Game changer...Santorum

[sammy the sage]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/07/santorum-romney-gingrich-paul-colorado-minnesota-missouri-republican/

Sweeps all three....sorry 'bout that B.M. or is it B.W....that video posted by P.A. got moi confused I tell ya.

[Greyfox]

Santorum is a light weight in this foursome. But if that's what GOP wants,
he's available. Stranger things have happened.

[DJofSD]

Lightweight in what way? Money? Debating? Political position? Boxing classification?

[boxcar]

Santorum is a light weight in this foursome. But if that's what GOP wants,
he's available. Stranger things have happened.

But he's the most conservative of the bunch.

The GOP obviously wants the RINO Romney to win. He's been the presumptive nominee all along. Weeks ago they were already whining and squawking about how they wish the process was over already and he was nominated. It's him they're trying to shove down our throats.

Boxcar

[sammy the sage]

Michigan will TELL the TALE :p

[lsbets]

But he's the most conservative of the bunch.

The GOP obviously wants the RINO Romney to win. He's been the presumptive nominee all along. Weeks ago they were already whining and squawking about how they wish the process was over already and he was nominated. It's him they're trying to shove down our throats.

Boxcar

How is he conservative? Everything conservatives on here disliked about Bush - out of control spending, no child left behind, prescription drugs - Santorum voted for. He is a social conservative, but he is far from an economic conservative, and he does not believe in individual liberty. Santorum is a big government "conservative".

He would also get trounced in the general with some of the looney shit he has said lately that appeals to a segment of the base, but will totally turn off the electorate in the general.

[bigmack]

Sweeps all three....sorry 'bout that B.M. or is it B.W....that video posted by P.A. got moi confused I tell ya.
Looks like my boy takes AZ & MI. :jump:

Start packin' up the crystal ball. YOU SUCK as a sage.

[PaceAdvantage]

He would also get trounced in the general with some of the looney shit he has said lately that appeals to a segment of the base, but will totally turn off the electorate in the general.Why do I get the impression that the electorate in general is a lot more socially conservative than perhaps you and others give them credit for...

I admit, I have paid no attention to politics much lately, other than what is written here...

What's the looniest thing Santorum has said to appeal to a segment of "the base" that you think will turn off the electorate in the general?

[Greyfox]

What's the looniest thing Santorum has said to appeal to a segment of "the base" that you think will turn off the electorate in the general?

For starters, Santorum's views on birth control will alienate many women- married and unmarried. Why he brought them up is anbody's guess.
Also, he has indicated that there is no separation between Church and State.
In that regard:
Specifically, he has said that
"Satan has his sights set on America.
"This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country - the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age? There is no one else to go after other than the United States and that has been the case now for almost 200 years, once America's preeminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers."

[PaceAdvantage]

For starters, Santorum's views on birth control will alienate both women- married and unmarried. Why he brought them up is anbody's guess.
Also, he has indicated that there is no separation between Church and State.
In that regard:
Specifically, he has said that
"Satan has his sights set on America.
"This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country - the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age? There is no one else to go after other than the United States and that has been the case now for almost 200 years, once America's preeminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers."What was his audience that day for that speech? A general town hall meeting? Something tells me not.

[PaceAdvantage]

BTW, is Santorum's little Satan speech akin to something like this?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/02/news/economy/obama_tax_rich_jesus/index.htm
Obama: Jesus would back my tax-the-rich policy

President Obama offered a new line of reasoning for hiking taxes on the rich on Thursday, saying at the National Prayer Breakfast that his policy proposals are shaped by his religious beliefs.Just another politician invoking religion to make a point...

Yeah, he's so super scary that Santorum... :lol:

Americans would surely run from him screaming their heads off in fear... :rolleyes:

[Greyfox]

BTW, is that akin to something like this?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/02/news/economy/obama_tax_rich_jesus/index.htm

You didn't ask that question.
I have no respect for Obama.

You asked:
What's the looniest thing Santorum has said to appeal to a segment of "the base" that you think will turn off the electorate in the general?

I gave an opinion. End of story. Santorum is a "flyweight," from what I have seen.

[bigmack]

For starters, Santorum's views on birth control will alienate many women- married and unmarried. Why he brought them up is anbody's guess.
Also, he has indicated that there is no separation between Church and State.
In that regard:
Specifically, he has said that
"Satan has his sights set on America.
He got all of that right. Umm, mmmm.

Then, some of us knew the SanMan had issues.

I pay far more attention on negatives in this grand scheme than at any other time. None of them could beat BO but MR, and NOT A SOLE has stepped up otherwise.

Tommy talks of someone from 'the wings' but that's fanciful thinking.

All aboard, who's goin' aboard.

North South East & West.

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/0/1/0/3/0/7/double-face-Mitt-65381988050.jpeg

[PaceAdvantage]

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/0/1/0/3/0/7/double-face-Mitt-65381988050.jpegThat must be a picture of Romney whilst wearing his magical underwear, right?

Foreign leaders would cower in his presence when he goes into Mormon-undies-shape-shifting mode, as seen in that photo... :eek:

[Greyfox]

What was his audience that day for that speech? A general town hall meeting? Something tells me not.

A speech to students at Ave Maria University Florida.

[PaceAdvantage]

A speech to students at Ave Maria University Florida. Right, a Catholic University. I rest my case.

Kind of like when Obama visits a black church or goes down South and suddenly his manner of speaking seems to alter a bit from his regular speech pattern.

It's called playing to your audience 101.

[bigmack]

That must be a picture of Romney whilst wearing his magical underwear, right?

Foreign leaders would cower in his presence when he goes into Mormon-undies-shape-shifting mode, as seen in that photo... :eek:
Whoa there. You've done such a herculean job in defending religious oddities - Don't go runnin' with the undie angle. It's beneath you. As are your undies. (Somebody get me a rimshot - STAT!)

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/amc/lowres/amcn23l.jpg

[lsbets]

Why do I get the impression that the electorate in general is a lot more socially conservative than perhaps you and others give them credit for...

I admit, I have paid no attention to politics much lately, other than what is written here...

What's the looniest thing Santorum has said to appeal to a segment of "the base" that you think will turn off the electorate in the general?

Let's skip the Satan speech, even though that would be replayed over and over again, and he said some things in there that would turn a ton of people off.

How about Obama wants everyone to go to college so they can be brainwashed into becoming liberals?

How about as President he would use the bully pulpit to criticize contraception because he thinks it causes bad things like people enjoying sex?

Those are two off the top of my head.

Oh yeah, internet gambling would be "dangerous" for America. A lot of people might be opposed to it, but don't think it is dangerous. Dangerous? Really?

Santorum is a fringe loon dressed up in a cute little sweater vest, and loves big government. I absolutely would never vote for him.

[PaceAdvantage]

Fringe loon? Hardly. Lots of people share his views (me not being one of them).

Besides, we need less milk-toasty candidates, not more. All this "middle of the road" baloney makes for a very boring country.

I think it's high time we had a fringe loon in the White House anyway...shake things up...

And your definition of fringe loon is way too easy...you need to expand your horizons....

[Greyfox]

Right, a Catholic University. I rest my case.

You've made no case made to rest. He's a "fly-weight."
The main bout will be against Obama, who is over his head.
The Republican's so far have not sent their very best opponents.
God Bless America, but Santorum is the weakest of those remaining.

[lsbets]

Right, a Catholic University. I rest my case.

Kind of like when Obama visits a black church or goes down South and suddenly his manner of speaking seems to alter a bit from his regular speech pattern.

It's called playing to your audience 101.

Mike, regardless of where the speech was, it was chock full of stuff that would turn off a lot of voters. Stuff like Satan has taken over academia and mainline Protestant churches. Yeah, that'll get a lot of votes when Obama's media friends play the speech over and over again.

[PaceAdvantage]

You've made no case made to rest. He's a "fly-weight."
The main bout will be against Obama, who is over his head.
The Republican's so far have not sent their very best opponents.
God Bless America, but Santorum is the weakest of those remaining.You make it seem like I'm some sort of Santorum backer.

Hardly. I'm just pointing out, once again, that the stuff used against this guy are petty ante bullshit, that when taken in context (speech to a Catholic university), are more easily explained with something other than "fringe loon."

You guys are way too quick to put people into neat little boxes, complete with pretty little bows.

You've learned well from the Sarah Palin days.

[lsbets]

Fringe loon? Hardly. Lots of people share his views (me not being one of them).

Besides, we need less milk-toasty candidates, not more. All this "middle of the road" baloney makes for a very boring country.

I think it's high time we had a fringe loon in the White House anyway...shake things up...

And your definition of fringe loon is way too easy...you need to expand your horizons....

If someone thinks the purpose of college is to brainwash people into being liberals they are a fringe loon.

[PaceAdvantage]

Mike, regardless of where the speech was, it was chock full of stuff that would turn off a lot of voters. Stuff like Satan has taken over academia and mainline Protestant churches. Yeah, that'll get a lot of votes when Obama's media friends play the speech over and over again.I don't care what Obama does or how they play it against him. My concern is merely with the objective view of who his audience was. With that known, his speech moves more into "OK, I understand now why he said the things he said" and less into "fringe loon."

[Greyfox]

You make it seem like I'm some sort of Santorum backer.

Hardly. I'm just pointing out, once again, that the stuff used against this guy are petty ante bullshit, that when taken in context (speech to a Catholic university), are more easily explained with something other than "fringe loon."

You guys are way too quick to put people into neat little boxes, complete with pretty little bows.

You've learned well from the Sarah Palin days.

Good humor appreciated. :lol: I'm off to bed.

[PaceAdvantage]

If someone thinks the purpose of college is to brainwash people into being liberals they are a fringe loon.Is that what he thinks the purpose of college is? Or is he saying that's basically what it's become given the high preponderance of liberal professors employed by a great majority of colleges, especially your higher ranked ones...

[bigmack]

I don't care what Obama does or how they play it against him. My concern is merely with the objective view of who his audience was. With that known, his speech moves more into "OK, I understand now why he said the things he said" and less into "fringe loon."
You right when you say you haven't been payin' attention to PoliTicks of late.

You'd be in hysterics 'bout now iffin' you was me and I knew what he's said, just in the last week, that would make your head spin.

And here you are worried about my boy in a big stadium with few people. :lol:

Negatives, my man. Negatives. That's what it's all about. "Give me a C. A bouncy C"

I thought ya'll were a bright crew? Haven't you known this about my boy all along? No skeletons. Untouchable for anything substantive.

Look at lsbets & JHS. They still holding out hope for Gare. :D

http://cdn2.dailycaller.com/2011/06/Gary-Johnson.png

[lsbets]

Is that what he thinks the purpose of college is? Or is he saying that's basically what it's become given the high preponderance of liberal professors employed by a great majority of colleges, especially your higher ranked ones...

He said that's why Obama wants everyone to go to college.

Don't you think its a bit nutty to think that Obama wants to brainwash your children in partnership with Satan?

[PaceAdvantage]

He said that's why Obama wants everyone to go to college.

Don't you think its a bit nutty to think that Obama wants to brainwash your children in partnership with Satan?You know, you can take anything you want and bash a candidate over the head with it...

Romney talks about Cadillacs and some people lose control of their bowels...what can you do?

What it all comes down to is money. Santorum doesn't have much, right? So he has no shot. Nobody has to worry about him.

That's the sad thing about American politics. It all comes down to money. That's the real Satan...isn't it?

[bigmack]

What it all comes down to is money. Santorum doesn't have much, right? So he has no shot. Nobody has to worry about him.

That's the sad thing about American politics. It all comes down to money. That's the real Satan...isn't it?
WTF is wrong with you people?

You, a Levin fan. Boxie a Limbaugh fan. What in the world do you people fear of my boy?

What will he do that will jeopardize mankind as we know it?

Because that's how ya'll are acting!

[PaceAdvantage]

WTF is wrong with you people?

You, a Levin fan. Boxie a Limbaugh fan. What in the world do you people fear of my boy?

What will he do that will jeopardize mankind as we know it?

Because that's how ya'll are acting!I love Mark Levin. He was a Bachmann / Santorum supporter last I heard...Bachmann is no more...Santorum is already flaming out...

Mark also said he'll support whomever the GOP nominee is...so at least you know you have Levin in your boy's corner when he finally nails down this dog and pony show.

[bigmack]

this dog and pony show.
It's a damn D&P show because of the GOP set-up, I guess.

People too freaked out that McCain slid through as a mod back in Oh8.

Stiffs like Boxie & you changed the format this time 'round. 'Cause your kind gets FREAKED out real easy like. BOO!

This format sucks.

[lamboguy]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2012/02/28/why-does-rick-santorum-have-serious-problems-with-the-gold-standard/

[Tom]

If someone thinks the purpose of college is to brainwash people into being liberals they are a fringe loon.

It just works out that way.

[Tom]

The problem is the whole bunch of loons has let the left set the agenda for their debates and primaries. They keep fighting the wrong battles.

Hardly an endorsement for a CNC.

I think only Newt or Christie would be up to the challenge, but both on them are marginal at best.

[badcompany]

It's a damn D&P show because of the GOP set-up, I guess.

People too freaked out that McCain slid through as a mod back in Oh8.

Stiffs like Boxie & you changed the format this time 'round. 'Cause your kind gets FREAKED out real easy like. BOO!

This format sucks.

While the "My Boy" stuff is somewhat disturbing, you were absolutely right.

I still think Newt's tax proposals are bolder, but, when push comes to shove, he's a big government conservative. As far as Santorum, I have no use for a self-righteous politician telling me how I should live.

Romney has been, by far, the best candidate and clearly deserves the nomination.

Whether he can win the general remains to be seen, as there are alot of deadbeats, freeloaders, gladhanders, and all-round wastes of sperm in this country, and Lord knows they'll all be voting for the Food Stamp Dispenser.

As far as my feelings about the profitability of horseplayers, the few who do manage to beat the game are exceptions who most probably devote way too much time to it. In addition, in the past few years, since we started the debate, even you have to admit that the game has gotten even worse, just wait until the slots money spigot gets turned off.

That said, as per usual, I'll be in Saratoga for most of August.

[JustRalph]

can't consider Santorum. If you look at his voting record, he is part of the problem.

I don't care about Satan, I don't care about any of that other shit.

But, when he was a Senator, he went along with that piece of shit Medicare plan, the bridge to nowhere, and all of the usual shit that put us in debt up to our eyeballs.

end of discusssion

I love Levin, and he hates Romney. I just don't think their is a better alternative. And now we are giving away Senate Seats (although I hated the bitch) to the Dems, and the house is in play...........

It's a lose, lose for all of us. No matter what side you are on.

[Tom]

Satan is already here.
He is in the WH.

[lsbets]

can't consider Santorum. If you look at his voting record, he is part of the problem.

I don't care about Satan, I don't care about any of that other shit.

But, when he was a Senator, he went along with that piece of shit Medicare plan, the bridge to nowhere, and all of the usual shit that put us in debt up to our eyeballs.

end of discusssion

I love Levin, and he hates Romney. I just don't think their is a better alternative. And now we are giving away Senate Seats (although I hated the bitch) to the Dems, and the house is in play...........

It's a lose, lose for all of us. No matter what side you are on.

I agree Ralph, and I pointed out his record in another thread when I asked someone why they thought he was conservative. He's not, he is a statist.

But my point on the Satan stuff is that if he got the nomination it would be played over and over again and he would be a laughing stock of a candidate to all except those who voted for him in the primaries.

[JustRalph]

But my point on the Satan stuff is that if he got the nomination it would be played over and over again and he would be a laughing stock of a candidate to all except those who voted for him in the primaries.

Agreed.......... he is a one trick pony for all I am concerned.

[elysiantraveller]

The problem is the whole bunch of loons has let the left set the agenda for their debates and primaries. They keep fighting the wrong battles.

Hardly an endorsement for a CNC.

I think only Newt or Christie would be up to the challenge, but both on them are marginal at best.

No they haven't. If anyone has been trying to change the agenda its the GOP with the "true conservative" and "social issues" arguments. Note: the longer the GOP keeps arguing this the lower they sink in polls matching them up against Obama.

Did you listen to the speech last night?

"More jobs, less debt, and smaller government. We got to hear that day in and day out."

He repeated that line about 4 or 5 times. He will frame the dicussion and has openly said, "If you disagree, go vote for the other guy."

The GOP is why the Republicans are struggling in general election polling and why Obama's approval rating is going up.

[Tom]

I mentioned the group - not one of them.
And if you listen to whole of Mitt, his message has not been on point all the time either.

Why are any of them talking about anything but jobs, energy, and security?
And why are any of them wearing sweater vests?

[elysiantraveller]

I mentioned the group - not one of them.
And if you listen to whole of Mitt, his message has not been on point all the time either.

Why are any of them talking about anything but jobs, energy, and security?
And why are any of them wearing sweater vests?

Of course it hasn't. He has had to battle a bunch of different challenger's. He has to talk about those issues though because thats how Santorum is contrasting himself with Romney. The primary battle going back to last fall can be summed up as:

Romney vs. Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Newt, Santorum, Newt Again, Santorum Again.

Thats a lot of different challengers.

Once the nomination is over he will be fine contrasting with Obama and a lot of the GOP people who don't like him will hop on board because despite all of these challenger's he has faced he is best equipped to take on Obama.

[johnhannibalsmith]

http://cdn2.dailycaller.com/2011/06/Gary-Johnson.png

The look of eagles. Very presidential. GARY GARY GARY!

[Tom]

I do not see how Mitt will ever win the argument on health care with Obama.
Obama will have his lunch on that one.

[DRIVEWAY]

I do not see how Mitt will ever win the argument on health care with Obama.
Obama will have his lunch on that one.

Positions:
If elected, Romney will immediately cancel Obamacare.

If re-elected, Obama will continue to implement Obamacare.

Mitt wins the healthcare argument hands down and has Obama for dessert.

Tom - How else can you see this? What happened in the past is meaningless.
The question is simple. Will you implement or cancel Obamacare?

[PaceAdvantage]

If Santorum is a statist, then how could it be back in December, Levin was quoted as backing either Bachmann or Santorum? He's the last person I would think that would support a statist.

I agree Ralph, and I pointed out his record in another thread when I asked someone why they thought he was conservative. He's not, he is a statist.

But my point on the Satan stuff is that if he got the nomination it would be played over and over again and he would be a laughing stock of a candidate to all except those who voted for him in the primaries.

[boxcar]

Positions:
If elected, Romney will immediately cancel Obamacare.

Explain how, please.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

If Santorum is a statist, then how could it be back in December, Levin was quoted as backing either Bachmann or Santorum? He's the last person I would think that would support a statist.

Got news for you: Rush also likes Santorum, even though he hasn't explicitly endorsed him. But the skinny with Santorum is that he's a social conservative but a big government guy. (Can you say, "conflicted"?)

Levin and Rush (to a lesser extent) have to throw their support behind someone during this crisis. (And, yes, America is in a crisis!) We're living in difficult, uncertain and dangerous times.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

If Santorum is a statist, then how could it be back in December, Levin was quoted as backing either Bachmann or Santorum? He's the last person I would think that would support a statist.

from his mouth:

I am not a libertarian, and I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement.

contrast with Reagan:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism

His record is one of voting for big government programs and out of control spending. He supports the militarization of the police state. He does not believe adults should be free to choose what they want to do.

Most social conservatives are statists. Its pretty hard for them not to be. If you want the government involved in people's lives, you are a statist.

[Tom]

Under what constitutional power will Mitt cancel Obama-care?
Under what powers will he fill the voids left?

It is not that simple - the law, until struck down by the SC, is the law.

Mitt talks a lot.
Fact remains, when he had the opportunity, he took the wrong path.

Obama and his machine make minced meat out him on HC.

[DRIVEWAY]

Explain how, please.

Boxcar

The bulk of Obamacare is scheduled to be implemented in 2014.

A combination of defunding and stopping of the implementation will essentially cancel Obamacare.

Parts that have been implemented will need some action or legislation to cancel.

Pleading no contest to current lawsuits will make the legislation optional and therefore canceled.

Expanding the list of companies and institutions that are exempt to the legislation to include everyone will essentially cancel the legislation.

Where there's a will there's a way. It may take multiple steps instead of a simple waving of a magic wand, but cancelling Obamacare is do-able and can and will happen almost immediately.

I'm sure a new Republican President will do everything necessary to end Obamacare.

[Tom]

Do we really want presidents going around undoing the lawful work of congress?

Forget politics......it is not right that thre branches of government over-step thier authority, even when it might be good thing at the time.

[DRIVEWAY]

Do we really want presidents going around undoing the lawful work of congress?

Forget politics......it is not right that thre branches of government over-step thier authority, even when it might be good thing at the time.

If the President and executive branch of government enforced illegal immigration laws would we have a problem? These laws have been on the books and ignored for many years.

Obamacare has not been implemented. The law is still being written. The law allows for waivers. Expanding the number of companies and institutions granted a waiver is part of the law. Creating a friendly process where companies and institutions request a waiver can easily be done.

Funding or de-funding of departments and legislation is the function of congress. Let them do their job.

SC Ginsberg will be retiring. A Republican President can and will appoint a new Justice sympathetic to his view on federal mandates.

What we want and need is a President and Congress that follow the wants and needs of the electorate. The electorate doesn't want Obamacare.

[Tom]

Not me.

I want a government where all the branches do what they are supposed to do and not what they are not authorized to do. Obama won the last election - we have to assume OBama care is what the electorate wants.

[badcompany]

from his mouth:

I am not a libertarian, and I fight very strongly against libertarian influence within the Republican Party and the conservative movement.

contrast with Reagan:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism

His record is one of voting for big government programs and out of control spending. He supports the militarization of the police state. He does not believe adults should be free to choose what they want to do.

Most social conservatives are statists. Its pretty hard for them not to be. If you want the government involved in people's lives, you are a statist.


http://my.jou.ufl.edu/students/files/2011/12/Trophy1.png

[elysiantraveller]

Not me.

I want a government where all the branches do what they are supposed to do and not what they are not authorized to do. Obama won the last election - we have to assume OBama care is what the electorate wants.

What point you are trying to make?

You make the claim that Romney will lose the health care debate and then when people point out how he will try to repeal Obamacare you make some vague, will of the people, excuse for why Obamacare should remain...

What would you like his position to be in regards to the bill?

[NJ Stinks]

Reading through this thread is like listening to a head coach talking to his assistants about how they can overcome a 27-0 deficit at halftime.

Carry on. ;)

[badcompany]

Reading through this thread is like listening to a head coach talking to his assistants about how they can overcome a 27-0 deficit at halftime.

Carry on. ;)

Props on your choice of Governor. "Heavy C" is doing a great job.:ThmbUp:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/jamesfallows/chris-christie-conigliojpg-97a0c33062fec066_large.jpg

[bigmack]

Props on your choice of Governor. "Heavy C" is doing a great job.
He didn't have anything to do with it.

His passions lay elsewhere.

http://www.theblogmocracy.com/wp-content/uploads/jcorzine-225x300.jpg

[NJ Stinks]

Props on your choice of Governor. "Heavy C" is doing a great job.:ThmbUp:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/jamesfallows/chris-christie-conigliojpg-97a0c33062fec066_large.jpg

Alright. 28-0. (And to think I was trying to offer a sliver of hope! :p )

[boxcar]

The bulk of Obamacare is scheduled to be implemented in 2014.

A combination of defunding and stopping of the implementation will essentially cancel Obamacare.

Parts that have been implemented will need some action or legislation to cancel.

Pleading no contest to current lawsuits will make the legislation optional and therefore canceled.

Expanding the list of companies and institutions that are exempt to the legislation to include everyone will essentially cancel the legislation.

Where there's a will there's a way. It may take multiple steps instead of a simple waving of a magic wand, but cancelling Obamacare is do-able and can and will happen almost immediately.

I'm sure a new Republican President will do everything necessary to end Obamacare.

Yup, just wave that magic wand and it will all be good. Good grief, man, on what planet do you live!? For one thing, whatever a president or congress can do now, can be undone by a new president and new congress. The only way to kill ObamaCare is to repeal it. That would kill it. Anything short of that is merely tinkering around the edges. But read up on the history of repeals and educate yourself. It's far easier said than done.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Alright. 28-0. (And to think I was trying to offer a sliver of hope! :p )
I've got just short of $6K on the outcome. Want in?

[DRIVEWAY]

Yup, just wave that magic wand and it will all be good. Good grief, man, on what planet do you live!? For one thing, whatever a president or congress can do now, can be undone by a new president and new congress. The only way to kill ObamaCare is to repeal it. That would kill it. Anything short of that is merely tinkering around the edges. But read up on the history of repeals and educate yourself. It's far easier said than done.

Boxcar

I'm surprised you would ask. Being a subordinate of the BIG HEAD, you must know this to be the Third Rock From The Sun.

Spock must get a big kick out of you.

[boxcar]

Spock must get a big kick out of you.

Not nearly as much as I get out of you, ET.

Boxcar

[Tom]

What point you are trying to make?

You make the claim that Romney will lose the health care debate and then when people point out how he will try to repeal Obamacare you make some vague, will of the people, excuse for why Obamacare should remain...

What would you like his position to be in regards to the bill?

You really need to read posts before you comment on them.
The fact that Obama will beat him on health care debate questions has nothing at all to do with the idea that presidents have to follow the constitution.There is more than one idea being talked about on this thread. He can be opposed to the bill without violating the constitution.

[bigmack]

The fact that Obama will beat him on health care debate
I'll let you outline how you came to the conclusion that MR will be destroyed by BO in a HC debate by showing similarities to both legislation, if you'll allow me to show how that is balderdash and outline the differences, starting with State/Fed.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...if you'll allow me to show how that is balderdash and outline the differences, starting with State/Fed.

A very strong difference, but one that will be completely lost in translation among the masses.

When push comes to shove, Rom gets asked if coverage for all citizens under his leadership is a good idea. Rom says yes, but whats good for Mass may not be good for Texas and its up to the states to decide. O presses him again that he doesn't in fact have any problem with the idea of government run care, that in fact its a great idea. Rom says, yes, it is for Mass, but that doesnt mean it should be federal policy. O says if its good enough for Mass, its good enough for the other 58 states.

[NJ Stinks]

I've got just short of $6K on the outcome. Want in?

No. If I do make any bets on the election, it will be with or through someone I know outside an Internet forum.

No offense intended, Mack.

[johnhannibalsmith]

No. If I do make any bets on the election, it will be with or through someone I know outside an Internet forum.

No offense intended, Mack.

And if OBama wins, I intend to inform the Insiduous Revenue Servicemen about your supplemental income. :liar:

[bigmack]

And if OBama wins, I intend to inform the Insiduous Revenue Servicemen about your supplemental income. :liar:
Or lack thereof. Due be sure and report your final loss for our aMoozment, enJay.

Can ya feel the love? It's the old-fashioned Father Knows Best, kind.

Say hey to Ward & June. (er whatever)

http://www.dlcache.indiatimes.com/imageserve/045t50q2Fx2a5/350x.jpg

[Tom]

I'll let you outline how you came to the conclusion that MR will be destroyed by BO in a HC debate by showing similarities to both legislation, if you'll allow me to show how that is balderdash and outline the differences, starting with State/Fed.

Obama will not use facts he will use sound-bytes and one liners.
And you know that is all that 60% of the people will listen to.
Mitten's only hope in HC is to attack it on economic grounds.

[sammy the sage]

Too bad SOME people around here can't even COMPREHEND 10th grade material... :rolleyes:

Nowhere did I EVER say "S" would win... :faint:

I've ONLY implied/stated that he was a game changer...ie...making things MORE interesting.... ;)

Tonight just shows...well...there ain't NOTHING wrong w/the so-called crystal ball :lol: :D :p

[sammy the sage]

now even MORE interesting...

[elysiantraveller]

now even MORE interesting...

It should knock the Newt out of the race...

[JustRalph]

didn't change a thing..........he only gained a small bit

the delegates were proportional.

[bigmack]

now even MORE interesting...
How so, SamSage, how so?
=======

Santorum's wife seems strange to me.

[elysiantraveller]

didn't change a thing..........he only gained a small bit

the delegates were proportional.

The media is milking this already decided contest for all its worth...

[newtothegame]

It should knock the Newt out of the race...
And, although rather deep in the race already, this WOULD be a game changer.
Gingrich and santorum have been battling for the same voters from day one all the while, Romney has shot out on both of them. Romney has sat back and laughed all the while.
Take Gingrich out and this could get interesting.
Although ralph ( I believe) makes a great point that being proportional gives Romney time and we already know he has oodles of money!

[canleakid]

It should knock the Newt out of the race...


"eye of newt" pluck thyself from the race sayit the big$$$$$$$ in the GOP :cool:

[Robert Goren]

Money will decide whether Newt stays in or not. If his PAC can raise more money, there is no reason for him to leave.
I am not that sure that most of Newt's go to Santorum if Newt gets out. In order for Santorum to win the nod, I think he will have get 80% of the Newt's vote. At this point Santorum not only has beat Romney, but he has to beat him bad in order to overcome Romney's delegate lead. I think it is 60-40 split for Santorum with the would be Newt voters. That would not be enough in places where Newt would get about 15% of the votes like he has been getting in non Southern states.

[badcompany]

They both need to get out. Who cares what Mississippi and Alabama think?They're the poorest sh!thole states in the country. That they voted for Santorum is reason enough for him to go away.

[NJ Stinks]

They both need to get out. Who cares what Mississippi and Alabama think?They're the poorest sh!thole states in the country. That they voted for Santorum is reason enough for him to go away.

Heard on TV last night that, while 40% of the population of Mississippi is black, 97% of GOP primary voters in Mississippi yesterday were white. Stands to reason that many of the GOP primary voters were not all that poor.

In short, the "poor" factor had nothing to do with Santorum winning in Mississippi IMO.

[badcompany]

Heard on TV last night that, while 40% of the population of Mississippi is black, 97% of GOP primary voters in Mississippi yesterday were white. Stands to reason that many of the GOP primary voters were not all that poor.



Because you can't be poor and also white?

[newtothegame]

They both need to get out. Who cares what Mississippi and Alabama think?They're the poorest sh!thole states in the country. That they voted for Santorum is reason enough for him to go away.
Appreciate that there BAD...I am sure you love that cess pool of New York you live in.....
And looking at NY's budget, you guys are doing just great...right???
p.s. take your shots brother, I live in Louisiana.....got to rank right up there with MS, and Bama right?
:faint:

[newtothegame]

P.S Bad, I could make a much better case for "Who gives a sh!T what those azzholes in NY think, especially considering it's a blue state!

[badcompany]

P.S Bad, I could make a much better case for "Who gives a sh!T what those azzholes in NY think, especially considering it's a blue state!

I'm not one of those rah rah types who thinks that the place where he happens to live is God's gift. NY is plenty effed-up, but, the reality is that Alabama and Mississippi are the bottom of the barrel from a household and per capita income standpoint, so pardon me if I don't get wow'd by the fact that Santorum won those states.

btw, I live in NYC. We've had a Republican mayor for the last 20 years, and hopefuly for the next 20.

[NJ Stinks]

Because you can't be poor and also white?

No. Because the average black in Mississippi makes a lot less than the average white in Mississippi makes.

See top of page 2 in the link below.


http://www.mississippi.edu/urc/downloads/africanamerican_economic.pdf

[newtothegame]

I'm not one of those rah rah types who thinks that the place where he happens to live is God's gift. NY is plenty effed-up, but, the reality is that Alabama and Mississippi are the bottom of the barrel from a household and per capita income standpoint, so pardon me if I don't get wow'd by the fact that Santorum won those states.

btw, I live in NYC. We've had a Republican mayor for the last 20 years, and hopefuly for the next 20.
I honestly could care less where you live. You comment regarding what us southerners think was way off base. I could care less what a person makes! Their vote STILL counts whether YOU like it or not. Last time I checked, there was more than one state in this United States Of America. Voter eligibility was NOT determined by one's wealth or income.
And you wonder why "poor" people have this envy or jealousy of the rich????
Not saying you are or arent but, here's a clue....look at your comments then ask yourself why they don't like the wealthy.

[johnhannibalsmith]

No. Because the average black in Mississippi makes a lot less than the average white in Mississippi makes.

See top of page 2 in the link below.


http://www.mississippi.edu/urc/downloads/africanamerican_economic.pdf

Great link. It was nice of them to include in a footnote the ethnicities that were not included in the black versus white presentation. Latinos apparently have a median income that probably mirrors the whites, as it lumps both genders together and lands right between that of white women and white men. This in spite of a high school graduation rate of just 58%, well below the 68% of black men that the chart uses as a low. I also noticed that the chart you refer shows that the age group represented shows blacks as 33% of the population. Unless they have cornered the market on the under 25 crowd in a serious way, your chart defies your television recollection of the population.

Of course, who really cares about my irrelevant contribution based upon that data? You just tried to use this chart somehow to argue that you can't be white and poor. That's a fairly remarkable feat of slobbering statistical lunacy that might cause Thomas Sowell to pen an article.

[NJ Stinks]

Of course, who really cares about my irrelevant contribution based upon that data? You just tried to use this chart somehow to argue that you can't be white and poor.

No I did not.

It occurs to me that many here smell gas where there is no gas. But don't quote me on that. :p :)

[johnhannibalsmith]

No I did not.

It occurs to me that many here smell gas where there is no gas. But don't quote me on that. :p :)

Gotcha. Your direct answer "no" to the direct question posed gave that impression, with the followup sentence appearing to be support of that answer. But I see now how it was intended. Sorry.

[elysiantraveller]

And, although rather deep in the race already, this WOULD be a game changer.
Gingrich and santorum have been battling for the same voters from day one all the while, Romney has shot out on both of them. Romney has sat back and laughed all the while.
Take Gingrich out and this could get interesting.
Although ralph ( I believe) makes a great point that being proportional gives Romney time and we already know he has oodles of money!

This is a massive mis-conception that people voting for Newt would immediately... en masse... switch to Santorum. There is nothing in exit polls or anything else to suggest that would be the case.

This thing has been over for months now yet these idiots want to keep draaaaaaggging it along...

More proof that the masses are simply too stupid to rule. People in Alabama and Mississippi especially. Think thats rude? Well, of exit polls of voters showed that Romney was far and away considered the most likely to beat Obama yet they still supported Santorum...

Yes... too stupid to be given a registration card.

[bigmack]

Well, of exit polls of voters showed that Romney was far and away considered the most likely to beat Obama yet they still supported Santorum...
I'd be willing to say they're stupid as well for the exact same reason.

"We REALLY want BO out and we think Romney has the best chance, so we'll vote for Santorum." :bang:

[newtothegame]

This is a massive mis-conception that people voting for Newt would immediately... en masse... switch to Santorum. There is nothing in exit polls or anything else to suggest that would be the case.

This thing has been over for months now yet these idiots want to keep draaaaaaggging it along...

More proof that the masses are simply too stupid to rule. People in Alabama and Mississippi especially. Think thats rude? Well, of exit polls of voters showed that Romney was far and away considered the most likely to beat Obama yet they still supported Santorum...

Yes... too stupid to be given a registration card.
Did you not listen to Gingrich yesterday evening and his speech? It is his intent to make sure NO ONE gets to the required delegates therefore forcing a brokered convention in Tampa. That is his ONLY hope.
As to Santorum, you can think Gingrich and his followers would not follow Santorum as "there are no polls to prove this".....and I will only suggest to you there are no polls to show otherwise.
Point is, and gingrich said so himself.....He and santorum took two thirds of the vote and Romney one third.. Whether or not you like it, this has become the Romeny, anti Romney vote. So, drawn from that, you have to assume that those who don't vote for Romney, wouldnt vote for Romney with or without Gingrich or Santorum.
But, my problem is not either way. I have said all along I will vote for WHOEVER the Nomination is.
My problem is when people like you and Bad start making accusations about "who gives a sh!t about what MS and ALA think", Then make references to them being poor and dumb etc etc.
Ther votes count just as much as YOURS OR HIS (BAD). Like it or not!
Do you all ask them if they are dumb poor southerners when they join the military and take up arms for their country?
Point is, they are citizens with a right to vote just like anyone else in the U.S. legally.
You may not like their attitudes, their votes, their hospitality. Personally, I could give a rats ass about living up north. But, I will never say something so stupid....as to say who gives a shit about what they think (as if you can just take their votes out). Or, question whether or not they should exist because they may not have the wealth of some of the other states per capita.
That's just down right ignorance! And you question their stupidity.......:bang:

[elysiantraveller]

You may not like their attitudes, their votes, their hospitality. Personally, I could give a rats ass about living up north. But, I will never say something so stupid....as to say who gives a shit about what they think (as if you can just take their votes out). Or, question whether or not they should exist because they may not have the wealth of some of the other states per capita.
That's just down right ignorance! And you question their stupidity.......:bang:

You are pulling a lot of conjecture out of what I wrote... Its not a North/South/East/West thing...

People voting in Mississippi and Alabama were asked, "Which candidate has the best chance to beat Barack Obama?" They overwhelmingly responded; Romney.

And then went and voted for the other guy.... :bang:

I'm sorry but if thats not a good enough example of the idiocy of voters I don't know what is...

Want another one? Here, I will use a northern one.

In the New Hampshire Primary the majority of people who supported Jon Huntsman were Liberals and Moderates which is absolutely preposterous as he was arguably the most conservative in the race. Care to make it a daily double of dumb? Fine, the right hated him because he was a RINO, again despite his record... of course... he wasn't the one who invented RomneyCare or the guy who said "earmarks are great!" :bang: :bang:

People are simply too dumb to be able to choose our leaders...

[newtothegame]

You are pulling a lot of conjecture out of what I wrote... Its not a North/South/East/West thing...

People voting in Mississippi and Alabama were asked, "Which candidate has the best chance to beat Barack Obama?" They overwhelmingly responded; Romney.

And then went and voted for the other guy.... :bang:

I'm sorry but if thats not a good enough example of the idiocy of voters I don't know what is...

Want another one? Here, I will use a northern one.

In the New Hampshire Primary the majority of people who supported Jon Huntsman were Liberals and Moderates which is absolutely preposterous as he was arguably the most conservative in the race. Care to make it a daily double of dumb? Fine, the right hated him because he was a RINO, again despite his record... of course... he wasn't the one who invented RomneyCare or the guy who said "earmarks are great!" :bang: :bang:

People are simply too dumb to be able to choose our leaders...

Well elysian, I have no probelm at all with what you're saying. But, that was NOT what started this whole southerner theme.
Next, you know like I do that poll questions are skewed to get a certain response. So therefore, ALL polls should be taken with a grain of salt.
And, I would add one last thing...you said "People are simply to dumb to be able to choose our leaders".....are you gonna ask for BIG letters and Buttons when you go into that booth come November? Maybe ask them for smaller words? Double space letters on the ballot? Or, is it your contention that it's the OTHER people who are simply to dumb and not yourself?

[elysiantraveller]

And, I would add one last thing...you said "People are simply to dumb to be able to choose our leaders".....are you gonna ask for BIG letters and Buttons when you go into that booth come November? Maybe ask them for smaller words? Double space letters on the ballot? Or, is it your contention that it's the OTHER people who are simply to dumb and not yourself?

Its my contention that Democracy is a bad system...

The masses simply aren't smart enough to be given the reigns of leadership. Plato, one of the greatest thinkers of the western world, felt that way.

I agree.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Its my contention that Democracy is a bad system...

The masses simply aren't smart enough to be given the reigns of leadership. Plato, one of the greatest thinkers of the western world, felt that way.

I agree.

What do you propose instead?

[Tom]

I agree.
You and Hitler. :rolleyes:

[elysiantraveller]

You and Hitler. :rolleyes:

:lol:

Hitler was elected...

[elysiantraveller]

What do you propose instead?

To be honest I don't know...

A caste leadership system similar to his philosopher-kings. Leaders must be segregated from society. The price of being a leader must be so high that only the most altruistic of individuals would even want to be one.

A monasticism of leadership I guess would be the easiest way to describe it...

Its a very idealistic theory so putting it into real motion is hard, especially for me, to grasp.

[bigmack]

Leaders must be segregated from society. The price of being a leader must be so high that only the most altruistic of individuals would even want to be one.
If it's co-ed, I may have some interest.

What's the criteria for hiring?

What do you propose instead?

Voter testing. You don't pass the test, you don't vote.

[elysiantraveller]

If it's co-ed, I may have some interest.

What's the criteria for hiring?

I really wish I had a better answer but I don't... I was asked so I tried. :)

It would be safe to say the cost of doing so would be so high that NONE of us on here would want to be one... So I doubt you would have interest.

I don't know how it would be done. A very rigorous and compulsory education mandated by the government that would then select the brightest and strongest at a very early age is how Plato did it. Something similar I guess.

Like a said a Monasticism of leadership would be the best way to describe it.

Also according to Plato it would be co-ed. He didn't think people should raise their own children in his system but he was all for women's equality! :cool:

[bigmack]

Like a said a Monasticism of leadership would be the best way to describe it.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/3_14_12_20_35_31.jpg



Celibacy, poverty AND obedience? As Kramer once said - I'm out.

[elysiantraveller]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/3_14_12_20_35_31.jpg



Celibacy, poverty AND obedience? As Kramer once said - I'm out.

:lol:

Told ya!

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

Voter testing. You don't pass the test, you don't vote.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

We'd get 6,439 eligible voters tops. The fact that the people Elysian was upset at even KNEW who the options were and had some notion of electability as a hypothetical puts them in the upper 10% of informed voters.

[newtothegame]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/3_14_12_20_35_31.jpg



Celibacy, poverty AND obedience? As Kramer once said - I'm out.
Under that criteria, most of us would be out!

[badcompany]

Under that criteria, most of us would be out!

Now, that you've given us a civics lecture, feel free to explain why the voters in Miss and Ala believed that Romney had the best chance of beating Obama; yet, voted for Santorum and Gingrich.

Could it be that they let their prejudices override practical considerations? In other words, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Northeastern "Yank."

[newtothegame]

Now, that you've given us a civics lecture, feel free to explain why the voters in Miss and Ala believed that Romney had the best chance of beating Obama; yet, voted for Santorum and Gingrich.

Could it be that they let their prejudices override practical considerations? In other words, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Northeastern "Yank."

Ohhh, I don't know. Maybe you could explain why Elysian posted this about some northerners???
"In the New Hampshire Primary the majority of people who supported Jon Huntsman were Liberals and Moderates which is absolutely preposterous as he was arguably the most conservative in the race. "
Guess northerners are as dumb as southerners huh? Maybe we should take away their voters rights too?
Or just screw em...let's just not care what they think either?
Or, here's another for ya. Most polls across the country I have seen say that Romney is most electable against Obama......so what possibly was all the other states where Santorum won thinking?????? I mean after all, why would they vote for someone other then the most electable???

As I said to Elysian, you can solicit almost any answer you want for any poll you want based on the question. People will say almost anything in polls. That's why they are to be taken with a grain of salt. People's votes is the only thing that matters.

Hell, if you want to only look at polls, why not just give Romney the mantle now? Of course those polls also have Romney and any repug getting beat by Obama, so lets just cut all the extra show and tell out and just give the incumbent four more years????

Prejudices?? That's funny from a guy who just threw all the voters in Ala, and MS., under the bus with comments about wealth and calling them dumb.....

But, none the less, Romney stumbles and you all come a running calling people dumb, poor, etc etc cause they voted for the guy they wanted to vote for.
P.S. don't look now but get your insults ready for TX too. The last poll , WPA, (since you all like them so much) has santorum up by 8 over Romney.
In PA, Santorum is up by 14 in the latest Quinnipiac. But not too worry, Romney is up by 4 in North carolina in the latest PPP(D) I saw....
Ohhh wait, MO is coming up again soon too. Last time there Romney didn't do so well either. LA (another dumb and poor state I am sure you think too) has Santorum up at the moment as well.....
But, as I said, I will vote for WHOEVER the R nominee is.
Otherwise, dose dum folk down here in da south may go and vote for someone who cant win and the possibility would exist that you rish folk from dem dere northern states may have to pay us po folk from down here some mo of ya monies. Ya know ya'll have too much and shoud do yer fair share!

[elysiantraveller]

The question in issue was simple: which GOP of candidate has the best chanceof beating Obama in the general election?

It wasn't leading, it wasn't rigged, and it wasn't confusing.

People are just dumb. Not northerners or southerner. Not republicans or democrats. People are just amazingly stupid.

[windoor]

can't consider Santorum. If you look at his voting record, he is part of the problem.

I don't care about Satan, I don't care about any of that other shit.

But, when he was a Senator, he went along with that piece of shit Medicare plan, the bridge to nowhere, and all of the usual shit that put us in debt up to our eyeballs.

end of discusssion

I love Levin, and he hates Romney. I just don't think their is a better alternative. And now we are giving away Senate Seats (although I hated the bitch) to the Dems, and the house is in play...........

It's a lose, lose for all of us. No matter what side you are on.

I also agree.

Many have awakened, but apparently not enough to see us through to a real change. Way too many sheep.

Maybe four more years of O'bama will be enough? I just hope we can survive it. Methinks NOT!

Regards,

Windoor

[elysiantraveller]

This is a massive mis-conception that people voting for Newt would immediately... en masse... switch to Santorum. There is nothing in exit polls or anything else to suggest that would be the case.

As to Santorum, you can think Gingrich and his followers would not follow Santorum as "there are no polls to prove this".....and I will only suggest to you there are no polls to show otherwise.
Point is, and gingrich said so himself.....He and santorum took two thirds of the vote and Romney one third.. Whether or not you like it, this has become the Romeny, anti Romney vote. So, drawn from that, you have to assume that those who don't vote for Romney, wouldnt vote for Romney with or without Gingrich or Santorum.
they may not have the wealth of some of the other states per capita.
That's just down right ignorance! And you question their stupidity.......:bang:

Tonight is the beginning of my hunch being correct with Gingrich possibly faring worse than RP...

[badcompany]

This one goes out to Newt:

GSsPP_uEgsc

[Tom]

a3xsDv6yCnY

[newtothegame]

Tonight is the beginning of my hunch being correct with Gingrich possibly faring worse than RP...
lol, you are one funny guy elysian......
You use a BLUE state to make your case.
Care to make the same case this coming Friday when Louisiana votes?
Anyway, it's really not worth going back and forth over.
Point is this, ROMNEY will have a difficult time reaching the required number.
santorum nor gingrich can reach either....
RP, no chance
The whole point was this is exactly what Gingrich was looking for...Unless of course, somehow Romney were to reach 1144.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Unless of course, somehow Romney were to reach 1144.

If this Santorum chucklehead keeps talking about porn while Romney talks about cutting spending and energy reform, it may be more plausible than it seems.

[elysiantraveller]

lol, you are one funny guy elysian......
You use a BLUE state to make your case.
Care to make the same case this coming Friday when Louisiana votes?
Anyway, it's really not worth going back and forth over.
Point is this, ROMNEY will have a difficult time reaching the required number.
santorum nor gingrich can reach either....
RP, no chance
The whole point was this is exactly what Gingrich was looking for...Unless of course, somehow Romney were to reach 1144.

Romney needs less than 50% of the remaining delegates. Its over.

Its been over since Florida.

As far as the Gingrich vote switching en masse to Santorum this is the first primary since I held that contention aside from the PR schlacking Santorum took. We shall see on down the line. My prediction is Louisiana is much closer than most think at this time. I think Romney might even win there and if he loses its by much less than 5%. Santorum has stuttered badly these past couple of weeks.

Also... FYI.... a few of those blue states need to turn red in November for any of this to matter.

[elysiantraveller]

If this Santorum chucklehead keeps talking about porn while Romney talks about cutting spending and energy reform, it may be more plausible than it seems.

Less than 50% of the remaining delegates.

[sammy the sage]

If this Santorum chucklehead keeps talking about porn while Romney talks about cutting spending and energy reform, it may be more plausible than it seems.

so true...was interesting for a bit...now just plain ugly...

[johnhannibalsmith]

Less than 50% of the remaining delegates.

Yeah, a month or so ago that may have seemed dicey, but with Newt all but petered out and Saintorum deciding to go strictly Falwell on issues that nobody even cares about for some odd reason, he's managed to make Romney look like a lot less "out of touch".

[Tom]

You guys think taking away our guns has been a problem?
The only way you will get our porn is to pry it from our cold, dead.......other hand! :cool:

[newtothegame]

If this Santorum chucklehead keeps talking about porn while Romney talks about cutting spending and energy reform, it may be more plausible than it seems.

Touche'
That's the one thing that romney has done a better job of this past week or so. STAY ON TOPIC!
If any of these fools try to play Obama's game of diversion, they will all get their butts handed to them in the general!

[newtothegame]

Romney needs less than 50% of the remaining delegates. Its over.

Its been over since Florida.

As far as the Gingrich vote switching en masse to Santorum this is the first primary since I held that contention aside from the PR schlacking Santorum took. We shall see on down the line. My prediction is Louisiana is much closer than most think at this time. I think Romney might even win there and if he loses its by much less than 5%. Santorum has stuttered badly these past couple of weeks.

Also... FYI.... a few of those blue states need to turn red in November for any of this to matter.

lol You say "50% of the remaining delegates" as if that's an easy task.... How many states have voted already percentage wise?
I do agree santorum has stuttered BADLY, but, Romney will continue to struggle in states that are pure RED.
I understand the arguement about who is most electable. But, this isn't the general election and that's not the question being posed right now.

[lsbets]

If this Santorum chucklehead keeps talking about porn while Romney talks about cutting spending and energy reform, it may be more plausible than it seems.

Totally agree. There are a lot of things I like about Santorum personally - seems like a good dude, loves his family, and the fact that he kept plugging away in Iowa when he was being ignored says a lot for him. Hell, at one town hall only one guy showed up.

But, the more he talks about social issues, the more he reminds me what a big government conservative he is, and the more I want to see him fare very poorly in the primaries.

[elysiantraveller]

lol You say "50% of the remaining delegates" as if that's an easy task.... How many states have voted already percentage wise?
I do agree santorum has stuttered BADLY, but, Romney will continue to struggle in states that are pure RED.
I understand the arguement about who is most electable. But, this isn't the general election and that's not the question being posed right now.

He needs less than 50% of the remaining delegates... Spin it anyway you want... Its relatively easy for him to hit that number. This primary season, no matter how badly the media wants it to drag on has been effectively over since January 31st.

Actually its more like less than 40% of the delegates if you assume he wins California. Right now that would put him at 713 needing 431 of the remaining 1132 or just over 38%.

38%? He's getting that from proportional states that he is LOSING so yeah... I think its a pretty easy task.

EDIT) While typing the above post it dropped to 37%