Food
- Steely_D - May 5, 2024 - 11:51pm
Farts!
- RazzCat - May 5, 2024 - 10:03pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- Coaxial - May 5, 2024 - 6:33pm
What Did You See Today?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 5, 2024 - 5:28pm
What can you hear right now?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 5, 2024 - 5:27pm
Global Warming
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 5, 2024 - 5:25pm
Trump
- R_P - May 5, 2024 - 5:16pm
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful
- Antigone - May 5, 2024 - 5:06pm
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - May 5, 2024 - 4:50pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 4:38pm
Israel
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 4:02pm
The Abortion Wars
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 3:27pm
Those Lovable Policemen
- R_P - May 5, 2024 - 3:12pm
The Obituary Page
- Red_Dragon - May 5, 2024 - 2:53pm
Joe Biden
- Steely_D - May 5, 2024 - 2:16pm
Radio Paradise Comments
- Bill_J - May 5, 2024 - 1:34pm
Ukraine
- thisbody - May 5, 2024 - 12:33pm
What Are You Going To Do Today?
- GeneP59 - May 5, 2024 - 12:07pm
NY Times Strands
- geoff_morphini - May 5, 2024 - 10:13am
NYTimes Connections
- geoff_morphini - May 5, 2024 - 10:07am
Wordle - daily game
- geoff_morphini - May 5, 2024 - 10:02am
volcano!
- geoff_morphini - May 5, 2024 - 9:55am
Song of the Day
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 5, 2024 - 9:26am
Today in History
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 5, 2024 - 7:42am
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc)
- miamizsun - May 5, 2024 - 6:16am
Russia
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 5, 2024 - 12:03am
Favorite Quotes
- Isabeau - May 4, 2024 - 5:21pm
Anti-War
- R_P - May 4, 2024 - 3:24pm
Iran
- Red_Dragon - May 4, 2024 - 12:03pm
Live Music
- oldviolin - May 4, 2024 - 11:18am
Other Medical Stuff
- kurtster - May 4, 2024 - 10:24am
SCOTUS
- Steely_D - May 4, 2024 - 8:04am
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 4:51pm
The Dragons' Roost
- GeneP59 - May 3, 2024 - 3:53pm
Name My Band
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 3:04pm
RightWingNutZ
- islander - May 3, 2024 - 11:55am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- MrDill - May 3, 2024 - 11:41am
Poetry Forum
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 9:46am
What the hell OV?
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 9:36am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - May 3, 2024 - 9:24am
Lyrics that strike a chord today...
- R_P - May 3, 2024 - 7:54am
Derplahoma!
- sunybuny - May 3, 2024 - 4:56am
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum
- miamizsun - May 3, 2024 - 4:36am
What Makes You Laugh?
- miamizsun - May 3, 2024 - 4:31am
Main Mix Playlist
- R567 - May 3, 2024 - 12:06am
Who Killed The Electric Car??? -- The Movie
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 2, 2024 - 9:51pm
If not RP, what are you listening to right now?
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 5:56pm
What Makes You Sad?
- thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 3:35pm
songs that ROCK!
- thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 3:07pm
Breaking News
- thisbody - May 2, 2024 - 2:57pm
Questions.
- oldviolin - May 2, 2024 - 9:13am
And the good news is....
- Bill_J - May 1, 2024 - 6:30pm
Things you would be grating food for
- Manbird - May 1, 2024 - 3:58pm
Economix
- black321 - May 1, 2024 - 12:19pm
I Heart Huckabee - NOT!
- Manbird - Apr 30, 2024 - 7:49pm
Democratic Party
- R_P - Apr 30, 2024 - 4:01pm
Oh, The Stupidity
- haresfur - Apr 30, 2024 - 3:30pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- VV - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:46pm
Canada
- black321 - Apr 30, 2024 - 1:37pm
New Music
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 11:36am
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 29, 2024 - 8:34am
Photos you haven't taken of yourself
- Antigone - Apr 29, 2024 - 5:03am
Britain
- R_P - Apr 28, 2024 - 10:47am
Birthday wishes
- GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:56am
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 27, 2024 - 9:53pm
Classical Music
- miamizsun - Apr 27, 2024 - 1:23pm
LeftWingNutZ
- Lazy8 - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:46pm
Things You Thought Today
- Red_Dragon - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:17pm
The Moon
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:08pm
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance
- fractalv - Apr 26, 2024 - 8:59pm
Musky Mythology
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 7:23pm
Mini Meetups - Post Here!
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 4:02pm
Australia has Disappeared
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 2:41pm
Radio Paradise sounding better recently
- firefly6 - Apr 26, 2024 - 10:39am
Neil Young
- Steely_D - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:20am
|
Index »
Regional/Local »
USA/Canada »
Mitt Romney
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
cc_rider
Location: Bastrop Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 12:01pm |
|
Romulus wrote: We can't deny the media isn't deceptive and persuasive. Blasphemy! Fox 'News' is fair and balanced! MSNBC leans forward! No WAY could legitimate news outlets be deceptive or persuasive. They just report the facts, right? Right? Please, tell me they just report the facts...
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:58am |
|
steeler wrote:
That itself is a myth.
How do you explain, for example, the rallying of Santorum to challenge Romney these last couple months? He complained about being ignored and written off by the media, and, in those early stages, he was polling low and being written off by prognosticators. Remember him standing at the far end of all of the early debates? He had no traction of which to speak nationally. He bet the ranch on Iowa, spent nearly all of his pre-2012 tinme there, and that strategy seems to have actually worked for him.
We've seen almost every GOP nominee cycle from bottom to top and back to bottom again — and everywhere inbetween. It has been a remarkable primary in that regard. Gingrich has been pronounced dead by prognosticators several times now.
The reality is that folk are free to vote for whomever they wish. If someone is so wishy-washy on his or her voting preference (much less commitment) as to be swayed into voting for someone else whom they don't even like just because of what someone has written in the media, well, that sort of speaks for itself.
Fair enough, but, Santorum was/(is?) and employee of Fox. Bain Capital owns half of Clear Channel. And neither of them have been vetting properly as much as they dog on Ron Paul. Gingirch is an excellent debater. That helps. Ron Paul is very much an imperfect messenger with a less than stellar appearance, so it all comes into play. If Santorum was vetted properly by Fox, I don't think his numbers would be up so high. We can't deny the media isn't deceptive and persuasive.
|
|
steeler
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:51am |
|
Romulus wrote: And by the media either ignoring or repeating "Ron Paul can't win" myth over and over.
People willfully accept what's presented to them.
That itself is a myth. How do you explain, for example, the rallying of Santorum to challenge Romney these last couple months? He complained about being ignored and written off by the media, and, in those early stages, he was polling low and being written off by prognosticators. Remember him standing at the far end of all of the early debates? He had no traction of which to speak nationally. He bet the ranch on Iowa, spent nearly all of his pre-2012 tinme there, and that strategy seems to have actually worked for him. We've seen almost every GOP nominee cycle from bottom to top and back to bottom again — and everywhere inbetween. It has been a remarkable primary in that regard. Gingrich has been pronounced dead by prognosticators several times now. The reality is that folk are free to vote for whomever they wish. If someone is so wishy-washy on his or her voting preference (much less commitment) as to be swayed into voting for someone else whom they don't even like just because of what someone has written in the media, well, that sort of speaks for itself.
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:49am |
|
Beaker wrote: Do you truly believe that a Ron Paul presidency would be the best choice for America right now? That Ron Paul would provide superior stewardship to your country over Romney, Santorum, or even Obama?
Yes, because 1. We are broke. 2. Neither one of the 3 GOP stooges will admit that and propose borrowing and printing more money to bomb Iran. and a big 3. Individual liberty matters! The TSA and Drones aren't the answer. Would prefer Obama over Ron Paul?
|
|
jagdriver
Location: Now in Lobster Land Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:49am |
|
sirdroseph wrote:
Sure we will give peace a chance. How do you know it won't work, we have never tried it before and the war thing does not seem to be helping any, now does it?
Give chance a piece!
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:48am |
|
Beaker wrote: Do you truly believe that a Ron Paul presidency would be the best choice for America right now? That Ron Paul would provide superior stewardship to your country over Romney, Santorum, or even Obama?
Sure we will give peace a chance. How do you know it won't work, we have never tried it before and the war thing does not seem to be helping any, now does it? Besides, I thought you were concerned about the deficit, he and Johnson are the only ones with the chutzpah to actually present a true deficit reduction plan, those is the facts jack.
|
|
Red_Dragon
Location: Dumbf*ckistan
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:46am |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: As in: You don't want anyone to be president, or there's no one on the ballot you want to vote for? Answer to the first is move to Cuba, answer to the second is write it in.
there ya go.
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:45am |
|
Beaker wrote: Libertarians will be taken seriously when they've got a successful track record of effective representation as witnessed by significant numbers of them holding senate and congressional seats over the course of several election cycles. Pushing a nutcase such as Ron Paul into the bright spotlight that is a run for POTUS seems counter-productive. Surely for the good of the Libertarian movement, they could have found a better representative for this (and last) contest. Put a serious candidate forward, and the Libertarians will be taken seriously. Until then,its just a waste.
my 2cents
That is Ron Paul you fruit. 12 terms in Congress and head of the House Financial Services Committee? The system is rigged against any 3rd party. That's why they have to run as R's. And when they do, the system unites against them because they challenge the corrupt establishment.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:43am |
|
oldslabsides wrote:and when there is no such person? As in: You don't want anyone to be president, or there's no one on the ballot you want to vote for? Answer to the first is move to Cuba, answer to the second is write it in.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:42am |
|
Romulus wrote: followed next week by HOT DOG SALES SKYROCKET!
I said this morning I can't believe I'm taking Santorum's side but NPR was all "Romney had a solid performance yesterday, taking 6 out of 10 states, and winning hotly-contested Ohio." Wait, what? He won Ohio, split the delegates (again) and comes away leading, but not really pulling away with any conviction, yet they're literally saying now that he's the presumptive nominee. I guess they're looking at the calendar and trying to guess what will happen but this is the most interesting primary season in a long time (hillary/obama was pretty great too, I guess) and they should just let it play out.
|
|
Red_Dragon
Location: Dumbf*ckistan
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:36am |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: Well if that's your metric, we can all stay home. At some point, we have to start voting for the person we want to win, and not try to play bookmaker and strategize... because that's how Romney has kept his frontrunner status, by repeating "I'm the only one who can win" over and over and over.
and when there is no such person?
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:32am |
|
Beaker wrote:And then what? Proclaim from your megaphone how you helped him win 0 or maybe 1 electoral vote?Seems pointless. But I suppose it gives you a platform to shriek forevermore at whoever wins these contests for the Oval Office. That is what I am doing, I am left with no choice. What is the matter with voting for who you feel is the best candidate especially when they are an official choice on the ballot? Last time I checked this was a representative republic where our leaders are elected after counting all of the votes. What would you do a.: If you were an American and could vote here and b. were left with the choice of Paul and Obama? Would you not vote? How would that help? BTW, I am amused if you think Romney, Santorum or Gingrich is any different than Obama especially regarding the economy and the deficit. You are no different than the liberals who support Obama just because he is a Democrat. Funny how the most hatred and vitriol are reserved for those that are most alike. I find this ironic and amusing.
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:31am |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: Well if that's your metric, we can all stay home. At some point, we have to start voting for the person we want to win, and not try to play bookmaker and strategize... because that's how Romney has kept his frontrunner status, by repeating "I'm the only one who can win" over and over and over.
And by the media either ignoring or repeating "Ron Paul can't win" myth over and over. People willfully accept what's presented to them.
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:29am |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote:You're not wrong, probably, in your assessment of the voters except that anyone voting Romney is trying to choose the best candidate to run against Obama. He's nobody's first choice but if you have to choose ABCorD, you hold your nose and pick one. Had an "Anyone but Obama" guy spouting off in the office yesterday and he said he could walk down the street and pick a guy who could be a better president. I chuckled to myself that it ain't that easy, then I thought, sure, I can name a few people in this county who would be the best president this country's ever had. But there's one problem: they aren't running. All this talk of Mitt attracting this voter and Santo attracting that voter, makes no sense. At this point, few people are voting for Any Of The Above out of a true belief that they are uniquely qualified to lead the nation. It's a question of "you gotta eat. Want a lukewarm hotdog, or some of this soup from last week?" You spend 5 minutes going I Don't Care, Whatever, then just grab a hotdog and the press screams "HOT DOGS PREFERRED BY NATION'S LUNCH-EATERS." followed next week by HOT DOG SALES SKYROCKET!
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:28am |
|
Beaker wrote:And then what? Proclaim from your megaphone how you helped him win 0 or maybe 1 electoral vote?Seems pointless. But I suppose it gives you a platform to shriek forevermore at whoever wins these contests for the Oval Office. Well if that's your metric, we can all stay home. At some point, we have to start voting for the person we want to win, and not try to play bookmaker and strategize... because that's how Romney has kept his frontrunner status, by repeating "I'm the only one who can win" over and over and over.
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:27am |
|
Beaker wrote:And then what? Proclaim from your megaphone how you helped him win 0 or maybe 1 electoral vote?Seems pointless. But I suppose it gives you a platform to shriek forevermore at whoever wins these contests for the Oval Office. So does participating in a false choice of Mitt vs O. If you vote on principle, it's never wasted.
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:25am |
|
Beaker wrote: So when Ron Paul bows out of the race, or goes into the convention only to throw his support away/to some candidate you dislike, who then will you vote for in November? Ron Paul won't be on your ballot.
Lots of people will write him in anyway. And not sure R's. Many folks jumped the D's shipped already, thanks to Obombya, just like the former R's did thanks to Bush. So the myth that RP will hand the election to O is a myth. He pulls support from all sides.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:23am |
|
LordBaltimore wrote:
But you see I question that Idaho and Arizona actually share Romney's values. Romney is a very centrist GOPer while those states are very conservative. Had they voted their actual values they would have probably gone for Santorum (yikes!) or maybe Paul (alright!).
Again, thank God it's not Santorum who's the Mormon in this race.
You're not wrong, probably, in your assessment of the voters except that anyone voting Romney is trying to choose the best candidate to run against Obama. He's nobody's first choice but if you have to choose ABCorD, you hold your nose and pick one. Had an "Anyone but Obama" guy spouting off in the office yesterday and he said he could walk down the street and pick a guy who could be a better president. I chuckled to myself that it ain't that easy, then I thought, sure, I can name a few people in this county who would be the best president this country's ever had. But there's one problem: they aren't running. All this talk of Mitt attracting this voter and Santo attracting that voter, makes no sense. At this point, few people are voting for Any Of The Above out of a true belief that they are uniquely qualified to lead the nation. It's a question of "you gotta eat. Want a lukewarm hotdog, or some of this soup from last week?" You spend 5 minutes going I Don't Care, Whatever, then just grab a hotdog and the press screams "HOT DOGS PREFERRED BY NATION'S LUNCH-EATERS."
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:22am |
|
Beaker wrote: Are you sure he'll be on the ballot?
Why wouldn't he. Libertarian party has ballot access to 50 states... amiright?
|
|
Romulus
Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 7, 2012 - 11:11am |
|
LordBaltimore wrote:Okay I'm going to come right out here and point out an elephant in the room that will probably offend some people. So what.
Romney's percentages in the Western states look more like Soviet election percentages than anything else. And I think we all know why that is.
It appears that certain individuals are voting for this guy solely because he has the same religion as they do and are expecting special favors in return. It can't be because of any substantive stance on any issues, because let's face it — Romney has no substantive stances.
We'll of course see a repeat of this in the general election too. And it stinks, because I hate to see people be so cynical about the political process that they vote for someone solely based on what their personal religious beliefs are. There's people dying in Afghanistan and a huge debt crisis, America deserves better than people blindly voting based on one personality trait of a candidate.
Most people act based on the appearance of something. It's a superficial world. Newt is correct when he said, "People don't care what I do, they care about what I say".
|
|
|