Who do you want the GOP to nominate for 2012?

[LickNeckey]

my link to huff post supported your belief that Kagan will/should recuse herself. 

[the KHAN!]

1. Huckabee- Yes, he's not running, but could wipe the floor with pretty much anyone on either party who is.

2. Cain- Good business sense, only vice is some sex scandal that dates back to the Clinton era.... who cares? Democrats don't care, why should Republicans?

3. Romney- Like his hair, like his false beliefs about gold tablets. Like his economic savvy.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

my link to huff post supported your belief that Kagan will/should recuse herself. 

Didn't realize Kagan was considering a run at the Repub bid.  Top notch journalism on the part of the Huffer Post, thinking she'll recuse her/himself from that race.  It's not her/his time.

[sys]

none of the four are palatable.  one of the weakest, least popular presidents in modern history is going to waltz into a 2nd term because the republicans can't field even a single mildly attractive candidate.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

It won't matter who runs (except Ron Paul).  The thrill is gone.

http://www.youtube.com/v/pB4b11_LREA?version=3&hl=en_US

[pike]

It won't matter who runs (except Ron Paul).  The thrill is gone.

http://www.youtube.com/v/pB4b11_LREA?version=3&hl=en_US

Ron Paul polls better vs Obama than all other candidates except Romney.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The republicans could run an inanimate object and win 42 states in 2012.  This emoticon would defeat B.O. in 2012 --> 


B.O. is that terrible.  His ability to keep this economy down for this long was unfathomable 3+ years ago.  I honestly thought it would be impossible to do this much damage, apparently he actually is a messiah of sorts, a messiah of incompetency.


FYI retards, popular vote isn't how the presidential election is decided.  We use a thing called the "electoral college".  There aren't that many welfare states. . .yet

[pike]

I don't think the election is an automatic "W" for the "R's" as of right now. Obama hasn't even fired up his propaganda machine yet, which as we saw last time was one of the greatest brain washings in American history.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I don't think the election is an automatic "W" for the "R's" as of right now. Obama hasn't even fired up his propaganda machine yet, which as we saw last time was one of the greatest brain washings in American history.

I think everybody knows Obama supporters (media) will attempt to divide and demonize (racism claims).  I don't think the independents will fall for his schtick again.

[LickNeckey]

"Didn't realize Kagan was considering a run at the Repub bid.  Top notch journalism on the part of the Huffer Post, thinking she'll recuse her/himself from that race.  It's not her/his time."


Didn't realize I posted a huff post article in this thread?  jeezus you try so hard to be dick and still fail  

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

The republicans could run an inanimate object and win 42 states in 2012.  This emoticon would defeat B.O. in 2012 --> 

I wish I shared your confidence, but even if the election were held today, it would be very close. Obama's baseline is a little over 200 electoral votes. (And you can go ahead and add another 16 for Michigan to that tally if Romney is not the nominee).

A Republican has not won PA or MI since 1988. Add those to Obama and he's up to 242.

If Republicans want their best chance to win in 2012, I have two words for you: Romney-Rubio.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The republicans could run an inanimate object and win 42 states in 2012.  This emoticon would defeat B.O. in 2012 --> 

I wish I shared your confidence, but even if the election were held today, it would be very close. Obama's baseline is a little over 200 electoral votes. (And you can go ahead and add another 16 for Michigan to that tally if Romney is not the nominee).

A Republican has not won PA or MI since 1988. Add those to Obama and he's up to 242.

If Republicans want their best chance to win in 2012, I have two words for you: Romney-Rubio.

Incumbents aren't supposed to be close at this point in the year.  Incumbents that are up by 10 points at this time of the year have close reelection runs.  Incumbents that are statistically tied at this point get crushed in the gen election.

Disclaimer:  no incumbent has ever had propaganda machine that B.O. has at his disposal, could be an equalizer, probably not.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

"Didn't realize Kagan was considering a run at the Repub bid.  Top notch journalism on the part of the Huffer Post, thinking she'll recuse her/himself from that race.  It's not her/his time."


Didn't realize I posted a huff post article in this thread?  jeezus you try so hard to be dick and still fail  

the eff are you talking about?

and learn how to use the quote function

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I wish I shared your confidence, but even if the election were held today, it would be very close. Obama's baseline is a little over 200 electoral votes. (And you can go ahead and add another 16 for Michigan to that tally if Romney is not the nominee).

A Republican has not won PA or MI since 1988. Add those to Obama and he's up to 242.

If Republicans want their best chance to win in 2012, I have two words for you: Romney-Rubio.

Incumbents aren't supposed to be close at this point in the year.  Incumbents that are up by 10 points at this time of the year have close reelection runs.  Incumbents that are statistically tied at this point get crushed in the gen election.

Disclaimer:  no incumbent has ever had propaganda machine that B.O. has at his disposal, could be an equalizer, probably not.

There's a big difference between national polling and the electoral college. As I explained above, because of the concentration of the liberal base in certain states, Obama has a baseline of 200 electoral votes. The days of a 49-state Reagan-Mondale sweep are over. A "blow out" these days would be if the GOP carries all traditional swing states plus some rust belt states such as PA and MI. Maybe that will happen, maybe not. I hold little hope for these states due to the union stranglehold.

Thus, Obama could be polling in the low 40s and still win 250+ electoral votes.

Furthermore, do not underestimate the power of this administration, aided and abetted by the national media, to shred the GOP candidate. Even if Obama is polling in the low 40s next summer, that is not a very comfortable margin. The GOP needs a candidate with excellent communication, messaging, organization, discipline, and political savvy. There are two such candidates in the race: Romney and Gingrich.

[pike]

I wish I shared your confidence, but even if the election were held today, it would be very close. Obama's baseline is a little over 200 electoral votes. (And you can go ahead and add another 16 for Michigan to that tally if Romney is not the nominee).

A Republican has not won PA or MI since 1988. Add those to Obama and he's up to 242.

If Republicans want their best chance to win in 2012, I have two words for you: Romney-Rubio.

Incumbents aren't supposed to be close at this point in the year.  Incumbents that are up by 10 points at this time of the year have close reelection runs.  Incumbents that are statistically tied at this point get crushed in the gen election.

Disclaimer:  no incumbent has ever had propaganda machine that B.O. has at his disposal, could be an equalizer, probably not.

There's a big difference between national polling and the electoral college. As I explained above, because of the concentration of the liberal base in certain states, Obama has a baseline of 200 electoral votes. The days of a 49-state Reagan-Mondale sweep are over. A "blow out" these days would be if the GOP carries all traditional swing states plus some rust belt states such as PA and MI. Maybe that will happen, maybe not. I hold little hope for these states due to the union stranglehold.

Thus, Obama could be polling in the low 40s and still win 250+ electoral votes.

Furthermore, do not underestimate the power of this administration, aided and abetted by the national media, to shred the GOP candidate. Even if Obama is polling in the low 40s next summer, that is not a very comfortable margin. The GOP needs a candidate with excellent communication, messaging, organization, discipline, and political savvy. There are two such candidates in the race: Romney and Gingrich.

That may or may not be true, but I will be voting for Ron Paul along with probably a couple million other people. Just can't see myself voting for neo con Romney, neo con Gingrich, or neo con Obama. Factor this in and Obama should win pretty easily.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

That may or may not be true, but I will be voting for Ron Paul along with probably a couple million other people. Just can't see myself voting for neo con Romney, neo con Gingrich, or neo con Obama. Factor this in and Obama should win pretty easily.

Good for you. Do you know how stupid you sound when you say things like "neo con Obama," or is that intentional, like some sort of protest?

[LickNeckey]

oooh CBN

 

from the guy who links to Huff Post 

 


the time i posted a huff post link was about Kagan.  the article supported the notion she would recuse herself.  you said she would recuse herself.  you then made statements indicating that i suggested Kagan was running for rep bid including a lot of his/her statements.

"Didn't realize Kagan was considering a run at the Repub bid.  Top notch journalism on the part of the Huffer Post, thinking she'll recuse her/himself from that race.  It's not her/his time."


Didn't realize I posted a huff post article in this thread?  jeezus you try so hard to be dick and still fail 

the eff are you talking about?

and learn how to use the quote function

i called you a dick and then used the quote function.

[LickNeckey]

Also unfortunately neo-con Obama fits pretty well.
-   Extending Bush era tax cuts – check
-   Extending Patriot Act provisions – check
-   Operating under huge budget deficits - check
-   Continuing military engagements in Middle East to "support" democracy – check
-   Continuing Government bail-out policies for too big to fail entities – check
-   Continuing the use of Guantanamo and extradition – check
-   Maintaining Bush’s cronies in Mineral Management – check
       -Rolling Stone reported that staffers throughout the Interior Department refer to working there now as "Bush's third term."

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

Also unfortunately neo-con Obama fits pretty well.
-   Extending Bush era tax cuts – check
-   Extending Patriot Act provisions – check
-   Operating under huge budget deficits - check
-   Continuing military engagements in Middle East to "support" democracy – check
-   Continuing Government bail-out policies for too big to fail entities – check
-   Continuing the use of Guantanamo and extradition – check
-   Maintaining Bush’s cronies in Mineral Management – check
       -Rolling Stone reported that staffers throughout the Interior Department refer to working there now as "Bush's third term."

True. Obama is Bush on steroids. If being a big government supporter and socially liberal makes you a neo con, then they are both neo cons.

If wasting your vote on Ron Paul to help keep Obama in office makes you feel better, go right ahead. I will take a chance on anybody but Obama, because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term.

[LickNeckey]

"because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term."

we do?  did i miss the memo?  will you tell me?

[wetwillie]

"because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term."

we do?  did i miss the memo?  will you tell me?

More Hope and Change.

[pike]

That may or may not be true, but I will be voting for Ron Paul along with probably a couple million other people. Just can't see myself voting for neo con Romney, neo con Gingrich, or neo con Obama. Factor this in and Obama should win pretty easily.

Good for you. Do you know how stupid you sound when you say things like "neo con Obama," or is that intentional, like some sort of protest?

See licknneckey's post.

Also unfortunately neo-con Obama fits pretty well.
-   Extending Bush era tax cuts – check
-   Extending Patriot Act provisions – check
-   Operating under huge budget deficits - check
-   Continuing military engagements in Middle East to "support" democracy – check
-   Continuing Government bail-out policies for too big to fail entities – check
-   Continuing the use of Guantanamo and extradition – check
-   Maintaining Bush’s cronies in Mineral Management – check
       -Rolling Stone reported that staffers throughout the Interior Department refer to working there now as "Bush's third term."

True. Obama is Bush on steroids. If being a big government supporter and socially liberal makes you a neo con, then they are both neo cons.

If wasting your vote on Ron Paul to help keep Obama in office makes you feel better, go right ahead. I will take a chance on anybody but Obama, because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term.

I can't vote for a GOP candidate again and certainly not Obama. I don't want that on my conscience when Neo Con Mitt Romney starts world war III or Neo Con Obama continues to crap all over everything. The GOP could win if they just supported Ron Paul, but unfortunately they've got their heads buried in Neo Con propaganda network Fox News.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

"because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term."

we do?  did i miss the memo?  will you tell me?

Where have you been for the last 3 years?  Just look at California, Greece, Italy, etc, and you will see what direction he wants to go. Those are his models of success.

[LickNeckey]

my favorite part is how neo-con's hate Obama even though he is really good at neo-conning

-at first i thought it was because he was black, now i think it is because there is a D next to his name and they are dumb

"because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term."

we do?  did i miss the memo?  will you tell me?

Where have you been for the last 3 years?  Just look at California, Greece, Italy, etc, and you will see what direction he wants to go. Those are his models of success.

Hur Hur Hur

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

"because we already know what he will attempt do in his second term."

we do?  did i miss the memo?  will you tell me?

Do you really need to be told? Ok, let's look into my crystal ball. If Obama wins in 2012, he will:
1. Continue to prop up the Affordable Care Act, expanding its bureaucracy and feeding it more and more resources.
2. Continue to push for greater "investment" in "green energy" and continue the stanglehold on domestic oil production.
3. Appoint another liberal justice to the SC to replace Ginsburg.

In addition, he will pursue:
4. Amnesty for illegal immigrants in the continuing quest to put another ethnic group in the Democrats' pockets.
5. Raising taxes, significantly, in order to prop up the entitlement programs which he will refuse to reform. This includes making the tax code more progressive, by raising marginal rates on the top bracket and perhaps even adding another tax bracket.

Of course, he won't be able to accomplish much on Items 4 and 5, because the GOP will retain the House, making any new legislation impossible. And really, that's just what we need. More gridlock as we add billions of dollars every rough ridin' day to the national debt. Obama 2012!!! Hope and Change!!!