting, growling and baring fangs if backed into a corner.
Mufasa[/quote]
Mufasa, there will be a billion dollar Obama-pittie going for the jugular of the republican nominee. So they, the republicans, can either choose the poodle, or their own pit-bull.
[/quote]
I wonder if your hate for Romney, or should I say all things traditional republican is a healthy position to take? Because you’re not looking to win, you’re simply trying to put someone, anyone in a position to be slaughtered.
Like I said it’s a game you’re playing but the wrong game.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I must admit, this has been a wild week. I expected Santorum to take this or at least do a LOT better. I must admit, I can see where Zeb and Trib are coming from. “Values voters” choosing Newt over Mitt is understandable to an extent (although from all accounts Mitt is a good family man), but Newt over Santorum?!? This is quite surprising to me.
I think Zeb may be right, cheating on your wife doesn’t matter anymore (for politics). [/quote]
Santorum had a respectable 3rd. He’s a first time candidate with no money, and little name recognition. Newt undoubtedly captured votes would have largely been his in Santorum VS Romney headers. But, he’s done this from scratch. Romney walked in as the well pressed, multi-million dollar, veteran election-team-machine. Favorite son of the establishment. It was his turn. He was, inevitable! He saturated mailboxes, radio stations, and TV, with ads about his greatness, and negatives about his opponents. First on Newt, and more recently trying to squash Santorum. Perhaps if Santorum had been given his win in Iowa a week or two earlier, he could have built something. But time was running short and they saw Newt fighting back passion and quick wit. If Romney was going to be stopped it had to be in SC. And without money, passion and articulation is the next best thing. Maybe even better.
Newt is an Attack Dog of the highest order; and will come out spitting, growling and baring fangs if backed into a corner.
Mufasa[/quote]
Mufasa, there will be a billion dollar Obama-pittie going for the jugular of the republican nominee. So they, the republicans, can either choose the poodle, or their own pit-bull.
[/quote]
I wonder if your hate for Romney, or should I say all things traditional republican is a healthy position to take? Because you’re not looking to win, you’re simply trying to put someone, anyone in a position to be slaughtered.
Like I said it’s a game you’re playing but the wrong game.[/quote]
If you think Newt can knock down Romney, Obama and his team would slaughter him. The man is wooden, and oozes a phony campaign created persona. Obama would leash that poodle and have him playing dead within a month. Maybe he’d get a ‘that-a-good-boy’ from Obama for his subjugated obedience. You think he stumbles over himself about bain, tax returns, and his flip-flopiness? How did a 4 year old campaign with high-powered advisers get caught so flat footed on bain and his tax returns? Romney has no chance against Obama. None. The base obviously isn’t enthusiastic about the man at all! And Obama will turn him into a late-night joke! “Who is Romney’s greatest ideological opponent? Himself from just a couple of years ago!” /Rimshot!
Newt is an Attack Dog of the highest order; and will come out spitting, growling and baring fangs if backed into a corner.
Mufasa[/quote]
Mufasa, there will be a billion dollar Obama-pittie going for the jugular of the republican nominee. So they, the republicans, can either choose the poodle, or their own pit-bull.
[/quote]
I wonder if your hate for Romney, or should I say all things traditional republican is a healthy position to take? Because you’re not looking to win, you’re simply trying to put someone, anyone in a position to be slaughtered.
Like I said it’s a game you’re playing but the wrong game.[/quote]
If you think Newt can knock down Romney, Obama and his team would slaughter him. The man is wooden, and oozes a phony campaign created persona. Obama would leash that poodle and have him playing dead within a month. Maybe he’d get a ‘that-a-good-boy’ from Obama for his subjugated obedience. You think he stumbles over himself about bain, tax returns, and his flip-flopiness? How did a 4 year old campaign with high-powered advisers get caught so flat footed on bain and his tax returns? Romney has no chance against Obama. None. The base obviously isn’t enthusiastic about the man at all! And Obama will turn him into a late-night joke! “Who is Romney’s greatest ideological opponent? Himself from just a couple of years ago!” /Rimshot!
[/quote]
Romney is the best chance that the republican party has of beating Obama. For the many reasons I’ve previously stated. And for the umpteenth time a primary is different than a general election. Soon you are going to earn a Zeb eye roll, now I know you don’t want that…
Also, I think it’s funny how you call him a poodle, yet when millions of dollars were spent blasting Gingrich early on you called Romney ruthless. Is he now a ruthless poodle? Whatever he does you are not going to like it.
Know why?
You don’t like him. He’s sharp, polished and has changed his mind on some issues over the years. He’s too Bill Clintonesque for you. You know that guy who won two terms as President.
You don’t like him. He’s sharp, polished and has changed his mind on some issues over the years. He’s too Bill Clintonesque for you. You know that guy who won two terms as President.
[/quote]
Don’t even try to compare Mitt to Clinton. Clinton, love him or hate him, was genuinely quick-witted, politically brilliant, and warm. His base loved him, and his enemies had to begrudgingly respect him. Mitt is wooden, oozes a phony high-dollar campaign tailored political persona, and falls to pieces into a stammering and quaking mess when taken off script. The base isn’t remotely enthusiastic about Mitt. There is no denying that now.
Mitt will end up like some-kind of generic, made to order, cardboard cut-out, political opponent for Obama to casually knock over on the way to his second term.
