drmbear Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I agree with you, NJCubScouter, and I think that was the point I was trying to make. I was saying that it is nonsense that there are folks that are wanting to remove TJ's name from the district because he once owned slaves. For all he did to insure tolerance and freedom, it is rediculous anyone would want to knock him. And I'm saying that as a graduate of THE University! (of Virginia) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Boyce Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Romney: people are not going to go over the Mormon hurdle. Palin: just an odd duck. Far too lightweight for what our country needs right know. Pawlenty: gets a good report; I don't know much about him. Huckabee: seasoned and sensible, he's my pick. other libertarian types: I'm not anti-government; this perspective doesn't fit modern times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalicoPenn Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 What will be discussed is what the media will decide to cover as major issues regardless of what we, the people, think is important. And they'll tell us that all they are doing is covering what we want them to cover even though they never ask us what we want covered. As for the primaries - what is it with Americans and the desire to start thinking about what's next when we haven't even gotten a handle on what's happening now, and what just happened. Can we get through 2011 before we start to wonder about 2012? Heck, in November 2009, people were already wondering who would run against President Obama, and he hadn't even been sworn in yet. It's bad enough that Halloween shops are opening on July 5, and Christmas Decorations are being put up in stores after Labor Day. On December 26, I went into my local grocery store and saw that they were putting the finishing touches on the Valentines Day merchandise displays. An awful lot can happen over the next year for this speculation to start so early. After Ms. Palin's statement this week, I'd be really surprised if she even gets much serious media coverage for a run in the primary, given how she tried to deflect responsibility for what some see as incendiary rhetoric on the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagledad Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 >>After Ms. Palin's statement this week, I'd be really surprised if she even gets much serious media coverage for a run in the primary, given how she tried to deflect responsibility for what some see as incendiary rhetoric on the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I don't think the events of the past week will hurt Palin's chances in 2012 (or beyond) at all. Those who have a problem with the things she has said and done weren't going to vote for her anyway. Those who support her will probably support her more. Is there anybody who is undecided about her? What pains me about this whole thing, not just Palin but the whole aftermath of the Arizona massacre, is that instead of bringing people together and calming down the rhetoric, it seems to have made the partisan and ideological divide worse, more divided, and more bitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 So NJCubScouter, are you appropriately condemning the left for blaming conservatives before even the assassin's name was released? The vitriol has come from the left toward Sarah Plain, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and others. The left glorified people advocating the assassination of President Bush. They said don't jump to conclusions about the Fort Hood murderer but in this case it had to be conservatives. So hopefully, your post is placing the blame in this instance on the progressives where it belongs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalicoPenn Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Ok - first a correction - meant 2008 not 2009. Second - that really wasn't my point about Ms. Palin. My point was that she bit the rather large hand that feeds us - and while she may believe that if she's heavily covered on just one network that should do it - if the rest of the media decide they're hacked off enough to marginalize her, she will be marginalized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Vol_scouter, I have not "condemned" anyone, at least not for this (aside from the guy who massacred those people.) If you wish to "condemn" people, that's your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Not a surprise NJCubScouter. The left/progressives can never criticize their own when they have clearly done something wrong. The hatred and vitriol leveled at conservatives before anything was known about the assassin is truly disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS-87 Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 As a newsworthy note, I think Donald Trump just threw his hat into the 2012 ring during his speech at CPAC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John-in-KC Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Trump is... The Weakest Link!! Good-bye! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I just read a couple of articles saying Trump said he is still thinking about it. The fact that anyone would seriously consider voting for this guy boggles my mind. When you vote for president you're not just voting for a set of ideas (hopefully you're voting for that too), you're also voting for an actual person. Without going into his whole history, I'd suggest anyone considering supporting him read the article about him on Wikipedia, and then let us know if this is really the guy you want to be President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS-87 Posted February 14, 2011 Author Share Posted February 14, 2011 Speaking of CPAC, Ron Paul just won the Straw Poll. And some Tea Partiers don't seem happy about it because they feel he's unelectable. Here I thought real Constitution following folks would be happy that the Champion of the Constitution had won the CPAC straw poll. Ron Paul is everything the Tea Party could ever ask for, and has a hugely loyal base that would do anything to march him to the presidency. In 2007, Romney's CPAC victory was seen as evidence that the man had an organization built that could help him in a national presidential bid. Not only is Ron Paul more successful at this, but his supporters are as rabid as he is for absolute Liberty, Freedom, and Victory over our Socialist POTUS. Discounting Paul is a huge mistake, because his supporters could light the fires that the Tea Party needs to reactivate en masse in 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS-87 Posted April 8, 2011 Author Share Posted April 8, 2011 The frontrunners as of 4/8/11: Mitt Romney - because he has been since day one, but is losing ground fast Michelle Bachmann - Tea Party favorite and 2nd in 1Q fundraising Donald Trump - Recently placed second in a poll of potential candidates Mike Huckabee - has been top-tier since day one, and is tied with The Donald for second in polling Ron Paul - Libertarian favorite and 1st in 1Q fundraising Second Tier Candidates as of 4/8/11: Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Rand Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrush Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Romney: can't win the south. He comes across as a slick northeastern used-car salesman, even before you find out he's mormon. Daniels: Not much flash and a lot of smart substance, which means he'll win the intellectuals among the GOP and indies. Unfortunately, I don't think he has enough flash (yet) to pull the other 80% of them away from Dancing With The Stars long enough to go vote...so, he would be a good VP choice, or he needs a flashy VP that doesn't turn off indies. Palin: actively dismissed by indies, and without some indies, you don't win the Presidency. Period. She's the Three Musketeers of the GOP; once you get past the fun chocolate coating, you realize there's nothing left but a bunch of cheap, crappy nougat. The Dem's first choice for an opponent for a reason. The Dems keep her in the spotlight for a reason. She's the 2nd biggest reason we have President Obama. Huckabee: can't win outside the bible belt. He seems like a geniune individual, but quotes like "the Constitution needs to be realigned with God's standards" have already sunk him as a national politician. Paul: the libertarian "platform" will sink him nationally. There is something for everyone to say "They can't be serious!", from significantly slashing the military to legalizing drugs and prostitution to disbanding medicare and social security. This is probably a close runner-up to Palin as the Dem's favorite matchup. Gingrich: (this is coming from a Georgian) Gingrich is the GOP's Jimmy Carter. Very smart individual, stepped on it nationally by going all in on an inside straight. Success depends on the public's memory and attention span, and whether he can avoid looking like another yankee-transplant neocon (i.e., GW Bush). Pawlenty: I want to like him, but Minnesota also elected Jesse Ventura and Al Franken in statewide elections. Apparently, you have to be a little bit weird to win in Minnesota, and I wonder in what way Pawlenty meets that standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now