US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
Neutral said:
Mitt-Romney-speaks-at-For-007.jpg

Members of the Detroit Economic club gather to hear a speech by Mitt Romney at Ford Field in Detroit. Photograph: Scott Olson/Getty Images


Romney opened himself up to derision for choosing a 70,000-seat stadium which attracted just over 1,000 people, many of them school children bussed in to help fill out the crowd, tucked into a corner of the astro-turf pitch.



:lol:
Click to expand...

Once again, visually it proves that he is there to address the needs of the 1% only. Metaphorically, the empty space is the 99%.
 
niMic said:
You're pretty much making our point for us here, Cali. If that is the prime example of a notable Democrat who is on the extreme left and is a total loon, that says more of the state of US politics than anything else.
Click to expand...


Boxer is simply a Progressive.

more to the fact, that speaks volumes of the Republicans and where they are....to the far right.
 
niMic said:
You're pretty much making our point for us here, Cali. If that is the prime example of a notable Democrat who is on the extreme left and is a total loon, that says more of the state of US politics than anything else.
Click to expand...

Red Dreams said:
Boxer is simply a Progressive.

more to the fact, that speaks volumes of the Republicans and where they are....to the far right.
Click to expand...

RD I have no doubt that you'd be quite supportive of Boxer. In fact I'd be surprised if you had a negative thing to say about her. It also speaks nothing of the how far right the repubs are, it only speaks to her. I have some reasons for disliking her but mostly because of her personality to be honest.
 
Boxer is OK. Her heart is in the right place, particularly on the environment. She is extreme only by US standards. Fortunately, enough of California is atypical, so she can still get elected.
 
She'd be quite the centrist in Europe or any other place that's politically to the left of the U.S.
 
Cali Red said:
RD I have no doubt that you'd be quite supportive of Boxer. In fact I'd be surprised if you had a negative thing to say about her. It also speaks nothing of the how far right the repubs are, it only speaks to her. I have some reasons for disliking her but mostly because of her personality to be honest.
Click to expand...

So when asked to provide a counterpoint to the utter lunatics who have been elected to high office in the Republican party, to support your position disagreeing that the nuts on the right are significantly more powerful and more dangerous than the ones on the left, one of whom is now one of the front-runners to be their nominee for the Presidency, your best example is of a not-that-far-left-at-all Democrat who you don't like.

surf said:
Boxer is OK. Her heart is in the right place, particularly on the environment. She is extreme only by US standards. Fortunately, enough of California is atypical, so she can still get elected.
Click to expand...

I don't even think she's all that extreme by US standards. California leans left, but for all the nonsense about "Hollywood liberals" and "San Francisco values", it's really not that extreme.

jveezy said:
I wish Boxer would have a stronger Democratic challenger in primaries. She keeps winning because she's always running against complete buffoons (Fiorina being the last one).
Click to expand...

It's a state with 37 million people, with 5 major media markets (including two of the largest and most expensive) and probably a half-dozen or so minor ones. It's physically large enough that you need to fly around the state to campaign across it. It takes a lot of money to run a statewide campaign here, and you don't win a Democratic primary by running to the right.

Frankly, I'm not worried. Complete buffoons are pretty much all the California GOP has to offer.
 
I do not understand American Politics and i am not going to try too from what i can gather about this republican race though

Newt- watched too many episodes of star trek
Ron Paul- escaped molestation from Bruno
Santorum- could easil rhyme with moron (almost)
Romney- a mormon a mormon a mormon- although it's a religion that's being going since the 1800's americans still seemed scared by it and believe it's non christian?

am i correct in these assumptions?
 
Mormonism is like Islam in that sense - they share some beliefs with christianity but doesnt agree with Christianity's basic tenets (most importantly about the Holy Trinity) and added new scripture and was based on the teaching of a new prophet/messenger , just like Islam.

I dont believe in any God, but facts are facts: mormons are not christians.

(edit: That was an answer to a Herzog question that was deleted)
 
cinc said:
Mormonism is like Islam in that sense - they share some beliefs with christianity but doesnt agree with Christianity's basic tenets (most importantly about the Holy Trinity) and added new scripture and was based on the teaching of a new prophet/messenger , just like Islam.

I dont believe in any God, but facts are facts: mormons are not christians.

(edit: That was an answer to a Herzog question that was deleted)
Click to expand...

Yeah i didnt want to get into an a religous debate. So decided too delete. Religion is a touchy subject and do not want too possibly offend anyone of any faith.

(For those interested i basically asked for an expansion on why mormons are not christians in cincs opinion).

In terms of the election do you think Romneys religion will have an effect on his chances to become the Republican candidate for president cinc?
 
cinc said:
No, I think its overstated, there are many issues with him, and most of them are far more important in the voters' eyes.
Click to expand...

Judging from a far and like i said i know nothing about America really, it seems he is the favourite- is this statement correct? If not then who is? Again judging from a far- the other 3 seem incompetitent.
 
The fact Romney is a mormon does matter to Conservatives who are mainly Christians.
It also rankles with them , he has flip flopped on many fundemental issues like abortion.

that is why he is struggling to close the deal with them and the loon Santorum has some momentum.

But overall he is a pretty weak candidate.
 
adexkola said:
Surely Obama will destroy any of these idiots in a general debate? I'm tired of this circus.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think as thing goes on it most likely will end up being a fairly easy win for Obama. There is still a decent length of time to go before the election and the two key factors for the average person will be unemployment and gas prices. Unemployment rate was trending the right way for him but gas is killing him right now.
 
Santorum should continue to poll well in the south as long as Gingrich continues his plunge from contender to fringe candidate. Mitt needs to step up his negative ads to knock Santorum's poll numbers down a bit. He's been getting a free ride with relatively few attacks.
 
Raoul said:
Santorum should continue to poll well in the south as long as Gingrich continues his plunge from contender to fringe candidate. Mitt needs to step up his negative ads to knock Santorum's poll numbers down a bit. He's been getting a free ride with relatively few attacks.
Click to expand...

not even in Michigan?

I thought he would be carpert bombing Santorum there.

I hear a lot of democrats are voting for Santorum there just to act as spoilers. But this guy really scares me. Anti college education..anti JFK because of separation of Church and State :eek:
 
The anti college thing is being taken out of context but he sounds and looks like an utter fool for saying what he said. I really can't get the JFK thing. I mean JFK was saying almost exactly what you would think Santorum would agree with. Maybe he's following the philosophy that any publicity is good publicity. I wonder if the train is coming off the tracks for this guy.
 
:confused:

how was it out of context? He said Obama was being a snob for encouraging young people going to college. Obama said clearly any kind of college was needed, icluding community college.

on the JFK statement, Santorum wants the exact opposite of what JFK said.

Care to explain how you saw this?

He is saying the very thing that will bring the conservative base to him. He knows what he is doing alright. Credit to Romney for not resorting to this sort of thing tbf.
 
Cali Red said:
The anti college thing is being taken out of context but he sounds and looks like an utter fool for saying what he said. I really can't get the JFK thing. I mean JFK was saying almost exactly what you would think Santorum would agree with. Maybe he's following the philosophy that any publicity is good publicity. I wonder if the train is coming off the tracks for this guy.
Click to expand...

He's a nitwit, and it's pure tribalism. JFK was a Democrat, ergo he was wrong.

At least I hope it's that, because the alternative is that he looked at Kennedy's speech, designed to assure a Protestant majority that a Catholic President would not seek to undermine their religious freedom, and that's what made him want to vomit.
 
Red Dreams said:
:confused:

how was it out of context? He said Obama was being a snob for encouraging young people going to college. Obama said clearly any kind of college was needed, icluding community college.

on the JFK statement, Santorum wants the exact opposite of what JFK said.

Care to explain how you saw this?

He is saying the very thing that will bring the conservative base to him. He knows what he is doing alright. Credit to Romney for not resorting to this sort of thing tbf.
Click to expand...

The out of context is that he's trying to say there's nothing wrong with not going to college either. It's not for everyone. Here's the Wall Street Journal quote from Santorum.

Sanatarium said:
“Who are you to say that every child in America goes” to college, he continued. “I have seven kids. Maybe they’ll all go to college. But if one of my kids wants to go and be an auto mechanic, good for him! That’s a good-paying job.”
Click to expand...

I think it's just his delivery is brutal.

As for the JFK remarks I'm very confused by him. I think he's taking them to mean JFK was saying there should be no religeon in gov't. I think JFK was saying you should be allowed in gov't no matter your religeon. Considering JFK was probably looked a bit down on for being Catholic during his time.

BTW, I think The Daily Show did a pretty good bit on this last night.

EDIT: I think what's happening to Santorum in all this is much what he's doing to Obama as well. Obama did say he'd like people to go to college. But he followed that with 'or a trade school, junior college, etc'. So Santorum is being deceitful as well (shocking).
 
Excal said:
He's a nitwit, and it's pure tribalism. JFK was a Democrat, ergo he was wrong.

At least I hope it's that, because the alternative is that he looked at Kennedy's speech, designed to assure a Protestant majority that a Catholic President would not seek to undermine their religious freedom, and that's what made him want to vomit.
Click to expand...

This is my concern, that he just doesn't understand JFK's meaning.
 
Cali Red said:
The out of context is that he's trying to say there's nothing wrong with not going to college either. It's not for everyone. Here's the Wall Street Journal quote from Santorum.



I think it's just his delivery is brutal.

As for the JFK remarks I'm very confused by him. I think he's taking them to mean JFK was saying there should be no religeon in gov't. I think JFK was saying you should be allowed in gov't no matter your religeon. Considering JFK was probably looked a bit down on for being Catholic during his time.

BTW, I think The Daily Show did a pretty good bit on this last night.
Click to expand...

I saw it the same way with regards to President Kennedy's speech as you.

on the college quote, the point the President was making is for the vast majority a high school degree is not enough...and frankly I cannot see how you aquire some worthwhile skill without some further education/training.
 
Cali Red said:
This is my concern, that he just doesn't understand JFK's meaning.
Click to expand...

He may be a loon...but I would never say he is stupid. He understands alright. He is simply appealing to the base...and it seems to be working.

atm I think Romney is really in two minds if he should up Santorum or remain in the middle.

Tonights results will be very interesting in any case.
 
Romney is in trouble I think. I heard on the way in he's polling poorly today as well as for Super Tuesday. Obama must be licking his chops. I can understand the repubs liking Santorum but he doesn't excite independents (or third partiers). Me personally, I will not be excited about this election at all if it's Obama and Santorum. Don't care for either.
 
Cali Red said:
Romney is in trouble I think. I heard on the way in he's polling poorly today as well as for Super Tuesday. Obama must be licking his chops. I can understand the repubs liking Santorum but he doesn't excite independents (or third partiers). Me personally, I will not be excited about this election at all if it's Obama and Santorum. Don't care for either.
Click to expand...

this does surprise me. Santorum had an awful debate last time round and Romney has loads of money for adverts.
 
Cali Red said:
Romney is in trouble I think. I heard on the way in he's polling poorly today as well as for Super Tuesday. Obama must be licking his chops. I can understand the repubs liking Santorum but he doesn't excite independents (or third partiers). Me personally, I will not be excited about this election at all if it's Obama and Santorum. Don't care for either.
Click to expand...

Fear is exciting.
 
Simon Adebesi said:
Would you vote for Romney with gladness in your heart? I mean, would the election excite you then?
Click to expand...

No I guess not. Romney is probably the most qualified to help the country financially but I'm guessing he'll follow Bush's foreign policy which doesn't make me happy.

No matter who gets elected there are some very tough choices that are going to have to be made. Taxes and reducing the size and role of gov't are going to be the top priorities to me. Then getting ahold of Afghanistan will be the next. Either end the war and bring the kids home or build up finish it. And I think at this point bringing the troops home is the policy the next POTUS should take.

I want to see who the Libertarian ticket is. I could see myself agreeing with one of them more at this point.
 
Red Dreams said:
this does surprise me. Santorum had an awful debate last time round and Romney has loads of money for adverts.
Click to expand...

I think they said Santorum has a big lead in Ohio, Georgia and Virginia. Which I think would be devastating for Romney.
 
Yep, the Midwest is where I've spent most of my life, they are the sort of people who hate Romney's fakeness the most. And we're a close second to the bible belt when it comes to religious fervor, outside of the big cities of course.

Obama will likely do very, very well in the midwest which will be a near disaster for Romney once he wins the nomination.
 
gooDevil said:
Yep, the Midwest is where I've spent most of my life, they are the sort of people who hate Romney's fakeness the most. And we're a close second to the bible belt when it comes to religious fervor, outside of the big cities of course.

Obama will likely do very, very well in the midwest which will be a near disaster for Romney once he wins the nomination.
Click to expand...

Indeed so, the fact he is a midwestern president himself, or at least is portrayed as one, due to his Illinois career then that spills over into Indiana, Wisconsin and Minnestota you'd think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.