2012 US Pres. Election Thread- Romney wins FL

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by Essential1

^ Ah so if he wants us to have 100% control I assume he is against stop lights, and speed limits

I mean who is the government to tell me when I need to stop my car so other traffic can come through, and what speed I have to drive when going through a school zone, or a residential neighborhood...

There is no such thing as 100% control...

I'm being highly patronizing of the "1000000% control to run their own lives" if you didn't catch that

No stop lights, no speed limits, no one making sure the cars are even safe to drive.  If enough people die in car accidents they will decide on their own to slow down and drive responsibly. 

If people buy cars with faulty breaks and die, people will stop buying the cars.  No need for government to step in.

No FDA.  If enough people die from food poisoning, they will stop buying food from that company or companies. 

This is why Ron Paul is considered a joke, that's just a little more funny/popular before elections.

 

[ninjahood]

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by Essential1

^ Ah so if he wants us to have 100% control I assume he is against stop lights, and speed limits

I mean who is the government to tell me when I need to stop my car so other traffic can come through, and what speed I have to drive when going through a school zone, or a residential neighborhood...

There is no such thing as 100% control...

I'm being highly patronizing of the "1000000% control to run their own lives" if you didn't catch that

No stop lights, no speed limits, no one making sure the cars are even safe to drive.  If enough people die in car accidents they will decide on their own to slow down and drive responsibly. 

If people buy cars with faulty breaks and die, people will stop buying the cars.  No need for government to step in.

No FDA.  If enough people die from food poisoning, they will stop buying food from that company or companies. 

This is why Ron Paul is considered a joke, that's just a little more funny/popular before elections.

i guess you didn't read that he prefers da STATES to police themselves...and its da right to pursue liberty AS LONG AS IT DOESNT mess up da liberties or harm others...

 

[Deleted member 43702]

So he won even after what his wife had to say.

That's wild.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by PoloLax

I'm a huge Democrat, but Obama has been unimpressive lately. His stance on the Keystone Pipeline seems odd to me. I understand the environmental impact that could be associated with this, but the project seems like it can be something close to FDRs New Deal. Large scale shovel ready project, new jobs, cutting dependency on foreign oil (How much, I'm not sure but it's a start) and the ability to snowball into other large scale projects in the area.

http://www.cbsnews.com/83...ny-jobs-really-at-stake/

5,000 to 6,000 U.S. jobs. One independent review of Keystone puts that number even lower, with the Cornell University Global Labor Institute finding that the pipeline would add only 500 to 1,400 temporary construction jobs. The authors of the September report also said that much of the new employment stemming from Keystone would be outside the U.S.

The dependency is very minimum because we actually do not own the oil.

Also it would increase the cost of oil in the Midwest.

http://www.keystonepipeli...l.nsf/AssmtDrftAccpt.pdf
(Page 90)
Under the KXL case, (which also allows for 400,000 bpd of expansion in the Transmountain line to Vancouver and Asia), total Canadian crude oil imports to the USA are projected to grow from 1.9 mbd in 2009 to 2.7 mbd by 2020 and 3.6 mbd by 203076. The results for the No KXL case are almost identical77.


Also in that same report.. In 2010 indicates we have 1.57 million barrels of Middle East oil imports a day.  By 2030 with KXL 2.48...  2030 No KXL  2.44.


In contrast, efforts to reduce oil demand, Ensys found, “would result in reduction of oil imports from non-Canadian foreign sources, especially the Middle East.

 

[00david00]

This whole notion that Paul wants everything (stop lights and speed limits?) to be abolished is misinterpreted.

As long as your acts are not harming others, you're fine.

For example, driving over the speed limit? BAD, you're putting others at risk.
driving without your seatbelt? who gives a @#@#, you're not putting others at risk

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by Essential1

^ Ah so if he wants us to have 100% control I assume he is against stop lights, and speed limits

I mean who is the government to tell me when I need to stop my car so other traffic can come through, and what speed I have to drive when going through a school zone, or a residential neighborhood...

There is no such thing as 100% control...

I'm being highly patronizing of the "1000000% control to run their own lives" if you didn't catch that

No stop lights, no speed limits, no one making sure the cars are even safe to drive.  If enough people die in car accidents they will decide on their own to slow down and drive responsibly. 

If people buy cars with faulty breaks and die, people will stop buying the cars.  No need for government to step in.

No FDA.  If enough people die from food poisoning, they will stop buying food from that company or companies. 

This is why Ron Paul is considered a joke, that's just a little more funny/popular before elections.

i guess you didn't read that he prefers da STATES to police themselves...and its da right to pursue liberty AS LONG AS IT DOESNT mess up da liberties or harm others...

Ah states rights where have I heard this.....


What is every southern state that tried to justify slavery for $1000 Alex

 

[blondsoccerplyr]

Newt has been married three times, yet feels that gay marriage is wrong. What a scumbag.

 

[essential1]

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Newt has been married three times, yet feels that gay marriage is wrong. What a scumbag.

And asked his second wife to have an open marriage.. But how dare the gays try to defile marriage

Hypocrisy in politics knows no bounds...

 

[bandit country]

Originally Posted by HankMoody

Interesting read on Ron Paul: http://www.timwise.org/20...-certain-white-liberals/

Just because we agree with him on some tiny, irrelevant issues like ending the war on drugs, ending military intervention, ending bailouts, and ending domestic spying, doesn't mean we should VOTE for the guy.

 

[foxdawg2000]

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by cguy610

No stop lights, no speed limits, no one making sure the cars are even safe to drive.  If enough people die in car accidents they will decide on their own to slow down and drive responsibly. 

If people buy cars with faulty breaks and die, people will stop buying the cars.  No need for government to step in.

No FDA.  If enough people die from food poisoning, they will stop buying food from that company or companies. 

This is why Ron Paul is considered a joke, that's just a little more funny/popular before elections.

i guess you didn't read that he prefers da STATES to police themselves...and its da right to pursue liberty AS LONG AS IT DOESNT mess up da liberties or harm others...

Ah states rights where have I heard this.....


What is every southern state that tried to justify slavery for $1000 Alex

This is what people don't understand.. States rights is code word for re institution of antebellum/discriminatory policies.. The Repubs would love to scrub all progress made in the last 65 years and put us back to policies prior to WWII.. I mean are you kidding me? You know its a shame when at one time Rick Perry led the polls, and just last yr the guy called for Texas to secede!  All that being said, Obama looks good against Gingrich for the fact that the man (Gingrich) has proven he's nothing but an ex pol/lobbyist in it for strictly personal gain..Romney would probably be able to garner a decent amount of Independents...Gingrich is willing to totally go outrageous either way on certain topics ala the statements made about "urban children." The man left 2 wives after both were  diagnosed with serious health complications... And they are claiming they want a guy that stands for christian family morals..

   They're now stuck with a man of a religion that most evangelicals call a cult, and Newt, a pure scum bag.. good luck in Nov....

 

[ninjahood]

if newt somehow beats mitt, its 4 more years of obama...... guaranteed

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

if newt somehow beats mitt, its 4 more years of obama...... guaranteed

You really think a Wall Street guy like Mitt really has a chance, that is also Mormon?

By the way, it is quite ironic that you seem to be a supporter of Ron Paul. 

 

[sillyputty]

I wish Newt would just call black people what he really thinks of us.

Stop beating around the bush with those DOG WHISTLE POLITICS

Seriously...

Dude might as well just call us NWA's or porch monkeys...

 

[thorrocksjs]

I don't trust Ron Paul or any of his states rights b.s. He is really trying reduce the u.s to zero as far as reforms .

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by Bandit Country

Originally Posted by HankMoody

Interesting read on Ron Paul: http://www.timwise.org/20...-certain-white-liberals/

Just because we agree with him on some tiny, irrelevant issues like ending the war on drugs, ending military intervention, ending bailouts, and ending domestic spying, doesn't mean we should VOTE for the guy.

Thanks for posting the article.  The more I hear about the guy the more I

.

" Paul argued that people harassed at work should simply quit their jobs, as no one is denying them their right to work someplace else.

"Employee rights are said to be valid when employers pressure employees into sexual activity," Paul wrote. "Why don't they quit once the so-called harassment starts? Obviously the morals of the harasser cannot be defended, but how can the harassee escape some responsibility for the problem? Seeking protection under civil rights legislation is hardly acceptable," he wrote.

  Well damn.  The boss can be telling chicks, "Get on your knees woman, or you won't be able to pay lil Timmy's tuition bills". 

 

[acidicality]

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Newt has been married three times, yet feels that gay marriage is wrong. What a scumbag.

For real, he talks about having "traditional conservative values" yet from his personal life he obviously doesn't value marriage one bit...big-time hypocrite.

 

[Senoj]

Newt wont get the nomination. The media is gonna hit Newt with the stone cold stunner all next week about his past marriages and his time as speaker. Plus the whole deal with Freddie Mac. He'll make it through Florida but he's gonna end up spending most of his money there so after that Mitt will wrap it up quick as long as he releases his tax returns soon.

 

[essential1]

All these guys are running just to lose


As Bill Maher said "They are running against a fictional President". You cannot win by running against the Barack Obama they wish to portray a "Sal Alinsky liberal" and "Socialist" and "Marxist" they cannot win that way.. Because that Barack Obama doesn't exist.. They also are setting themselves up for a beating if they challenge his foreign policy and call him weak...

What are they going to run on tax cuts?  Obama already beat them over the head with the payroll tax, and has not raised taxes on the middle class once... So what are they going to argue based on tax cuts for the "job creators"

You have Mitt Romney saying dumb things like Newt and Santorum are political insiders, and Americans do not want to vote for people in the Washington bubble. and he knows what it is like to be from the "real streets of America" the man whose father was worth millions...  Being born on third and making it home...  Add in the fact that Mitt Romney is the definition of a politician. So the irony is there.. Not to mention he wanted to become a politician in 94 and lost... Then became Governor. And has been running for President for 5-1/2 years..

Maybe 2016 will be better when they have to run against Andrew Cuomo

 

[luckyp90]

Romney and Obama are practically the same on the issues, with Obama leaning a little more left on welfare programs, but Romney still has his fair share. Same foreign policy. Same campaign donors. Both their campaign strategies will be to call the other one a flip flopper. It all just depends if you want to get raped by the SWC or the BBC. Obama does things like dance on Ellen, give fistbumps, and sing Al Green so my money would be on him.

I don't think Newt will win the Republican nomination. He's not on the ballot in alot of the states and that would not only hurt him directly, but now that he's a threat, the other candidates will probably use that against him in their upcoming campaigns. And yea, that ex wife thing isn't over yet. He flipped it pretty good during the debate and it actually helped him but if they keep it up it'll probably end up hurting him, especially when he can't respond directly since he's honestly a pretty good debater.

 

[Senoj]

Originally Posted by Essential1

All these guys are running just to lose


As Bill Maher said "They are running against a fictional President". You cannot win by running against the Barack Obama they wish to portray a "Sal Alinsky liberal" and "Socialist" and "Marxist" they cannot win that way.. Because that Barack Obama doesn't exist.. They also are setting themselves up for a beating if they challenge his foreign policy and call him weak...

What are they going to run on tax cuts?  Obama already beat them over the head with the payroll tax, and has not raised taxes on the middle class once... So what are they going to argue based on tax cuts for the "job creators"

You have Mitt Romney saying dumb things like Newt and Santorum are political insiders, and Americans do not want to vote for people in the Washington bubble. and he knows what it is like to be from the "real streets of America" the man whose father was worth millions...  Being born on third and making it home...  Add in the fact that Mitt Romney is the definition of a politician. So the irony is there.. Not to mention he wanted to become a politician in 94 and lost... Then became Governor. And has been running for President for 5-1/2 years..

Maybe 2016 will be better when they have to run against Andrew Cuomo

I don't understand how a middle or lower class citizen could support the republicans. It's like all republican supporters rely on the media and worthless debates to tell them who to support. There is no substance within the party anymore.

 

[tego calderon el abayarde]

I own property in other countries. I'm upper class regardless of where I live

 

[sillyputty]

Originally Posted by Adidas Freak

Originally Posted by Essential1

All these guys are running just to lose


As Bill Maher said "They are running against a fictional President". You cannot win by running against the Barack Obama they wish to portray a "Sal Alinsky liberal" and "Socialist" and "Marxist" they cannot win that way.. Because that Barack Obama doesn't exist.. They also are setting themselves up for a beating if they challenge his foreign policy and call him weak...

What are they going to run on tax cuts?  Obama already beat them over the head with the payroll tax, and has not raised taxes on the middle class once... So what are they going to argue based on tax cuts for the "job creators"

You have Mitt Romney saying dumb things like Newt and Santorum are political insiders, and Americans do not want to vote for people in the Washington bubble. and he knows what it is like to be from the "real streets of America" the man whose father was worth millions...  Being born on third and making it home...  Add in the fact that Mitt Romney is the definition of a politician. So the irony is there.. Not to mention he wanted to become a politician in 94 and lost... Then became Governor. And has been running for President for 5-1/2 years..

Maybe 2016 will be better when they have to run against Andrew Cuomo

I don't understand how a middle or lower class citizen could support the republicans. It's like all republican supporters rely on the media and worthless debates to tell them who to support. There is no substance within the party anymore.

I heard this quote and I forget the source but it says:
Middle class republicans always like to think that they're just millionaires that are temporarily down on their luck.

Thats why they defend dudes WAY richer than them. 

...talk about living VICARIOUSLY...

 

Originally Posted by Adidas Freak

Newt wont get the nomination. The media is gonna hit Newt with the stone cold stunner all next week about his past marriages and his time as speaker. Plus the whole deal with Freddie Mac. He'll make it through Florida but he's gonna end up spending most of his money there so after that Mitt will wrap it up quick as long as he releases his tax returns soon.

Obama is campaigning so little right now...

 

 

[gambit215]

Originally Posted by Adidas Freak

I don't understand how a middle or lower class citizen could support the republicans. It's like all republican supporters rely on the media and worthless debates to tell them who to support. There is no substance within the party anymore.

Uneducated people  think God will bless them with a substantial amount of money (Lotto) in their lives which will put them in the Republican forefront......

The movie Titanic I think best represents what happens to white trash who strike it rich...............Old Money never respects New Money.....

 

[mytoasterspeak]

Obama don't have anything to worry about. We have a Mormon who goes on 500 mile trips with his dog on the top of his car, but the luggage on the inside. Another guy who said black people are the only ones on welfare and who so staunchly doesn't believe in abortion, that his wife almost died twice. Then theres another guy who thinks only black people are on welfare, who has cheated on a dying cancer filled wife, cheated on all his wives, and is an idiot and probably the biggest hypocrite on earth. This is the competition for Obama?

If any one of those idiots get in office, you think Bush was bad? Wait til you get a load of them, I would be in Canada by the way

 

[hankmoody]

I'd consider myself more of a progressive but the opening lines hold true for that classification as well.