Reply With Quote
I don't think Santorum will go home after Florida. He said in post-debate that he had gotten more money in the last three weeks than in the previous nine months.
Romney did well and Newt was awful. For the second straight debate, the best debaters on the stage were Santorum and Paul. But, unlike the last debate the two actually got the chance to speak.
It likely won't improve the turnout for either substantially though.
I don't think Santorum will go home after Florida. He said in post-debate that he had gotten more money in the last three weeks than in the previous nine months.
Yep Romney's best debate by far. He smoked Gingrich to the point that Newt cried uncle and asked to stop the bickering. Then Newt tried his usual attack the media schtick and Blitzer gave him the smack down.
I don't quite agree on the Santorum/Romney exchange though. Santorum had an effective line of attack but his inability to deliver it without looking like an angry kid having a temper tantrum negates any advantage he might have gained from it imo.
Paul had a great performance tonight. His best of the debates I've watched. Congressman Paul your in the oval office and Castro calls what would you do? Well I'd ask him what he wantsing brilliant!
I know that this question has been asked a million times but is Ron Paul going to run as a 3rd party candidate? I'd vote for him as a 3rd party candidate. I still think it's possible that he could by some miracle get the GOP nomination if voters stop caring gay people, bombing Iran, and crying over abortion and start listening to the real issues like the debt, jobs, and overeseas building. If the Mavs can win a championship against a Heat team that had Wade, Bosh, and Lebron, and the fact that the Mavs didn't have homecourt then why can't this miracle happen too?
Can you imagine Ron Paul as a 3rd party candidate? I'm not an expert or psychic but from what I've read in the polls, he would get enough to be allowed to be in the debates with Obama and Gingrich/Romney.
No he is not running as a 3rd party candidate (at least according to him). Politics ain't basketball so you may as well stop dreaming now.
Yeah but people are still allowed to vote for him as a write in candidate if he doesn't wind up as the GOP nominee or a 3rd party candidate. For me, I'm either voting for him or the Libertarian candidate.
Can someone explain to me why a lot of voters are idiots especially when it comes to Ron Paul on foreign policy? Why do people hate what he says on foreign policy?
What's wrong with offering countries friendship and promoting diplomacy?
Why do we have to bomb countries and force them to do our bidding?
I can't believe how rude Gingrich and Romney were to that Palestinian American guy that asked a question about Palestine in the debate tonight. They basically told the guy that he was a piece of and that Palestine can go itself.
Romney crushed Gingrich last night and I thought Santorum had the best night. Paul did nothing last night but did have a few good puns.
To the GOP Paul's foreign policies show weakness. Period. Yeah, the treated that Palestinian like he wasn't even there.
Mitt Romney's Struggle With Truth Continues
Mitt Romney's inexplicable compulsion to fudge facts continued in Thursday's debate, threatening to undermine his credibility over the long term. Romney's blurring came, as in previous debates, when he was challenged on his past.
On Thursday, his two most noticeable fibs involved whether he'd seen an ad -- a reprise of an earlier debate dodge -- and the nature of one of his investments.
The ad in question attacked Newt Gingrich for saying that Spanish is "the language of the ghetto." Romney, however, turned to Gingrich and said he didn't know whether the ad was true or not and wanted Gingrich to clarify.
"Let me ask the speaker a question. Did you say what the ad says or not? I don't know," Romney said.
CNN staff dug up the ad and Blitzer read the script to the candidates. Blitzer noted that Romney finished the ad by saying he approved the message.
At an earlier debate, Romney had deflected responsibility for super PAC attack ads, saying, "And with regards to their ads, I haven't seen them." Seconds later, he spoke as if he'd seen the ad. "The ad I saw said you were forced out of the speakership," Romney said.
The second truth question involved Romney's investment in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which Romney said was in a "blind trust" managed without his knowledge by a trustee.
"What my trustee did is he loaned money to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And they got paid interest," Romney said. "But what the speaker did was get paid to promote Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
But, as the Boston Globe reported, the Fannie and Freddie investments were not in the blind trust: "Unlike most of Romney’s financial holdings, which are held in a blind trust that is overseen by a trustee and not known to Romney, this particular investment was among those that would have been known to Romney."
Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom acknowledged that not all of the Fannie and Freddie investments were managed by a blind trustee. "But," he wrote in an email, "in both cases the investments are not selected by Gov. Romney and he has no control over them."
Fehrnstrom added: "The campaign has produced 85 videos, TV ads and radio spots." Romney "doesn't recall every one."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...comm_ref=false
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/27/the_...ney_voted_for/An unlikely name crept into Thursday night’s Republican debate in Florida: Paul E. Tsongas, a one-time Massachusetts Democratic senator and 1992 candidate for president who passed away 15 years ago this month.
Romney, who exercised his right as a registered independent to participate in the Bay State’s ’92 Democratic primary, acknowledged years ago that he cast his ballot for Tsongas, who was vying with Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown for the right to oppose President George H.W. Bush.
Gingrich reintrodiuced the subject in an effort to draw attention to Romney’s less-than-conservative past. Romney replied: “Just a short clarification. I’ve never voted for a Democrat when there was a Republican on the ballot. And in my state of Massachusetts, you could register as an independent and go vote in which — either primary happens to be very interesting. And any chance I got to vote against Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy, I took. And so, I have always voted for a Republican any time there was a Republican on the ballot.”
If Newt really hangs in there until the convention will Willard be so damaged he cannot beat Obama? Or the anger/hatred toward Obama enough to carry him to victory?
losing Florida plus not being on the ballot in MO and VA might be too much for Newt to overcome
being Noot is too much for Noot to overcome
Newt got the "everything but official" endorsement from Sarah (!), which means his goose is cooked.
I'm so excited I can hardly contain myself.
Hold it until you have an Aide to release it with.
Romney is out to get endorsements to end this quickly.
Looks like it is going to take a little more time for Willard to wrap this up. Convention?
Super Tuesday will either be clarifying, or it won't
GOP Insiders Preparing for Obama Win?
political pros are more sanguine. Among the factors:
In bent presidents are always hard to beat. The trappings of the presidency go a long way. Also, Obama will be very well financed and has the luxury of husbanding his money while Republicans deplete their contributors’ pockets trying to defeat each other.
Republicans are doing a lot of Obama’s dirty work for him. Gingrich’s attacks on Romney’s work at Bain Capital, where he made a vast fortune by downsizing businesses and outsourcing jobs, will be echoed by Democrats through the general election campaign.
Republicans give new ammunition to Obama almost daily. Romney’s statement that he is not concerned about the very poor is only the latest example. And if by some miracle Gingrich manages to win the nomination, the public record is filled to overflowing with his off-the-wall proposals, such as wasting hundreds of billions of dollars to build a colony on the moon for no apparent reason.
It’s starting to look as if the economy is on a steady, if unspectacular, upward trend. Considering how beaten down the economy has been, it might not take much growth for people to start to feel a lot better. Republicans will claim that Obama’s policies deserve none of the credit, but they also blamed them for the economic slump within minutes of his inauguration. Fairly or not, presidents tend to get the blame for everything bad that happens on their watch and credit for everything good.
Obama’s chances for re-election are starting to look so good that Republican insiders are already considering what it will mean for 2016.
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Column...Win.aspx#page1
The Uninspired GOP Electorate
Even at this point, after Romney trounced Newt Gingrich in the Florida primary and the Nevada caucuses, there are some fairly compelling reasons for Republicans to pause before bowing to the party establishment’s decision that Mitt must be It.
First is the fact that so many GOP voters still can’t summon much enthusiasm for their likely standard-bearer. In a poll released last week, the Pew Research Center found that an incredible 52 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents consider the field of candidates only fair or poor. Just 46 percent assessed the field as good or excellent—compared to 68 percent who were satisfied with the contenders at the same point in the battle for the nomination four years ago.
In Florida, exit polls confirmed Pew’s findings: Nearly four in 10 GOP voters said they were unhappy with their choices. It is reasonable to assume that many Republicans who didn’t bother to vote—and thus were not sampled in exit polls—are probably even less enthusiastic.
Last May, as the roster of candidates was shaping up, just 43 percent of Republicans thought the field was fair or poor, according to Pew. In other words, the better Republican voters come to know these candidates, including Romney, the less they like them.
Still, somebody is going to get nominated. At this point, Romney has shown he can beat Gingrich almost everywhere. But that “almost” is important.
the South is the Republican Party’s heartland. Romney has shown in other contests that he can put a check mark in every ideological box—that despite Gingrich’s taunt of “Massachusetts moderate,” he can still win the support of voters who call themselves “very conservative” or who say they are tea party members. But maybe the relevant pejorative is the “Massachusetts” part.
So far, Romney has not shown that he can connect with and excite voters in the South the way Gingrich does.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/print...rate_20120207/
CNN reports Mitt Romney met privately with a small group of conservative leaders at CPAC's hotel today.
CPAC, what insane crap and lies will they spew this year?
Yeah, I've agreed with this thread. Just when you think he's locked up the GOP nomination, he loses; and when it looks like he's on the ropes, he comes back. All I'm saying is that Santorum had a legit shot at taking Romney down and blew it.
The man will not take no for an answer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions