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.
You know, hon, just tonight there was a program on TV indicating that homeowners in metro Las Vegas are sitting in homes that have lost 61% of their value since the peak (3 years prior to Obama). Tell me how Mitt is going to bolster the value in people's homes to their unrealistic values, just so people don't have negative equity. We have some very deep structural problems. Maybe you're not analytical enough to grasp how deep, and how global, the problems are.
Also, California holds 12% of the US population. A Republican governor couldn't balance the budget in almost 2 terms. I don't think Democrat Jerry Brown is doing too much better. However, the situation is deeply embedded because California's structural and societal problems have mushroomed.
Similarly, there are NO guarantees with the next election and what will happen thereafter. One thing we do know is that we don't need another Bush type president ... and being educated at Harvard, as are GWB and Mitt, is NOT a panacea to our deep structural problems.
More importantly tell me how Obama is going to turn it around when he has had time but can can't seem to get it going. Sorry, Obama has to run on his record this time and it's ain't good.
CA is Liberalville. They will go into bankruptcy soon.
If you want to talk about "buy in" to gossip and sensationalism, it's the bold above. Somebody published this article or made an assertion that Obama is a narcissist and everybody (I mean the elephants) run with it. I bet if they did some psychological profiling, Mitt Romney would score much higher than Obama on the narcissism scale, but Bill Clinton would be up there, too.
If anything, I think Ann Romney and her phony speech would only help disenfranchise today's American woman from her husband and whatever his agenda might be - that includes minority women, working class women, single women, and any other type of woman who isn't a rich "breeder" who cranks out kids while her husband is in grad school at Harvard. Mormons are instructed not to delay childbearing...even during professional school ...because someone at Mormon HQ did a calculation that if everyone "breeds" a few years earlier, and so does the next generation (they've got 18 grandchildren), that means there are more Mormons using exponential multiplication, and more money in church tithes from those in "good standing" with the church.
OMG, they have five children and eighteen grandchildren, how will we all manage. What a huge family, how dare they. You libs seem to be losing it. You talk about women's rights until it's conservative women. You make me barf.
More importantly tell me how Obama is going to turn it around when he has had time but can can't seem to get it going. Sorry, Obama has to run on his record this time and it's ain't good.
CA is Liberalville. They will go into bankruptcy soon.
Even more importantly, tell us how many times the GOP has blocked jobs bills. Do you know? Do you care?
Originally Posted by robertpolyglot
Mormons are instructed not to delay childbearing...even during professional school ...because someone at Mormon HQ did a calculation that if everyone "breeds" a few years earlier, and so does the next generation (they've got 18 grandchildren), that means there are more Mormons using exponential multiplication, and more money in church tithes from those in "good standing" with the church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertpolyglot
No, not desperate. Got As in statistics courses and got a mid 700s in math on the GRE. I can crunch numbers, so I can only imagine the thinking at Salt Lake City headquarters.
What calculation do you come up with the girl who has 15 kids?
OMG, they have five children and eighteen grandchildren, how will we all manage. What a huge family, how dare they. You libs seem to be losing it. You talk about women's rights until it's conservative women. You make me barf.
Pretty sparse profile. I see you are somewhere in the homeland. Some conservative women don't crank out as many kids, and some do. It's just that THOSE conservative women don't feign humility.
Are we using exponential calculations with her? What is her church teaching her?
Read post #156.
Some people crank out a lot of kids, irrespective of religion. For some people, it's about self-actualization. This isn't a Psychology thread. This is about an exaggerated allegiance to their church, including Mitt's position within his church, which should NOT be enmeshed with the White House.
Regardless, even if they were a Catholic couple, I'd still vote against them. They are elitist. Get it?
Ann Romney was just wonderful. She gave the best speech any candidates wife has ever given in my opinion. She is just a natural and she and Mitt are going to be excellent representing our country. Chris Christie was really good also, I am not a huge Christie worshiper like so many are, but he was very good and did what he was asked to do.
Surely, you jest. Ann's speech was poorly scripted and, even more so, poorly delivered. It was hollow and halting. It was, well, sweet. I'll give her credit for being sincere about her support for her husband, but a spouse's support is the least a candidate should expect. During the speech, I actually queried on one blog why Mitt hadn't sprung for a few bucks to have her spend a minimal amount of time with a speech coach. The content was so predictable and trite as to be almost embarrassing. (Truth be told, I actually was a bit embarrassed for her.) I know she's not a professional politician or speaker, but it was downright cruel to put her on a national stage. Stepford wives just aren't trained for that duty, I guess. Not that candidates' wives are really persuasive, but even Cindy McCain did better in '08. Both could have taken lessons from Laura Bush. Of course, none of them could hold a candle to Michelle Obama, a truly talented speaker.
I expected, anticipated, Chris Christie's speech. He has been touted as a terrific speaker, and from what I've heard in his previous talks, I agree. But tonight he phoned it in. He spoke mostly about himself, and didn't mention Mitt Roney's name until over half-way through his speech. It was his warmup for 2016. Mitt should demand his money back (or maybe Mitt should have fired him. I hear he likes to do that).
I had to leave this place to hear Ann Romney and Chris Christie do their speeches tonight. I thought that Romney's speech was excellent and told so much about her husband that the Obama campaign hasn't told us before. I know him a lot better after her excellent speech. Surely, even you of the left could see she did one helluva job.
Now I thought that Christie did a great job in that he spoke over 20 minutes before he mentioned the name of Barack Obama and didn't say it again till the end. I don't know whether his speech could compare with the one Obama delivered in 2004 because I didn't take the trouble to listen to a beginning politician back then.
I know some here who didn't hear any of either speech from reading them on this forum and seeing the times of their posts. I will certainly hear the major speeches next week, especially Bill Clinton's. I think that him being looked to as something very close to God means I have to hear him speak.
Ok, I have told my judgement and am waiting for the rest. I do know that all of you from the left side of life will be able to read plenty pretty early in the morning from New York Times and WAPO or some blog that you prefer to hear what it was like. Lets hear what they say.
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.
...because someone at Mormon HQ did a calculation that if everyone "breeds" a few years earlier, and so does the next generation (they've got 18 grandchildren), that means there are more Mormons using exponential multiplication, and more money in church tithes from those in "good standing" with the church.
How do you rate tonight's key speeches?
