[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/241392153148915712[/quote]
OMG
Overall, I’d say the RNC was very well done. They had some really impressive black, hispanic and women speakers. They needed to combat the notion of the GOP being an old-white-guys party, and I think they delivered in spades. They have an outstanding bench. Successful business people. Compassionate givers. Beautiful families. What’s not to like?
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.
I don’t think this says anything against the Republicans and I am not 100 percent certain on it since I caught it on a radio news piece this morning, but it falls in pretty much with where I think we are as America right now sadly.
Honeybooboo had more viewers than the RNC when it went against it among the money target(adults 18 to 49). If this is true, and I think it probably is it just saddens me.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]
I don’t think his mule would think it nice you laugh’n. Now if you apologise like I know you’re going to…
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything
[/quote]
So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?
Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]
Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.
I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.
[quote]groo wrote:
I don’t think this says anything against the Republicans and I am not 100 percent certain on it since I caught it on a radio news piece this morning, but it falls in pretty much with where I think we are as America right now sadly.
Honeybooboo had more viewers than the RNC when it went against it among the money target(adults 18 to 49). If this is true, and I think it probably is it just saddens me. [/quote]
NOt that a convention is the be-all end-all of being an informed voter, but yeah… The typical American would prefer the TV do their thinking for them, and don’t want to be bothered with the inconvience of thought and information.
I think it has been this way forever though, just 200 years ago they didn’t have shitty TV to make distraction so easy.
The entire convention painted an accurate picture of who Mitt Romney really is. And this was much needed help after allowing the Obama campaign to paint him as an evil rich guy early in the campaign.
This is a man who has worked hard all his life and has been a leader in many different capacities, business, the Olympics, Governor. He understands the economy and has deep executive experience. Honestly, I have no idea why anyone would not want to vote for someone with his kind of background. It’s almost like he was born to step into the office of the Presidency at this very moment to turn things around.
The convention ended with probably the third best convention speech of any nominee since 1980. I feel he was only beaten by Reagan’s first acceptance speech in 1980 and George Bush (41) in 1988. Romney absolutely hit it out of the park.
It will now be interesting to see if he gets the coveted 5-8 point bounce. If he gets it and holds half that number after the democrats have their convention he’ll become the next President as I expect him to do well in the debates and potentially only gain ground there.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything
[/quote]
So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?
Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]
Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.
I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.
[/quote]
I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything
[/quote]
So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?
Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.
[quote]
I am surprised you did not study the economics of the situation 
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything
[/quote]
So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?
Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]
Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.
I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.
[/quote]
I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]
I am huge Clint Fan and Clint is entitled to his opinion but he is showing his age and I agree he was some what disheveled . But he is an old guy
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]
I see what you are saying, and am happy Rubio introduced Mitt.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]
So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]
So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.
[/quote]
Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything
[/quote]
So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?
Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]
Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.
I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.
[/quote]
I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]
I am huge Clint Fan and Clint is entitled to his opinion but he is showing his age and I agree he was some what disheveled . But he is an old guy
[/quote]
Let’s see how sharp you are when you hit 82.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]
So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.
[/quote]
Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
No I agree with his positions. He can’t be nominated by the current Republican party he doesn’t court the evangelicals. I don’t mean he should be nominated now that he is the Libertarian nominee. I think the Republicans should adopt a more Libertarian like platform if you like.
I am realistic he would have a hard row to hoe with cutting medicare and social security and defense spending and ya know being actually for limited government and wanting to stay out of all issues of personal choice, but dare to dream.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]
So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.
[/quote]
Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
I would vote for him too. Serious question… What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]
So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.
[/quote]
Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
No I agree with his positions. He can’t be nominated by the current Republican party he doesn’t court the evangelicals. I don’t mean he should be nominated now that he is the Libertarian nominee. I think the Republicans should adopt a more Libertarian like platform if you like.
I am realistic he would have a hard row to hoe with cutting medicare and social security and defense spending and ya know being actually for limited government and wanting to stay out of all issues of personal choice, but dare to dream.[/quote]
So let me get this right, you wanted Johnson because he would have stayed out of your personal affairs. But you are going to vote for Obama? Someone who has nosed government in between you and your doctor, taking over 1/6th of the economy in the process. Someone who wants to grow government so that it can be even more intrusive than it already is.
You are going to have to explain that to me.
Thanks.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?
[/quote]
Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]
So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.
[/quote]
Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
I would vote for him too. Serious question… What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)
[/quote]
One reason I laugh at Pitts political positions (there’s many more than one). He was on board with Ron Paul, but would rather vote for Obama than Romney.
Paul who didn’t want to collect any income tax and Obama who feels that income taxes should be raised to world record levels.
Certainly there are many more similarities between Paul and Romney than Paul and Obama. There are other forces at work like what I call the “rebel factor.”
HEY! I just realized blowhard Trump didn’t have a roll in the RNC!
LOL Good call!