Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
MR has been #1 the whole time, so the reality is he may be the best of a weak field, but that says even worse about all the laughable mighty midgets around him. That is the true, unwritten story, the laughing stock 2011 GOP field, where the quality folks like Daniels and Christie say "No thanks".
Romney with a solid campaign for the real show has a shot. The others are toast vs BO, all down 11 or more. McGovernesque numbers. Anyone but MR means get used to hearing House Speaker Pelosi again in 14 months.
Notice, btw, while MR is stagnant in party, no one passing him lasts two weeks at number 1. They get 15 minutes of fame, like Pizza Man, and whoosh, they are gone. First MB, than R(I)P, now HC, all passing fads.
I can't really believe that. I think a moron has a very good chance against BO. I have heard MANY Dems that are furious with their HORRIBLE choice of BO...in '08!
Every poll shows moderate MR faring 7 ahead of all others vs BO. You were saying, Matt?
2010 40% turnout, 2012 61%. Almost all gap from Blue or swing states. Nice try, Matt. When, if ever, TP man/woman wins the big enchilada with 61% voting, then they are vetted. But in the big show, they remain untested. They did well in the Little League of 2010.
I am glad you're back, Bob. He will never get it, no matter how clear it is to some of us.
He must have flunked, math. When a party is the smallest of 3 blocks, they must fight to win crossovers of the other 2. The #1 and #2 need to do LESS to win than the third, regarding courting crossovers.
Speaker of the House Pelosi will be a painful way to learn. Of the 85 TP newbies, several dozen come from naturally blue districts. 25 seat loss for GOP = Pelosi, she's back (in Halloween spirit). 25 seat flip is not a major shift at all, historically.
PS, MR positions are vastly different than the basically, Keynesian Obama. Any idiot can govern or run a Pizza joint w/o working with opposing forces, MR dealt with a Democratic House in Ma who, left to their own devices, would have passed, a statewide, single payer system, far, far left of what went through. Truth be told, the contrarians who won in states as the minority party are better posied to deal with DC's multi-party folks, than those who won with all state chambers in their party. The latter is like Green Bay winning with Aaron Rodgers, a walk in the park.
No, I don't think we are sypathetic to his plight: we are not going to judge until we see more evidence. It is that simple.. If he did do something that was really totally out of line that is one thing, but most, regardless of your political leanings should want to know exactly what was done, then judge how damaging it could or shoud be.
I agree, I have not seen one bit of actual evidence that he did anything wrong. I will agree it doesn't look good and as soon as they changed their story 3 times in a 24 hr. period I started wondering, but I still haven't seen or heard one thing that tells me he did anything. If he didn't and this has all been leaked just to destroy his political chances in this race, I think it is really low and I don't like it one bit.
He must have flunked, math. When a party is the smallest of 3 blocks, they must fight to win crossovers of the other 2. The #1 and #2 need to do LESS to win than the third, regarding courting crossovers.
Speaker of the House Pelosi will be a painful way to learn. Of the 85 TP newbies, several dozen come from naturally blue districts. 25 seat loss for GOP = Pelosi, she's back (in Halloween spirit). 25 seat flip is not a major shift at all, historically.
PS, MR positions are vastly different than the basically, Keynesian Obama. Any idiot can govern or run a Pizza joint w/o working with opposing forces, MR dealt with a Democratic House in Ma who, left to their own devices, would have passed, a statewide, single payer system, far, far left of what went through. Truth be told, the contrarians who won in states as the minority party are better posied to deal with DC's multi-party folks, than those who won with all state chambers in their party. The latter is like Green Bay winning with Aaron Rodgers, a walk in the park.
That's exactly right! How can anyone think that Mitt Romney and Obama would govern the same? I understand they get that from just sound bites and media bias, but please read up on the candidates. Romney issued over 800 budgetary vetoes in Massachusetts, even though the legislature overode a lot of them. He did cut spending and balanced the budget. He also lowered unemployment and taxes. He took the state from a deficit to having a surplus in three years. He has a fiscally conservative record...nothing like Obama's.
That's exactly right! How can anyone think that Mitt Romney and Obama would govern the same? I understand they get that from just sound bites and media bias, but please read up on the candidates. Romney issued over 800 budgetary vetoes in Massachusetts, even though the legislature overode a lot of them. He did cut spending and balanced the budget. He also lowered unemployment and taxes. He took the state from a deficit to having a surplus in three years. He has a fiscally conservative record...nothing like Obama's.
Romneycare caused taxes to go up, long after he was gone.
What are Obama's and Romney's difference on government run health care and AGW?
Romneycare is a term used by the uneducated. It was not an issue he championed, in the way BC championed NHC (far more radical than version passed) throughout 1991. If MR is not elected governor, and if he did not veto as often as he did, single payer would have passed in Ma, which would have led to a national, left of BC Health Care single payer passing in Obama's first year. The version passed in Ma was subsidized exchanges,not what the state Dems wanted, but a more radical approach would have met a quick veto.
MR made a world of difference, and as one who grew up in CT, MR made Ct's economic job rougher (which generates mixed MR feelings on my part). He improved the competitive atmostphere of Ma. They have the strongest economy in the Northeast. Pre MR, that was not true.
Matt, Growing up and spending 37 years in the next state gave me a profound respect for what a strong minded GOP governor could do, and truthfully, I thought Dems would defeat him in passing bills far more liberal. It did not happen. We've had cowboys in the WH that were IMO politically weak, and I saw a soft spoken Ma governor , MR, who acted politcally tough, in a very difficult climate. I don't rely on 4 column USA Today op eds, or Coulter's rants. I study the issues. I also do not measure toughness by talk, but rather by action. In this field, I have little doubt MR is the toughest.
Last edited by bobtn; 11-03-2011 at 12:27 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
