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.
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.
Your candidate is a great speaker and persuader, nothing more, after that, he seriously lacks the skill to run this country and our economic condition is proof of that. I would rather our president be a great business person who understand economy and has more skill than Obama.
Even several democrats blocked the jobs bills... Reason? They weren't going to create non union jobs in the private sector.
Yes, President Obama was stymied by the filibuster and blue dog Democrats.
The GOP blocked Obama for one reason and one reason only...in their own words...to make him a one term President.
Where is the trickle down effect, BTW? Weren't those tax cuts for the rich supposed to create jobs? You know...tax cuts for those beloved, but elusive JOB CREATORS.
Compare private-sector job creation from January 2001 to January 2009 — the Bush era — with job creation from January 2009 to April 2012. Or maybe you think presidents shouldn’t be held accountable for their first year, and want to start either comparison from the first January after inauguration. Here are the results:
A few thoughts on the number of children discussion.
Demography is Destiny..... so adding to this thread it's tantamount to the old adage if the 'right' people are having children (the productive, engaged parenting types who instill some kind of value system that is constructive to society) then you have in general terms a positively leveraged societal model. When you have politicians catering to groups to create dependency based voting blocs and encourage policies via social services programs that encourage the non engaged parenting (i.e. destructive qualities) to propagate at greater rate you get a negatively leveraged societal model. Which is a recipe for disaster. Personally I don't care how many children people have AS long as they take care provide and instill a good model of living. Take the Amish for example, they may live in a 18th century technological world but it is sustainable and very constructive, albeit technologically backward by our current standards. On the other hand look at the example in urban areas of multiple children bred to increase welfare benefits - they have all the latest tech but live often worse than the Amish people's pigs (absentee parenting, victimology dependency mindset etc...). That is a major destructive societal problem - idiocy multiplied.
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).
Good points. You know what's funny? It's that a lot of ordinary people of ordinary means, like some of the other posters, I presume, are often rooting for Romney/Ryan due to their demographics. That is, they live in an area of the heartland where the neighbors would ostracize them if they backed Obama or they belong to a right-wing church for whom Romney/Ryan is a part of that right-wing packaging. Have you noticed that they can't offer one single good reason why Romney SHOULD be President, other than 1) he has been a business man, and 2) he will bring about change. GWB was a Harvard educated businessman turned politician, and look what happened.
A few thoughts on the number of children discussion.
engaged parenting types who instill some kind of value system that is constructive to society) then you have in general terms a positively leveraged societal model.
When you have politicians catering to groups to create dependency based voting blocs and encourage policies via social services programs that encourage the non engaged parenting (i.e. destructive qualities) to propagate at greater rate you get a negatively leveraged societal model. Which is a recipe for disaster.
Personally I don't care how many children people have AS long as they take care provide and instill a good model of living. Take the Amish for example, they may live in a 18th century technological world but it is sustainable and very constructive, albeit technologically backward by our current standards.
On the other hand look at the example in urban areas of multiple children bred to increase welfare benefits - they have all the latest tech but live often worse than the Amish people's pigs (absentee parenting, victimology dependency mindset etc...). That is a major destructive societal problem - idiocy multiplied.
I agree. What do you think the mom with the 15 kids and 3 baby daddies, one daddy in jail. With the children gathered around her, the mother says "someone has to be held accountable, someone has to pay". What are these kids learning from the mothers attitude.
Yet the previous forum member attempts to insult and discredit Romney and his religion.
What would you rather have. A mom with 15 kids who expect the system to take care of her and the kids or people of faith who believe in teaching their kids moral values and self dependance.
Ron Paul endorsed Romney. I have lost all respect for Dr. Paul. Something told me he was a phony but I didn't listen. Dr. Paul you ain't a Libertarian, you're a punk ass *****!!!!!
Ron Paul is another person that created a niche, though one that didn't have broad enough appeal. Not only that, I'm sure that marketing and image experts would find that his name is a deterrent, just as was Nixon's five o'clock shadow, according to some accounts I've read about past elections.
Ron Paul, go back to doctoring, as Howard Dean might have.
That is, they live in an area of the heartland where the neighbors would ostracize them if they backed Obama.
Really, where I live you are encouraged to listen to both sides and welcomed to voice your own opinion. People don't try to force you with the threat of repercussions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertpolyglot
Have you noticed that they can't offer one single good reason why Romney SHOULD be President, other than 1) he has been a business man, and 2) he will bring about change. GWB was a Harvard educated businessman turned politician, and look what happened.
To you it is not a good reason because he does not preach dependency on the government. Maybe if you would clean your ears out and open your mind you would hear all the good reasons.
Please let it be Palin....I'll def. tune in to watch that dummy.
Me too if I can only get past her annoying folksy tone she always uses when she speaks. EEEEK! But she would be great entertainment!
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.
