GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 4 - Page 10 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-27-2012, 09:57 PM   #136
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:08 AM
yes, I was fairly young in 1980, but most Dems felt pretty good about right-wing Reagan getting the nomination over the more moderate Bush

and even in 2008, Limbaugh and his ilk were pushing Obama over Hillary, even going so far as to urge GOP to go to the polls in open primaries and vote for Obama.

In all truth, the GOP nominee is guaranteed to come in first or second, so having the best nominee for the whole country should be the desired outcome.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 01:06 AM   #137
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 08:08 AM
whatever Santorum ends up with in Michigan tomorrow
you can bet many of the people that vote for him will be voting for Obama in Nov.

Rick Santorum courts votes from Michigan Democrats | World news | guardian.co.uk
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 07:22 AM   #138
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,042
Local Time: 03:08 AM
__________________
cobl04 is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 07:24 AM   #139
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 10:08 AM
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 07:59 AM   #140
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,609
Local Time: 10:08 AM


i hadn't thought of that comic in forever, because it's my dad's favourite, which has always amused me because my dad's republican (or so he says).
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 11:26 AM   #141
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,667
Local Time: 12:08 PM
Great news! Romney got the all-important Kid Rock endorsement!
__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 01:22 PM   #142
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 09:08 AM
Romney and Lenny Kravitz ?

Redirect Notice
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 02:43 PM   #143
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,730
Local Time: 08:08 AM
That is faulty comic logic.

The pursuit of the orgasm leads women to buy vibrators, which leads to zero abortions.

Although that probably just makes us sluts. Shameful.
__________________
corianderstem is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 03:12 PM   #144
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 10:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Romney and Lenny Kravitz ?

Redirect Notice
Someone's trying to get street cred...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 03:38 PM   #145
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,996
Local Time: 11:08 AM
That's what I was thinking, doesn't Santorum even get the context of that Kennedy speech?

WASHINGTON — Newt Gingrich disagrees with Rick Santorum's harsh criticism of the famous speech on religion that John F. Kennedy delivered as he campaigned to become the nation's first Roman Catholic president.

Gingrich and Santorum, each a Catholic seeking the GOP nomination, view Kennedy's words differently. Santorum says he felt sick after reading Kennedy's 1960 speech and believes it advocated absolute separation of church and state.

Gingrich calls it a "remarkable speech." He told Fox News Channel on Tuesday that Kennedy was reassuring voters that he wouldn't obey any foreign religious leader. Gingrich said Kennedy was declaring "that his first duty as president would be to do the job of president, and I think that's correct."

Gingrich does share Santorum's position on President Barack Obama, however. Gingrich said Obama's administration is "anti-religious."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 02-28-2012, 03:42 PM   #146
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,996
Local Time: 11:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Romney and Lenny Kravitz ?
I think they just happened to be at Daytona at the same time, don't think Lenny is endorsing Mitt. I doubt Mitt even knew who he was.

Did Mitt cause that explosion, fire..whatever it was? He probably had too much product in his hair and got too close to some sparks or a gas tank or something.

Any dogs strapped on top of any of those cars?
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 02-28-2012, 04:02 PM   #147
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 10:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
....so having the best nominee for the whole country should be the desired outcome.
IMO, that's irrelevant, deep.

So let's accept the conventional wisdom, that despite selling his soul to get what he wants (the Rep nomination) that Romney - at his core- is genuinely "moderate" and would be more digestible to most of American than the others.

His agenda will still be dictated by the establishment in the Congress.
Look at what happened to GHW Bush when he thumbed his nose at them.
Pat Buchanan ran against the sitting President and did well for awhile, winning about 25% of the overall vote. That arguably hurt GHWB that November.
The Liberal Ted Kennedy wing did the same to Carter in 1980. And in both cases the sitting President was not re-elected. Gerald Ford was the sitting President in 1976, he was challenged by Reagan and lost to Carter.

The moral to the story is, I think Presidents will do anything they can to avoid those kind of large fissures in the party. And Romney would obviously always want to be re-elected in 2016. He would govern just like the rest of them. When it gets right down to the practical matter, there is no difference between those three candidates as to the real effect on the country in 2013.

The biggest distinction for Obama supporters is getting (or hoping for) the least digestible Republican candidate in November. If you want Obama to win, you should hope it is someone other than Romney. That's my view.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 06:40 PM   #148
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 09:08 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
IMO, that's irrelevant, deep.

So let's accept the conventional wisdom, that despite selling his soul to get what he wants (the Rep nomination) that Romney - at his core- is genuinely "moderate" and would be more digestible to most of American than the others.

His agenda will still be dictated by the establishment in the Congress.
Look at what happened to GHW Bush when he thumbed his nose at them.
Pat Buchanan ran against the sitting President and did well for awhile, winning about 25% of the overall vote. That arguably hurt GHWB that November.
The Liberal Ted Kennedy wing did the same to Carter in 1980. And in both cases the sitting President was not re-elected. Gerald Ford was the sitting President in 1976, he was challenged by Reagan and lost to Carter.

The moral to the story is, I think Presidents will do anything they can to avoid those kind of large fissures in the party. And Romney would obviously always want to be re-elected in 2016. He would govern just like the rest of them. When it gets right down to the practical matter, there is no difference between those three candidates as to the real effect on the country in 2013.

The biggest distinction for Obama supporters is getting (or hoping for) the least digestible Republican candidate in November. If you want Obama to win, you should hope it is someone other than Romney. That's my view.
I think the landscape has changed so much you can't use old models. All those comparisons were relevant up until the Cold War ended w Reagan.
We now find ourselves in many more gray areas where there are no simple answers.

I see Mitt being savvy the same way Bill Clinton was savvy in working w the opposing political party if he is to get elected POTUS.


Mitt is fit for office, those w sweater vests, cellulite, or attitudes need not apply.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 06:47 PM   #149
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 10:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post


Mitt is fit for office, those w sweater vests, cellulite, or attitudes need not apply.

<>
I just get the feeling that very few in your party really believe this. He's the alternative to Obama, but that's about it for most Republicans. He's the John Kerry of the GOP.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-28-2012, 07:02 PM   #150
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 09:08 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I just get the feeling that very few in your party really believe this. He's the alternative to Obama, but that's about it for most Republicans. He's the John Kerry of the GOP.
No, Mitt is honorable, faithful to wife family and country.
Mitt made his own money - didn't marry it.
Mitt is no John Kerry.

Try again.

<>
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com