This was a big disappointment for me regarding Ann Coulter who supports Mitt. She thinks it’s a good thing that Mitt lied in MA to become governor.
Now they are openly saying they are lying to republican voters to win the nomination. So come Nov. we get a choice of which liar to make president.
Now we see the media, right and left, shilling for Romney. Saying the others should drop out. He has to get to 1144 and every media outlet is talking like he already has. Talk of who splits what vote is total red herring. Every single delegate the other three take is from his 1144.
Note that they say the tea party is getting behind Mitt. Another media lie. What the tea party is saying is if Mitt can’t lose the primary as the media keeps telling us then we better stop opposing him. Not opposing is not an endorsement.
We can’t trust the delegate count the media is saying either.
Ken,
Willard didn’t lie to become Guv – he said he was a Progressive.
And he is.
Ya gotta point.
But who would you rather have? A left or right leaning progressive?
A “right leaning progressive” moves the Overton window to the left in a way that a “left leaning progressive” does not. Gov. Romneycare per se may be preferable to the Zero, but it is not without cost.
Oh I totally agree. But it’s looking more and more we are going to have to play with the hand as it’s dealt to us. And who knows, maybe the Tea Party was just the thing we needed to get RINO squishes like Romney to straighten up a little bit.
No doubt. You cannot fight tomorrow if you die today.
Doomed.
Too short. OK, how about, “We’re effing doomed.”
If the “etch-a-sketch” candidate wants to go that way (and wins the Republican primary), I can always vote libertarian come November. Romney has a window of opportunity to fix this, say by firing his adviser in question and taking concrete steps in the future to avoid the appearance of bait-and-switch on primary issues. What turned me off of Obama was his abandonment of primary promises once he had won enough votes.
To be blunt, even if Obama does get reelected, he’s not likely to have the support of Congress. Voting for congressional candidates that oppose Obama’s efforts are a higher priority for me than whoever is the presidential candidate.
If Obama gets reelected, he may well have coattails, meaning he could have an increase in the number of Democrats in Congress. Whomever is president in the next 4 years will likely have 1 or 2 Supreme Court vacancies to fill as well. As weak as Romney is, I still think he’d put in better nominees than Obama.
Romney isn’t my guy, but if he wins the nomination, I’m willing to crawl on my belly over broken glass and rolll in a pile of salt on my way to vote for him if that’s what it takes to get Obama out of the White House. This isn’t an election for “my way or the highway”, IMO.
Just remember, Bush gave us Souter.
Yeah, and some of Reagan’s nominees didn’t turn out too well, either. Still, we know Obama has put the “wise latina” and Kagan on the bench. Do you want to give him more opportunities to nominate such “quality” candidates?
Sotomayor and Kagan are sitting on the bench for one reason only… congress did not do it’s job. This is why we need to get rid of the elite republicans.
I’ll have to see how it turns out, but there are some startling accusations of voter fraud in the Ron Paul forums related to Romney in several states (at least including New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada).
The claimed symptoms seems to be that in certain districts which have a high percentage of overall votes, that as more votes are reported in that district, Romney gains votes, usually at a single competitor’s expense while other competitors are unaffected (on the forum, there are claims that there are side-by-side countries where different competitors suffered to Romney’s gain). No similar effect is seen in a few prior election years (2008, 2000, 1996). A key feature is that early returns for Romney undershoot the final vote tally significant while early returns for one or more other candidates overshoot the final vote tally significantly. Several races show exactly one other candidate (and not always the same candidate!) overshooting their eventual total.
If the accusations are correct, someone was siphoning votes after the point of first returns from the primary vote counts from one or more competitors to Romney consistently across a number of different state primaries and transferring them to Romney.
Everyone seems to be getting on the Gov. Romney bandwagon, including Freedom Works. It will be interesting to see if other Tea Party groups follow Freedom Works move to support him or hold out for a brokered convention with someone else.
But Tom, you, yourself said that the Tea Party is a cold dead corpse which has zero influence…..they are powerless, you said…
meaningless, you said….
so what does it matter what the the TP groups do eh, squire?
If the Tea Party still had power Gov. Romney wouldn’t be winning the nomination. Their acceptance of Gov. Romney is a tact admission they don’t have the power to stop him from winning the nomination.
Freedom works has not endorsed Romney. That’s just the media narrative. What they’ve said is they will back him if he becomes the nominee.
Romney has to get to 1144 and this has to be a solid 1144, not just a claimed 1144. That’s the magic number and he’s not even half way there (unless you believe the lying media.) He’s got about a 100 less than what’s being reported.
This is no surprise to those of us who know Willard from direct experience….
…the only surprise is tht one of his staff could be so brainless as to say such a thing.
…and people said Newt was a loose cannon….
Kerry 2004…. Anyone? I never did meet anyone who voted Bush twice… I wonder if the same will be true of Obama?
What do you mean? I voted for Bush the Younger twice.
Yeah, but you wouldn’t want to meet Dave. He’ll tell you your wife should get cancer. He’s that kind of liberal.
There’s another kind?
“How could Nixon have won? I don’t know anyone who voted for him.” – Pauline (Dave O’Neill) Kael.
Why are there no democrats saying give your money to republicans?
This was a big disappointment for me regarding Ann Coulter who supports Mitt. She thinks it’s a good thing that Mitt lied in MA to become governor.
Now they are openly saying they are lying to republican voters to win the nomination. So come Nov. we get a choice of which liar to make president.
Now we see the media, right and left, shilling for Romney. Saying the others should drop out. He has to get to 1144 and every media outlet is talking like he already has. Talk of who splits what vote is total red herring. Every single delegate the other three take is from his 1144.
Note that they say the tea party is getting behind Mitt. Another media lie. What the tea party is saying is if Mitt can’t lose the primary as the media keeps telling us then we better stop opposing him. Not opposing is not an endorsement.
We can’t trust the delegate count the media is saying either.
Ken,
Willard didn’t lie to become Guv – he said he was a Progressive.
And he is.
Ya gotta point.
But who would you rather have? A left or right leaning progressive?
A “right leaning progressive” moves the Overton window to the left in a way that a “left leaning progressive” does not. Gov. Romneycare per se may be preferable to the Zero, but it is not without cost.
Oh I totally agree. But it’s looking more and more we are going to have to play with the hand as it’s dealt to us. And who knows, maybe the Tea Party was just the thing we needed to get RINO squishes like Romney to straighten up a little bit.
No doubt. You cannot fight tomorrow if you die today.
Doomed.
Too short. OK, how about, “We’re effing doomed.”
If the “etch-a-sketch” candidate wants to go that way (and wins the Republican primary), I can always vote libertarian come November. Romney has a window of opportunity to fix this, say by firing his adviser in question and taking concrete steps in the future to avoid the appearance of bait-and-switch on primary issues. What turned me off of Obama was his abandonment of primary promises once he had won enough votes.
To be blunt, even if Obama does get reelected, he’s not likely to have the support of Congress. Voting for congressional candidates that oppose Obama’s efforts are a higher priority for me than whoever is the presidential candidate.
If Obama gets reelected, he may well have coattails, meaning he could have an increase in the number of Democrats in Congress. Whomever is president in the next 4 years will likely have 1 or 2 Supreme Court vacancies to fill as well. As weak as Romney is, I still think he’d put in better nominees than Obama.
Romney isn’t my guy, but if he wins the nomination, I’m willing to crawl on my belly over broken glass and rolll in a pile of salt on my way to vote for him if that’s what it takes to get Obama out of the White House. This isn’t an election for “my way or the highway”, IMO.
Just remember, Bush gave us Souter.
Yeah, and some of Reagan’s nominees didn’t turn out too well, either. Still, we know Obama has put the “wise latina” and Kagan on the bench. Do you want to give him more opportunities to nominate such “quality” candidates?
Sotomayor and Kagan are sitting on the bench for one reason only… congress did not do it’s job. This is why we need to get rid of the elite republicans.
I’ll have to see how it turns out, but there are some startling accusations of voter fraud in the Ron Paul forums related to Romney in several states (at least including New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada).
The claimed symptoms seems to be that in certain districts which have a high percentage of overall votes, that as more votes are reported in that district, Romney gains votes, usually at a single competitor’s expense while other competitors are unaffected (on the forum, there are claims that there are side-by-side countries where different competitors suffered to Romney’s gain). No similar effect is seen in a few prior election years (2008, 2000, 1996). A key feature is that early returns for Romney undershoot the final vote tally significant while early returns for one or more other candidates overshoot the final vote tally significantly. Several races show exactly one other candidate (and not always the same candidate!) overshooting their eventual total.
If the accusations are correct, someone was siphoning votes after the point of first returns from the primary vote counts from one or more competitors to Romney consistently across a number of different state primaries and transferring them to Romney.
Everyone seems to be getting on the Gov. Romney bandwagon, including Freedom Works. It will be interesting to see if other Tea Party groups follow Freedom Works move to support him or hold out for a brokered convention with someone else.
But Tom, you, yourself said that the Tea Party is a cold dead corpse which has zero influence…..they are powerless, you said…
meaningless, you said….
so what does it matter what the the TP groups do eh, squire?
If the Tea Party still had power Gov. Romney wouldn’t be winning the nomination. Their acceptance of Gov. Romney is a tact admission they don’t have the power to stop him from winning the nomination.
Freedom works has not endorsed Romney. That’s just the media narrative. What they’ve said is they will back him if he becomes the nominee.
Romney has to get to 1144 and this has to be a solid 1144, not just a claimed 1144. That’s the magic number and he’s not even half way there (unless you believe the lying media.) He’s got about a 100 less than what’s being reported.
This is no surprise to those of us who know Willard from direct experience….
…the only surprise is tht one of his staff could be so brainless as to say such a thing.
…and people said Newt was a loose cannon….
Kerry 2004…. Anyone? I never did meet anyone who voted Bush twice… I wonder if the same will be true of Obama?
What do you mean? I voted for Bush the Younger twice.
Yeah, but you wouldn’t want to meet Dave. He’ll tell you your wife should get cancer. He’s that kind of liberal.
There’s another kind?
“How could Nixon have won? I don’t know anyone who voted for him.” – Pauline (Dave O’Neill) Kael.
Why are there no democrats saying give your money to republicans?