GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 3

[Irvine511]

The Lesson: Hypocrisy knows no political affiliation.

but Leonardo DiCaprio isn't passing any laws.

 

[INDY500]

but Leonardo DiCaprio isn't passing any laws.

That's fair given the context of the your quote. Still hypocritical on a personal level though.

 

[Irvine511]

That's fair given the context of the your quote. Still hypocritical on a personal level though.

there's a big difference between a Hollywood actor who donates millions to environmental causes and drives a hybrid while taking a private jet to S. Africa to watch the World Cup with friends vs. an elected former Speaker of the House preach about "family values," about protecting the "sanctity" of "traditional marriage, and pursuing Bill Clinton's private life -- all things with real, tangible consequences that affect the lives of everyday people, like writing anti-gay bigotry into the US COnstitution, forcibly divorce gay couples, and ban adoptions by same-sex couples -- while at the same time living a life utterly contradictory to the ideals he seeks to impose on everyone else.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Callista Gingrich has to be the hottest female-to male-to female transexual I've ever seen in my life.

 

[Canadiens1131]

To remind us how much Mitt is in touch with the hard scrabble recession of everyday America mainstreet Joe the Plumber, he currently has at least $ 20 million and at most $ 100 million in an individual retirement account.

Romney's Unorthodox IRA - WSJ.com

The Gilded Age is back, bitches.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Well, it's good to see he's saving up so he can retire comfortably.

 

[2861U2]

Callista Gingrich has to be the hottest female-to male-to female transexual I've ever seen in my life.

Seriously? That's uncalled for.

 

[Irvine511]

Seriously? That's uncalled for.

yeah, i agree. and that's also a kind of offensive to trans people.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

and i respect you for voting your values.

see, i personally have no problem with people who may mutually agree to an open relationship. i have minimal problem with people who have affairs or less than perfect marriages -- life is long, marriage is work, libidos must be controlled, and god knows we aren't perfect.

i'm much more bothered by him dumping his wives when they become sick (cancer, MS) than with wanting an open relationship. i also think that, yes, people make mistakes, they grow and mature, etc.

the problem is when you extend no such compassion to others, when you demonize others who live differently than you claim to, and when you actively live a life vastly different from the one you preach to others.

Well said .

And for the record, I think John Edwards is a douchebag, too. I was never a big supporter of the guy to begin with when he ran in the past, I'd always favored Obama/Kucinich. But hearing about his actions bothered me, too. Cheating is one thing and a problem in and of itself, but when you step out on someone who is ill, if not deathly sick, that's just beyond low. I fully agree that hypocrisy must be called out more on both ends with any issue, definitely.

CNN is reporting that Perry is dropping out today and endorsing Gingrich.

I read an article on this this morning, and Perry was talking about how he felt Obama was leading us "down a dangerous path".

So naturally, to stop that, he goes ahead and supports Gingrich .

It's funny that some voters are so desperate to go for these guys who supposedly "appeal more to the base". They forget that while they may like these guys, for one reason or another, they're not the only ones voting, and there's many more in the country who find the Gingrichs/Bachmanns/Perrys/Santorums troublesome at best, downright offensive at worst. And if I were a member of the base, and people assumed that these sorts of candidates automatically were good for me and would "speak for me", I'd be a little offended by that.

I will echo the sentiments of those about our more conservative posters here. Things have gotten heated every now and again, but I do appreciate the general respect you've shown in debates, and the arguments you bring up. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't, but either way, I enjoy the discussion. If it weren't for you guys it'd be nothing but an echo chamber in here, and that gets boring after a while .

 

[BigMacPhisto]

yeah, i agree. and that's also a kind of offensive to trans people.

Sorry if anyone thought I was offensive, I was just going for random funny. That's all.

 

[Irvine511]

no worries.

 

[2861U2]

Predictions for South Carolina tomorrow:

1) Gingrich- 34%
2) Romney- 32%
3) Santorum 16%
4) Paul- 15%

I'm going with Gingrich, but I wouldn't be surprised if Romney won either. Santorum had a pretty good debate last night- better than Gingrich- and he could take some support from Newt at the last minute. Also, today's endorsement for Romney from Bob McDonnell (who I'm increasingly thinking will be his VP selection) could sway some undecideds.

It will be interesting to see what turnout is like. I hear it's supposed to rain and storm in much of the state tomorrow, which means the race may come down to organization and get-out-the-vote efforts.

If the results play out more-or-less like this, I think it's possible that Gingrich privately offers Santorum something if he gets out, and Santorum might just accept, having little money to compete in Florida. I also think we might see Marco Rubio and/or Jeb Bush endorse Romney before the primary.

 

[deep]

I really hope Gingrich wins SC by a few points, at least 5.

Romney will still get the nomination. And South Caroline will lose its so-called status as the king maker. It deserves to be as irrelevant as Iowa.

 

[Irvine511]

i find fewer people more loathsome than Gingrich. on every level.

but he sure has made this interesting.

 

[deep]

"We could fire a union paid school janitor, with full benefits in New York and take than money and put 450 black children to work picking cotton,
so they can learn a work ethic, that working for money is good."

(unless your father is a janitor earning a living wage)

 

[INDY500]

Daniels to deliver GOP response to State of Union | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com

Daniels to deliver GOP response to State of Union

WASHINGTON – Gov. Mitch Daniels will give the GOP response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday, Republican leaders announced today.

Daniels, in the final year of his second term, considered running for the GOP presidential nomination to challenge Obama but decided against it because his family was opposed.

Still, coulda, shoulda.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Of course, Gingrich will win tomorrow. The polls are always behind in terms of a surge. Gingrich is surging and there's only one day to make him backtrack. The allegations of his ex-wife clearly haven't done much to impede his rise in the polls lately, so I'm sure he'll handily win.

Overall, it's just bad for Republicans. They have no chance in hell of winning with anyone but Romney and all this will probably lead to is the Obama camp having more ammo to use against Romney and Romney's approval ratings being much lower before he ever even gets to the main fight.

 

[PhilsFan]

Daniels to deliver GOP response to State of Union | The Indianapolis Star | indystar.com





Still, coulda, shoulda.

Props to a dude who actually gives a shit about his family, unlike so many in this political climate who just pretend to.

 

[Irvine511]

Still, coulda, shoulda.

when i heard this on NPR (shock!) this morning, i knew you'd post something.

still, you're all going to be crushed by Hillary/Cuomo in '16.

 

[INDY500]

when i heard this on NPR (shock!) this morning, i knew you'd post something.

still, you're all going to be crushed by Hillary/Cuomo in '16.

If there's any crushing to be done in 2016 I think we all know the politician best equipped for that.

 

[deep]

I don't know if this has been posted

its not very good


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5VJryxUzi58

 

[HBK-79]

^

Stephen Colbert: "What's the difference between Mitt Romney and a statue of Mitt Romney?...The statue won't change positions."

 

[financeguy]

If there's any crushing to be done in 2016 I think we all know the politician best equipped for that.

You forgot to point out that there will be no need for Mr Christie to run in 2016 unless President Romney accomplishes all of his goals within his first term and decides to relinquish the post and seek other challenges.

I personally think it will take President Romney two terms to solve the problems created and damage done by Bushobama.

 

[anitram]

^

Are you entirely missing the fact that half the voters will vote for Obama and that most of the other half have at various points hoped for President Thrice-Married, President Pizza Philanderer, President Man-on-Dog, President Dumber-than-Bush and that nothing Mitt has done or said during the last decade while he's campaigned for president has made anyone like him?

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that die-hard Republicans will vote for Obama instead. But to get people to get off their asses and go vote on a cold night in November, you have to inspire them to do so. All Mitt does is inspire them to look past him and stay at home and watch Jersey Shore.

 

[financeguy]

To remind us how much Mitt is in touch with the hard scrabble recession of everyday America mainstreet Joe the Plumber, he currently has at least $ 20 million and at most $ 100 million in an individual retirement account.

Romney's Unorthodox IRA - WSJ.com

The Gilded Age is back, bitches.

I really object to this line of reasonsing - not because Romney's personal wealth and personal taxation shouldn't be on the public record and up for debate - it should, and is - but because it seems to suggest that purely because a person earns or has saved a bit more than the average (ok, a lot more, in Romney's case) they are not a good candidate for president.

Romney hasn't cost the taxpayer anything, hasn't run a bank into the ground and then demanded the taxpayer bail it out, has in fact helped to create numerous jobs in companies that would otherwise have folded. There is no suggestion that any of his fortune has been illegitimately earned. It has been said that his personal tax rate averages to 15%, as though this was something scandalous and disgraceful. I assume his investment income is substantial, so 15% of it is still a lot of money. Has anyone calculated how many hospitals that his personal tax bill pays for, how many peoples' unemployment benefits it funds?

Using Romney's wealth, which helps to keep America up and running, is about the weakest argument anyone can use against him. It doesn't even make logical sense.

 

[financeguy]

^

Are you entirely missing the fact that half the voters will vote for Obama and that most of the other half have at various points hoped for President Thrice-Married, President Pizza Philanderer, President Man-on-Dog, President Dumber-than-Bush and that nothing Mitt has done or said during the last decade while he's campaigned for president has made anyone like him?

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that die-hard Republicans will vote for Obama instead. But to get people to get off their asses and go vote on a cold night in November, you have to inspire them to do so. All Mitt does is inspire them to look past him and stay at home and watch Jersey Shore.

I haven't missed any of that, post was meant somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

You're right about half the voters going for Obama almost by default. He's already near as damnit bought the election. The higher the unemployment rate, the more it suits him.

 

[BVS]

Wow someone has injected the kool aid

 

[maycocksean]

The higher the unemployment rate, the more it suits him.

Say what?

How would a higher unemployment rate "suit" Obama? That's the worst thing for him politically.

 

[anitram]

I think FG is postulating that the "welfare queens" will vote for Obama.

Which completely ignores the fact that the poorer you are, the less likely you are to vote at all. The votes are with retired people and soccer moms, not the unemployed.

 

[financeguy]

Say what?

How would a higher unemployment rate "suit" Obama? That's the worst thing for him politically.

Well, I disagree. Game has changed, I reckon. I know it sounds mad, but, paradoxically, continuing shitty news on the economic front could be good for the incumbent, and not the challenger.

We've had the bankers bailout, we've had the Detroit/GM bailout, we've had the failure to rescind tax breaks for the super-rich.

At the same time, we have the black ghettos, the Mexican influx, the illegal Irish immigrants who only decided they had a moral issue with being illegal (and therefore, probably, getting paid tax free) when the economy turned down.

Obama might appear to be almost useless, but what he's being doing is quite cynically clever. Create more paper money out of thin air, devalue the dollar, etc, in order to balance the government books, temporarily. When inflation kicks in, just borrow more money and deflect the blame onto the rich guys. Hence, Obama emerges as man of the people, by contrast to ex-management consultant, stiff upper lip Romney, who is too polite and civilised to go for the jugular.

Make no mistake, Obama, being a keen student of Tammany Hall machine Chicago politics, will get the vote out.