Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Who Will Be the 2012 Republican Presidential Nominee? Who Will Be the 2012 Republican Presidential Nominee?

08-19-2011 , 09:16 PM
heh hoisted by my own argument
08-19-2011 , 09:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjkidd
Another Bushie, Bruce Bartlett, is critical of Perry's Fed comments:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...bbed-at-perry/

Anyone else think that Perry's over the top comments might have been made consciously in order to receive criticism from the Republican establishment? That it wasn't a gaffe after all?

Even more sinister, might Rove and Bartlett be in on it?
You thinking he is shooting to be as relevant as Paul and Bachmann? From my lips to FSM ears.
08-19-2011 , 09:23 PM
I think he wants to have the best of both worlds. He wants to be a mainstream candidate with an outsider image. And he wants to distance himself from GW Bush.
08-19-2011 , 09:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjkidd
Another Bushie, Bruce Bartlett, is critical of Perry's Fed comments:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...bbed-at-perry/

Anyone else think that Perry's over the top comments might have been made consciously in order to receive criticism from the Republican establishment? That it wasn't a gaffe after all?

Even more sinister, might Rove and Bartlett be in on it?
Perry and Bush have what appears to be a genuinely strained relationship. I think alot of the Bushies just don't like him. If all of that is a ruse that somehow helps Perry it is amazing strategery even for Rove.
08-19-2011 , 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjkidd
Another Bushie, Bruce Bartlett, is critical of Perry's Fed comments:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...bbed-at-perry/

Anyone else think that Perry's over the top comments might have been made consciously in order to receive criticism from the Republican establishment? That it wasn't a gaffe after all?

Even more sinister, might Rove and Bartlett be in on it?
I think it might have been made consciously to set up a "Perry vs powerful bankers who control everything" meme, with Perry on the side of the common man and Obama/Dems/moderate media types on the side of the evil bankers.
08-19-2011 , 09:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
they had 59 votes in the senate and passed one the biggest legislative changes to health care ever.

Like these are basic facts.... seriously. Just wow.
ikes, you're like Foxnews to Jon Stewart's writers. You make it too easy most times. You obviously know the # of votes needed to pass legislation in the Senate. And you must know about the filibuster rule, and then I must assume you're not a complete idiot, and understand cloture requirements. Add all that together, and you stuck your foot firmly in your mouth again.
08-19-2011 , 09:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjkidd
I think he wants to have the best of both worlds. He wants to be a mainstream candidate with an outsider image. And he wants to distance himself from GW Bush.
I think Ikes theory of sheer stupidity holds the most water. Has he mentioned the Fed sense his walk back the day after he made the statement? I would be shocked if corporate america/Wall Street hasn't told him that if he wants any support from them he needs to cease and desist on the Fed immediately.
08-19-2011 , 10:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjkidd
Another Bushie, Bruce Bartlett, is critical of Perry's Fed comments:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...bbed-at-perry/

Anyone else think that Perry's over the top comments might have been made consciously in order to receive criticism from the Republican establishment? That it wasn't a gaffe after all?

Even more sinister, might Rove and Bartlett be in on it?
"Almost treasonous" was a carefully scripted comment...
People are dying to hear plain talk...
As opposed to Orwellian DC lying doublespeak.

Does anyone think that printing $2,000,000,000,000...
In order to prop up a failed President is "patriotic"?

Let's see what happened since:

(1) Perry sucked all oxygen from the US political sphere.

(2) Obama took the bait... and addressed Perry directly...
Placing Perry on the same level as POTUS...
Perry is now responding DAILY to every Obama move.

(3) Mitt Romney disappeared... again.

(4) The Bushies despise Perry... and they took the bait...
Harsh Bush Machine attacks are a God-send for Perry...
He is a real West Texan... versus fake Yale Texan GWB.

(5) Rove is ****ting bricks...
A Perry win will marginalize the Bush-Rove Machine.

WIN, WIN, WIN for Perry... get used to more of same.
08-19-2011 , 10:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlelou
I think Ikes theory of sheer stupidity holds the most water. Has he mentioned the Fed sense his walk back the day after he made the statement? I would be shocked if corporate america/Wall Street hasn't told him that if he wants any support from them he needs to cease and desist on the Fed immediately.
Sheer stupidity is overstating... every politician is going to make mistakes on the trail, where a mic is in your face pretty much 24/7 (ask Obama how many states there are for example). The key is to not let those mistakes distract you from your goal.
08-19-2011 , 10:46 PM
I would vote for, in order:

Ron Paul
Huntsman
The NJ Governor
Mitt Romney
Obama

Anyone else

Michelle Bachman

Rick Santorum

The Devil

Newt
08-19-2011 , 10:49 PM
you forgot johnson
08-19-2011 , 10:54 PM
Is The Devil running?
How does he feel about universal healthcare?
08-19-2011 , 10:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
I would vote for, in order:

Ron Paul
Huntsman
The NJ Governor
Mitt Romney
Obama

Anyone else

Michelle Bachman

Rick Santorum

The Devil

Newt
This is an interesting list. What would you say is the most important attribute in your voting preference? Weed>>>>>?.
08-19-2011 , 11:39 PM
I would guess from least to most evil.
08-19-2011 , 11:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grue
I would guess from least to most evil.
How would you define "evilness"? With Paul at the top of the list I would guess you would have to define it from a pro religion/anti-science perspective but why wouldn't Perry and Bachmann be 2 and 3 on that list?
08-19-2011 , 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedManPlus
"Almost treasonous" was a carefully scripted comment...
People are dying to hear plain talk...
As opposed to Orwellian DC lying doublespeak.

Does anyone think that printing $2,000,000,000,000...
In order to prop up a failed President is "patriotic"?

Let's see what happened since:

(1) Perry sucked all oxygen from the US political sphere.

(2) Obama took the bait... and addressed Perry directly...
Placing Perry on the same level as POTUS...
Perry is now responding DAILY to every Obama move.

(3) Mitt Romney disappeared... again.

(4) The Bushies despise Perry... and they took the bait...
Harsh Bush Machine attacks are a God-send for Perry...
He is a real West Texan... versus fake Yale Texan GWB.

(5) Rove is ****ting bricks...
A Perry win will marginalize the Bush-Rove Machine.

WIN, WIN, WIN for Perry... get used to more of same.
It looks like someone has hacked RMP. There are like five sentences without ellipses.

08-20-2011 , 12:02 AM
Oh **** emoji works?!?!
08-20-2011 , 12:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlelou
How would you define "evilness"? With Paul at the top of the list I would guess you would have to define it from a pro religion/anti-science perspective but why wouldn't Perry and Bachmann be 2 and 3 on that list?
that's definitely what i've noticed about paul, whenever he comes on talking about the Federal reserve, and ending wars in the middle east, and protecting civil liberties, i think "oh there's that pro-religion anti science guy ron paul, he's just awful."
08-20-2011 , 12:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlelou
How would you define "evilness"? With Paul at the top of the list I would guess you would have to define it from a pro religion/anti-science perspective but why wouldn't Perry and Bachmann be 2 and 3 on that list?
It was a joke. See, "traditionally", the devil, also known as Lucifer, is the most evil of all creation, and therefore its a "dig" at former speaker Gingrich's expense. zing!
08-20-2011 , 12:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Tsao
that's definitely what i've noticed about paul, whenever he comes on talking about the Federal reserve, and ending wars in the middle east, and protecting civil liberties, i think "oh there's that pro-religion anti science guy ron paul, he's just awful."
Well when I here RP talk I think his views on the federal reserve and economics are roughly equivalent to his rejection of the theory of evolution-on the wrong side of science. He protects civil liberties except when it comes to a women's right to choose or gays right to marry or adopt. I would like to see the wars end and if that was my number one priority RP would be my guy.

But I was really trying to understand Riverman's list and I still can't find a policy issue that from my way of thinking explains the list. Grue's posit that it was a based on evil or "supernatural immorality" which led me to religion. Of course I understand it is Riverman's list and his views are the relevant ones when discussing the ranking.
08-20-2011 , 12:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grue
It was a joke. See, "traditionally", the devil, also known as Lucifer, is the most evil of all creation, and therefore its a "dig" at former speaker Gingrich's expense. zing!
Gotcha. I kinda used you mention of evil to take a shot at Paul. Probably as much out of desire to stir the pot as much as personal animosity. I already stated in the RP thread that I could almost support him if it wasn't for his views on the Fed and was told I was the only person in America that felt this way. They might be right.
08-20-2011 , 04:14 AM
Lucifer too low
08-20-2011 , 09:01 AM
With Obamas numbers sadly dropping like a brick it looks like Palin is a lock to get in now and Christie is looking more likely.
08-20-2011 , 09:35 AM
Palin getting in will help Ron Paul. She will not win the nomination, There's just no way.

Her getting in hurts Perry and Bachmann too. Can't wait.
08-20-2011 , 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4 High
With Obamas numbers sadly dropping like a brick it looks like Palin is a lock to get in now and Christie is looking more likely.
Good to have the ole' "4high hyperbole" back.

The chances of Palin and Christie running do not necessarily correlate with Obama's ratings.

      
m