WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RealTruth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There are only three real candidates now.
> Herman
> > Cain, Gingrich and Ron Paul. Romney and Perry
> > have been dropping consistently and they're
> going
> > down like front runner Bachmann did.
> >
> >
>
> There's only been two real candidates - Romney and
> the non-Romney. That's why Tim Pawlenty was dumb
> to quit when he did. Born-again Christian who had
> a relatively decent conservative record. He would
> be leading right now if it hadn't been for his
> stupid advisers.

There's no way republicans are going to elect a Mormon so Romney is out.

RomenyCare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> There's no way republicans are going to elect a
> Mormon so Romney is out.


I hope you are right, because Romney is the only one from "the gang that can't shoot straight" to stand a chance of beating Obama.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RomenyCare Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > There's no way republicans are going to elect a
> > Mormon so Romney is out.
>
>
> I hope you are right, because Romney is the only
> one from "the gang that can't shoot straight" to
> stand a chance of beating Obama.

They will nominate him, he will pick a strong VP and he will win.

sleepy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RomenyCare Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > There's no way republicans are going to elect
> a
> > > Mormon so Romney is out.
> >
> >
> > I hope you are right, because Romney is the
> only
> > one from "the gang that can't shoot straight"
> to
> > stand a chance of beating Obama.
>
> They will nominate him, he will pick a strong VP
> and he will win.

I'm hoping he picks Palin as his running mate, she really energizes the base and has good VP campaign experience.

sleepy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RomenyCare Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > There's no way republicans are going to elect
> a
> > > Mormon so Romney is out.
> >
> >
> > I hope you are right, because Romney is the
> only
> > one from "the gang that can't shoot straight"
> to
> > stand a chance of beating Obama.
>
> They will nominate him, he will pick a strong VP
> and he will win.


Strong VP? Hech, Republicans dont even have a strong Presidential candidate to pick from! He will pick a relative unknown like our Governor.

Mao Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sleepy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > RomenyCare Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > >
> > > > There's no way republicans are going to
> elect
> > a
> > > > Mormon so Romney is out.
> > >
> > >
> > > I hope you are right, because Romney is the
> > only
> > > one from "the gang that can't shoot straight"
> > to
> > > stand a chance of beating Obama.
> >
> > They will nominate him, he will pick a strong
> VP
> > and he will win.
>
>
> Strong VP? Hech, Republicans dont even have a
> strong Presidential candidate to pick from! He
> will pick a relative unknown like our Governor.

Yeah. A Romney/Rubio ticket would be a disaster. LOL. You really don't get it. This President is in trouble and is very vulnerable. Get outside the beltway once in a while.

I'm not so sure VPs are much of a bonus. You aren't voting for the VP, you are voting for the main guy, the P. All people look for in a VP is some competence. You don't have to fulfill as big a standard as the P.

What I'm saying is, I don't think in modern elections a VP adds much to the campaign. However, I think they can be a liability.

sleepy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Yeah. A Romney/Rubio ticket would be a disaster.
> LOL. You really don't get it. This President is
> in trouble and is very vulnerable. Get outside
> the beltway once in a while.

The president will be in trouble when republicans can find a valid candidate to run against him.

Cain, Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Paul are all jokes. Obama will crush them in the first presidential debate. I don't think Romney, Perry or Bachmann even have any economic or foreign policy plans that republicans will agree with.

Joe Scarborough said it this morning. It's another case of the GOP picking a boring establishment candidate like Dole, McCain or Ford who probably has no chance of winning but it's "his turn."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

At least Cain is throwing his 9-9-9 plan out there. About time somebody actually addresses our tax system's many flaws. His plan may not be the best, but at least it starts people talking about changing the system. Realistically, things will never change, the politicians are all corrupt.

village idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At least Cain is throwing his 9-9-9 plan out
> there. About time somebody actually addresses our
> tax system's many flaws. His plan may not be the
> best, but at least it starts people talking about
> changing the system. Realistically, things will
> never change, the politicians are all corrupt.


The tax plan we have today is what's left of Reagan's Tax plan. Cain's plan already has deductions in it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Yes, President Obama's re-election is a foregone conclusion.

The Repug. primary is nothing more than kabuki theater.

The Other Guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, President Obama's re-election is a foregone
> conclusion.
>
> The Repug. primary is nothing more than kabuki
> theater.


The election is a year away and anything can happen, but Obama, despite his crappy approval ratings, is beating Romney is virtually every poll. Obama is a known quantity. For the most part, Romney isn't. The Dems can spend a year tearing Romney down over RomneyCare, his Wall Street windfalls, his flip-flopping on issues like abortion and his "Corporations are People, too" mantra. With any luck, the economy will improve somewhat in the coming months, which, combined with Obama's foreign policy accomplishments, could make for a re-election victory.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

The problem with Romney is his moderate and popular policies that he championed are radical and left wing to most of the Republican party.

@ JW, WTL , The Other Guy

If you all did a gut check, right now, on whether you truly believe Obama will be relected I suspect it would say no, he will not.

With that said, Mitt is your guy, because Mitt will be the most complacent on reversing Obama policies. The American people will be unahppy with Mitts presidental performance and he 2016 cycle will be ripe for the Democrats to get POTUS.

My gut check on Obama is that it is 50/50 for re-election. I think in the general election he will poll better than he does now, even if there isn't a huge improvement in the economy.

Obama has been compared to Carter, but Carter was surly, unlikeable and appeared really weak on foreign policy. At the same time, the economy continued to get worse and worse during Carter's term. Currently, the economy is not great, but it doesn't appear to be getting exponentially worse.

I think if there are some signs of the economy coming around and if Obama has some more foreign policy successes in late 2012, he stands a decent shot at re-election.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Come'on, a Gut Check is devoid of any thoughtful analysis.

as the Sports Junkies would say "Gun to your head", as of today, will Obama be relected, yes or no?

FurfaxTownie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Come'on, a Gut Check is devoid of any thoughtful
> analysis.
>
> as the Sports Junkies would say "Gun to your
> head", as of today, will Obama be relected, yes or
> no?


Based on what I'm seeing from the GOP since 2010 and how I personally feel about the job Obama has done, I would say my "gut check" is he'll be re-elected.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

I think that thinking it's a slam dunk that he won't be reelected is one of the mistakes a lot of conservatives and Republicans are making. It's the same one liberals and Democrats made in '04.

I do think he would absolutely win against any Republican I've seen except maybe Romney, and even that one is 55/45, leaning Obama's way.

Johnny Walker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think that thinking it's a slam dunk that he
> won't be reelected is one of the mistakes a lot of
> conservatives and Republicans are making. It's the
> same one liberals and Democrats made in '04.
>
> I do think he would absolutely win against any
> Republican I've seen except maybe Romney, and even
> that one is 55/45, leaning Obama's way.

There really haven't been any attacks on Romney because he has been in the background of Perry and Cain. If Romney ever gets to the front runner status(doubtful after the last debate) then he'll drop like rock with his past votes made public.

I would think Obama supporters would be jockeying to have Romney be the front runner. Obama would easily defeat Romney no question on that.

Good thing Romney knows how to create jobs. It's not like his state was ranked 49 out of 50 during his time as governor in terms of job creation...

Hm. Weird. I honestly think he's the biggest threat. I think he could attract moderates pretty well. But anyways, it's all speculation.

Bill Maher bet $1,000,000 to Michelle Caruso-Cabrera's $1 that Cain would not be the nominee,,,

Safe money,,,



And no, I have no idea who she is,,,just some guest on his show

Hatemotor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bill Maher bet $1,000,000 to Michelle
> Caruso-Cabrera's $1 that Cain would not be the
> nominee,,,
>
> Safe money,,,
>
>
>
> And no, I have no idea who she is,,,just some
> guest on his show

Then I guess it's four more years of Obama.

Consider all of the jobs Wilbur 'created' as a partner @ Bain Capital.

Here's a textbook example: http://www.massresistance.org/romney/ampad_062607/index.html

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Other Guy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes, President Obama's re-election is a
> foregone
> > conclusion.
> >
> > The Repug. primary is nothing more than kabuki
> > theater.
>
>
> The election is a year away and anything can
> happen, but Obama, despite his crappy approval
> ratings, is beating Romney is virtually every
> poll. Obama is a known quantity. For the most
> part, Romney isn't. The Dems can spend a year
> tearing Romney down over RomneyCare, his Wall
> Street windfalls, his flip-flopping on issues like
> abortion and his "Corporations are People, too"
> mantra. With any luck, the economy will improve
> somewhat in the coming months, which, combined
> with Obama's foreign policy accomplishments, could
> make for a re-election victory.

Let's not forget, in a field of many candidates no one has jelled behind anyone yet. These polls will change once the primaries begin - once the field is down to 2 or 3 final people and the others have dropped out of the race these polls will have more meaning. The fact that he is polling as badly as he is right now as the incumbent is pretty telling though.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's not forget, in a field of many candidates no
> one has jelled behind anyone yet. These polls will
> change once the primaries begin - once the field
> is down to 2 or 3 final people and the others have
> dropped out of the race these polls will have more
> meaning. The fact that he is polling as badly as
> he is right now as the incumbent is pretty telling
> though.

I said the same thing about Bush v. the Democratic
field in October 2003. I was just as wrong then as
you are now.

The Other Guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Let's not forget, in a field of many candidates
> no
> > one has jelled behind anyone yet. These polls
> will
> > change once the primaries begin - once the
> field
> > is down to 2 or 3 final people and the others
> have
> > dropped out of the race these polls will have
> more
> > meaning. The fact that he is polling as badly
> as
> > he is right now as the incumbent is pretty
> telling
> > though.
>
> I said the same thing about Bush v. the
> Democratic
> field in October 2003. I was just as wrong then
> as
> you are now.

There wasn't much you could do about Kerry... Having Newt get the nomination would be almost on par.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama has been compared to Carter, but Carter was
> surly, unlikeable and appeared really weak on
> foreign policy. At the same time, the economy
> continued to get worse and worse during Carter's
> term. Currently, the economy is not great, but it
> doesn't appear to be getting exponentially worse.


I think Obama is more like a George H.W. Bush. He rocked the foreign policy, was piss poor on the economy. He ran against a fractured field of Democrats who in the end coalesced around Clinton. Clinton wasn't many Democrats' first choice.

sleepy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Obama has been compared to Carter, but Carter
> was
> > surly, unlikeable and appeared really weak on
> > foreign policy. At the same time, the economy
> > continued to get worse and worse during
> Carter's
> > term. Currently, the economy is not great, but
> it
> > doesn't appear to be getting exponentially
> worse.
>
>
> I think Obama is more like a George H.W. Bush. He
> rocked the foreign policy, was piss poor on the
> economy. He ran against a fractured field of
> Democrats who in the end coalesced around Clinton.
> Clinton wasn't many Democrats' first choice.


Bush lost because 1) Ross Perot split the Republican vote and 2) Bill Clinton was Bill Clinton. If anyone runs to split the vote this time, it will be from the Tea Party end of things if Romney gets the nomination. And Romney is not Bill Clinton.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There wasn't much you could do about Kerry...
> Having Newt get the nomination would be almost on
> par.

I don't see any of the current crop of potential GOP
nominees as being particularly strong against Obama.

Romney - Much baggage, elitist, flip-flopper, weak on jobs, business experience enriched him & not much else.

Perry, Bachmann, Cain - National-level political novices, the gang that couldn't shoot straight, fundamental wackos, niche appeal won't carry over to the national stage.

Paul, Gingrich, Johnson, Huntsman, Santorum - Really, their chances are so low that discussion of it isn't necessary.

Of course, it's WAY too late for additions to the field, so them's your choices.

Obama's reelection is looking more likely every day.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2011 01:01PM by The Other Guy.

LOL!



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush lost because 1) Ross Perot split the
> Republican vote and 2) Bill Clinton was Bill
> Clinton. If anyone runs to split the vote this
> time, it will be from the Tea Party end of things
> if Romney gets the nomination. And Romney is not
> Bill Clinton.

To your first point, Ross Perot took the same amount from Clinton and Bush.

To your second point, Bill Clinton was not Bill Clinton in 1992. He was a relative unknown that made it to the top of a very muddled heap. He, like Romney, was a moderate in a field of idealogues.

I realize you think a Tea Party candidacy is a possibility, but it is about as possible as an Occupy candidacy as well. In the end, the imdependents will break for a candidate like Romney over Obama.

sleepy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I think Obama is more like a George H.W. Bush. He
> rocked the foreign policy, was piss poor on the
> economy. He ran against a fractured field of
> Democrats who in the end coalesced around Clinton.
> Clinton wasn't many Democrats' first choice.

WTF are you talking about?

Bush didn't rock foreign policy. He got the US involved in two wars. One war searching for WMD's that didn't exist.

Bush destroyed the banking industry by letting it run wild.

Bush took the stock market from 11,000 down to 5,600.

Gas went to $4.80.

After Bush there had to be government bailouts to kept major industries like the banks, car makers and airlines from going under.

Not to mention the incredible debt bill Bush ran up that the country may never recover from.

BushWoman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sleepy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I think Obama is more like a George H.W. Bush.
> He
> > rocked the foreign policy, was piss poor on the
> > economy. He ran against a fractured field of
> > Democrats who in the end coalesced around
> Clinton.
> > Clinton wasn't many Democrats' first choice.
>
> WTF are you talking about?
>
> Bush didn't rock foreign policy. He got the US
> involved in two wars. One war searching for
> WMD's that didn't exist.
>
> Bush destroyed the banking industry by letting it
> run wild.
>
> Bush took the stock market from 11,000 down to
> 5,600.
>
> Gas went to $4.80.
>
> After Bush there had to be government bailouts to
> kept major industries like the banks, car makers
> and airlines from going under.
>
> Not to mention the incredible debt bill Bush ran
> up that the country may never recover from.


Wow! We are dealing with a really bright one here! Let's see if you can figure out where your thinking went awry. I bet you are too stupid to figure it out.

sleepy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow! We are dealing with a really bright one here!
> Let's see if you can figure out where your
> thinking went awry. I bet you are too stupid to
> figure it out.

Psst, BushWoman! Sleepy was referring to George Herbert Walker Bush, Dubya's daddy, not Dubya himself.

BushWoman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTF are you talking about?
>

Really? LOL - reading comprehension wasn't your strong suit was it?

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Herman Cain will fade and next month it will be Ron Paul's turn in the spotlight. The fact the republicans candidates easily come and go is a sign that republicans don't think they have a strong candidate. I'd say it looks like Obama will be re-elected if he plays it cool.

I'd look for a lot of Congress to get booted.

Herman Cain will get the nomination. He is the only candidate will balls enough to change Washington. Romney and Perry are just Washington career politicians and the Tea Party voters will never vote them. Bachmann and Ron Paul are too whacked out when they speak.

So now Cain is accused of sexual misconduct by Bachmanns new campaign staff. Nice!

Watergated Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So now Cain is accused of sexual misconduct by
> Bachmanns new campaign staff. Nice!

Witness the GOP field eating itself. Truly, Ronald Wilson Reagan's ideals died with him.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

Watergated Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So now Cain is accused of sexual misconduct by
> Bachmanns new campaign staff. Nice!

Thought this was just a hit job in the Politico - where did Bachmann's campaign come into the story?

This is just the current MSM "Clarence Thomas" moment for the uppity black man.

2 women accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67194.html

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Funny how they waited until he has lead the polls for a couple of weeks before making these allegations,,,,,,,,,

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is just the current MSM "Clarence Thomas"
> moment for the uppity black man.

Whatever it takes, RV. This is politics, not a cotillion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

village idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Funny how they waited until he has lead the polls
> for a couple of weeks before making these
> allegations,,,,,,,,,

I just want to know where all the critical reporting was of the associations Obama had with William Ayers (which still have yet to make it to the MSM after all these years). I mean come on, these folks planted bombs in Federal government buildings and killed people - but yeah, Ayers is a professor now or something, so he gets a pass. Really. It is amazing the lengths the MSM goes to avoid reporting on any of Obama's past or affiliations - I mean really, what do we know about Obama that wasn't in his book (written by Ayers)? There have been some off channel stories, but MSM refuses to do any critical coverage of the guy. It just goes to show that with artful planning (see bury all your records as deep as you can and not allow anyone to release them) you can be elected President.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just want to know where all the critical
> reporting was of the associations Obama had with
> William Ayers (which still have yet to make it to
> the MSM after all these years). I mean come on,
> these folks planted bombs in Federal government
> buildings and killed people - but yeah, Ayers is a
> professor now or something, so he gets a pass.
> Really. It is amazing the lengths the MSM goes to
> avoid reporting on any of Obama's past or
> affiliations - I mean really, what do we know
> about Obama that wasn't in his book (written by
> Ayers)? There have been some off channel stories,
> but MSM refuses to do any critical coverage of the
> guy. It just goes to show that with artful
> planning (see bury all your records as deep as you
> can and not allow anyone to release them) you can
> be elected President.

Your assertions above get no play in reputable media
circles because there is no ‘there’ there. Ayers is
a guy from the neighborhood in Chicago whom the President
barely knew. It’s a non-story, which is why you only
read about it on wingnut outlets like World Net Daily
& CSN News.

You have to believe that there’s some sort of media
conspiracy to protect the President, because that’s all
you’ve got. You can’t handle the truth, which is as I’ve
stated above. If you have some sort of evidence; not
supposition, not inference, not opinion masquerading as
fact; actual proof of the President’s nefarious past,
bring it. Otherwise, STFU.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

Eyes of the Weasel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> You have to believe that there’s some sort of
> media
> conspiracy to protect the President, because
> that’s all
> you’ve got.

What rock do you live under again? LOL

The only reason you see much in the way of critical reporting on Obama now is that some of Hill and Bill's old pals have finally had enough of him and they are starting to get critical. The folks in the MSM firmly tied to the DNC are towing the line just as faithfully as before.

If you DON'T believe there is a move afoot to protect Obama then you must be living in that same utopia they are painting for you.

The proof is out there every day they refuse to cover stories that ARE stories critical of Obama's past.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2011 01:00PM by Registered Voter.

Eyes of the Weasel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you have some sort of evidence;
> not
> supposition, not inference, not opinion
> masquerading as
> fact;

As opposed to "sources" unnamed that curiously surface when it is clear Cain is in the lead. Please, you are about as deluded as they come - drinking from the Obama/MSM koolaid dispenser. Do you watch Ed Schultz - that guy lives in Obama delusion-ville central.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The only reason you see much in the way of
> critical reporting on Obama now is that some of
> Hill and Bill's old pals have finally had enough
> of him and they are starting to get critical.
> The proof is out there every day they refuse to
> cover stories that ARE stories critical of Obama's
> past.


Thanks for providing additional supposition, inference,
and opinion masquerading as fact. Really, you are too
predictable. Just because you're paranoid, RV, does
not mean that the world isn't out to get you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

Eyes of the Weasel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Watergated Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So now Cain is accused of sexual misconduct by
> > Bachmanns new campaign staff. Nice!
>
> Witness the GOP field eating itself. Truly,
> Ronald Wilson Reagan's ideals died with him.

I am still waiting for the link where it says Bachmann's staff was making this claim.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As opposed to "sources" unnamed that curiously
> surface when it is clear Cain is in the lead.

I don’t know the motives of these women and neither
do you.

> Please, you are about as deluded as they come -
> drinking from the Obama/MSM koolaid dispenser. Do
> you watch Ed Schultz - that guy lives in Obama
> delusion-ville central.

“Hello, Kettle? Pot calling: You’re black”.

“Please, you are about as deluded as they come -
drinking from the Beck/Limbaugh/Levin/FAUX
SPEWS/WND/CSN News koolaid dispenser. Do
you watch Sean Hannity - that guy lives in anti-Obama
delusion-ville central.”


See, just change a few words and anybody can spew
the same vapid shit as you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am still waiting for the link where it says
> Bachmann's staff was making this claim.

Ask watergated. It's not my assertion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

Eyes of the Weasel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> See, just change a few words and anybody can spew
> the same vapid shit as you.

Go eesh.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eyes of the Weasel Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> Do you watch Ed Schultz - that guy
> lives in Obama delusion-ville central.

That loudmouthed buffoon gives me a headache,
so no, I don't watch him. I can't stand
listening to/watching Rev. Al, either.

I do watch Rachel Maddow, though. She's
extremely intelligent and her arguments
are always well-reasoned and supported
by verifiable facts. She takes shots at
both sides, too. Best of all, she's got
winning sense of humor.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm not concerned about the very poor." – Willard "Mitt" Romney, February 1, 2012

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eyes of the Weasel Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If you have some sort of evidence;
> > not
> > supposition, not inference, not opinion
> > masquerading as
> > fact;
>
> As opposed to "sources" unnamed that curiously
> surface when it is clear Cain is in the lead.
> Please, you are about as deluded as they come -
> drinking from the Obama/MSM koolaid dispenser. Do
> you watch Ed Schultz - that guy lives in Obama
> delusion-ville central.


You've got some balls to use scare quotes around "sources."

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/712313.html

Johnny Walker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You've got some balls to use scare quotes around
> "sources."
>
> http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/71
> 2313.html

See: Personal Attacks.

Last I checked ACORN was an organization. The allegations being "sourced" regarding ACORN/NYCC are current events, not something covering an issue that may have come up 15-20 years ago.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

The point is name the sources in that article.

Herman Cain didn't know anything about sexual harassment suits in a 9am interview but in a FOX NEWS evening interview he all the sudden said "A paid agreement was made to one of the women." (Actually both women were paid a FIVE figure settlements)

God I am enjoying the Republican candidates eating each other alive and being called out on their bullshit lies.

It's called the internet GOP! People can look up facts now and Republicans can no longer just make facts up. The GOP candidates might fool republicans with their BS but Democrats know how to use the internet to look facts up.

Herman Cains accuser may come forward to tell her story in NBC interview.

I hope it's nice, juicy and contains references to Norm Albert.

Westerns Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Herman Cains accuser may come forward to tell her
> story in NBC interview.

Yeah, Cain's now toast, too (and he WAS the leader until this blew).

He can't get his story straight, so the story itself will "get it right". The woman-with-the-NDA will make more money from revealing "her truth" than the NDA payoff.

Stupid.

4 more years, II Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Westerns Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Herman Cains accuser may come forward to tell
> her
> > story in NBC interview.
>
> Yeah, Cain's now toast, too (and he WAS the leader
> until this blew).
>
> He can't get his story straight, so the story
> itself will "get it right". The woman-with-the-NDA
> will make more money from revealing "her truth"
> than the NDA payoff.
>
> Stupid.

Gotta love the way it was "Absolutely false!", then "I know of one instance but no compensation", then "Ok I know who this person is and of the incident but she did get paid."

Pretty soon it's going to be "We did have sex in the Godfathers Pizza store while it was video taped and customers watched."

FlippyDlop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4 more years, II Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Westerns Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Herman Cains accuser may come forward to tell
> > her
> > > story in NBC interview.
> >
> > Yeah, Cain's now toast, too (and he WAS the
> leader
> > until this blew).
> >
> > He can't get his story straight, so the story
> > itself will "get it right". The
> woman-with-the-NDA
> > will make more money from revealing "her truth"
> > than the NDA payoff.
> >
> > Stupid.
>
> Gotta love the way it was "Absolutely false!",
> then "I know of one instance but no compensation",
> then "Ok I know who this person is and of the
> incident but she did get paid."
>
> Pretty soon it's going to be "We did have sex in
> the Godfathers Pizza store while it was video
> taped and customers watched."

+1

Looks like Cains sexual harassment charges are starting to fade. He'll be back on top. I don't see GOP's having a problem.

Cained Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like Cains sexual harassment charges are
> starting to fade. He'll be back on top. I don't
> see GOP's having a problem.


LOL! Yeah, right....



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

I'd like to have seen Herman answer just one question last night without saying "999" solves all this.

I think it will eventually be between Romney, Cain and Gingrich as all the others fade out. My guess is that Romney will get the eventual nod. I had always thought that, but up until all the harassment stuff, was beginning to think Cain might have a chance at pulling off an upset. Kind of a shame, I would've enjoyed the campaign where the race card couldn't have been used because I think it would have been very entertaining.

After seeing his latest ad, I would totally vote for a Cain/Computer-Reagan ticket:

village idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think it will eventually be between Romney, Cain
> and Gingrich as all the others fade out. My guess
> is that Romney will get the eventual nod. I had
> always thought that, but up until all the
> harassment stuff, was beginning to think Cain
> might have a chance at pulling off an upset. Kind
> of a shame, I would've enjoyed the campaign where
> the race card couldn't have been used because I
> think it would have been very entertaining.

Romney will go the same path as Perry. Both of them are shit candidates that just smile and repeat a couple of talking points. They are career smiling politicians. Romney just hasn't said much yet so he hasn't had a good gaffe.

Obama would destroy Romney. Obama was top of the Harvard debate team. The biggest threat to Obama would be Gingrich in a debate. Gingrich can quote facts and figures that will make your head spin.

The best thing for a GOP candidate to do is to not debate Obama if possible. I'd say democrates want to prop up Cain or Romney for an easy win.