|
Post by gk on Jan 21, 2012 19:05:01 GMT -6
And for the record, these numbers were against Romney - who's supposedly the electable one - and BEFORE all this Bain Capital and "not much money" and 17% tax rate stuff came out.
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 21, 2012 21:38:21 GMT -6
I'll say this: obviously I'm voting for Paul. But in one of those hypothetical situations where you HAVE to vote, I would vote for Obama over Romney every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
And I can't stand Obama.
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 22, 2012 1:11:46 GMT -6
I keep hearing how Obama has a billion dollars saved up for his campaign. If that's true, there is no way he's NOT the one funding Gingrich. That's the only explanation that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by gk on Jan 22, 2012 22:25:52 GMT -6
I keep hearing how Obama has a billion dollars saved up for his campaign. If that's true, there is no way he's NOT the one funding Gingrich. That's the only explanation that makes sense. I read that he could double what he spent in 2008. That's insane. And ARG poll just showed Gingrich up by like 8 over Romney in Florida.
|
|
|
Post by gk on Jan 22, 2012 22:36:23 GMT -6
Sorry, it was InsderAdvantage, and it was 12.
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 22, 2012 22:48:23 GMT -6
I don't know what to do with the polls. Wasn't Gingrich polling third in SC a mere 24 hours voting day?
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 23, 2012 16:41:51 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by gk on Jan 24, 2012 12:42:22 GMT -6
So Romney pays 13% in taxes, not the incredibly sui-generous 17% like he estimated. And he closed a Swiss account last year (SNEAKY).
I really hope he's the nominee. He didn't do anything wrong (I guess?), but he's the perfect nominee to embody our stupid tax code. And then to bludgeon it to death with.
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 24, 2012 12:57:35 GMT -6
When are people going to learn nominating somebody simply on perceived "electability" doesn't work. Didn't work for Kerry, not gonna work for Romney.
|
|
|
Post by mayor on Jan 24, 2012 16:49:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by gk on Jan 24, 2012 17:49:06 GMT -6
Up until now, I've been pretty eye-rolling when I read those "we need an(other) alternative" columns from Republicans, unhappy with the candidates. But Nate Silver is now dipping his toe into that possibility: fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/some-signs-g-o-p-establishments-backing-of-romney-is-tenuous/Mitch Daniels is delivering the SOTU rebuttal tonight. If he has a good performance (which, really, Bobby Jindal aside, is it THAT hard to have a good rebuttal of the SOTU?) we'll probably hear a lot about him jumping into the race. I don't know much about him, but I DO know that he has been very friendly to the education reform non-profit I currently work for. He's a huge fan of what we do and has worked to expand our footprint all throughout Indiana - currently over 10% of the high schools in Indiana follow our model. Personally, it would make for a conflicted vote in the general for me (again, without knowing one iota of his views on things like bombing countries for no reason).
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 27, 2012 2:13:38 GMT -6
!
Newt promises a permanent moon base by the end of his second term.
Spending more money we don't have on more things we don't need creates more debt we can't pay. Seems like a reasonable thing for a NWO president to push for, right?
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 27, 2012 22:06:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by fatmenace on Jan 27, 2012 22:12:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by gk on Jan 27, 2012 23:17:20 GMT -6
|
|