Romney now promising no abortion legislation...that may provide him with what he needs to win.  Romney is a product, and he will "reformat" his positions to create a product the public is willing to buy, like a CEO who changes styles as he moves from company to company.   I dont believe he has any personal agenda other than to be president - not sure if that is good or bad thing?

Is anybody going to do anything about the voter intimidation perpetrated by that Siegel jerkwad? Threatening to lay off employees if Obama is re-elected? That is not free speech, that is voter intimidation, and it is illegal.

I predict not.

 kurtster wrote: 

538 Blog is showing Romney with a 25% chance of winning the Electoral College. It also indicates that Romney has erased the post-convention bounce for the president. There are also trendlines that show gains for Romney among many polls, but there is still a gap.  

 kurtster wrote: 
I wouldn't bet the farm if I were you, son.  These models based on economic data alone aren't very accurate.

 hippiechick wrote: 

And you wonder why people dislike your brand of sanctimonious partisanship which you try to defend as nonpartisan truth-telling.

I must say you are nonpartisan in one respect:  There are people on both sides of the aisle who toss out insults and trade in facile stereotypes the way you do. It has little appeal for me regardless of which side of the aisle it comes from.

 oldslabsides wrote: 
+1

 jagdriver wrote: 

 aflanigan wrote: 
As in, I don't have to defend myself to you.

 hippiechick wrote: 

Take or leave what?

 aflanigan wrote: 
Take it or leave it

I predict whoever winds up in the white house will still be beholden to the monied interests that put him there.

 hippiechick wrote: 
There was no laughing emoticon included when you wrote: "I am now sure that America is populated (at least half) by total morons who don't have any clue what is good for them."  You seemed deadly in earnest to me.

 aflanigan wrote: 
I was joking, jeez (note the laughy emoticon)

 hippiechick wrote: 

So intelligent, sensitive, compassionate, lil' ol' you apply the ad hominem moron to anyone who votes differently than you.  How wonderful to have you around to raise the level of civil discourse here in the forums.

 Zep wrote: 
The tv is a metaphor

 Zep wrote: 
How would it be in a woman's best interest to vote for Romney, or someone like Todd Akin? I would not in any way, but there will be women who will vote for these people. When I asked a woman acquaintance, for example, why she would for for Rick Santorum, with his extreme beliefs, she answered, "Well, he won't be able to do those things anyway." Yet, if we elect a Republican president, he will appoint at least one justice, and then the SCOTUS will have the power to overturn Roe v Wade.

I don't need to interpret what is good for them, some things are just obvious.  

 hippiechick wrote: 
Is it that you don't agree with their interests? Or are you interpreting what is best for them?