U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-15-2012, 02:57 PM
 
42 posts, read 27,102 times
Reputation: 21

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post
But the sheeple were too stupid to see it. Obviously, any of the white male Republican candidates would have gotten basicly the same white vote that Romney got... Santorum, Perry, Gingrich. The anti-Obama vote was a givaway to any white male candidate. But the only candidate that could have pulled a sizable number of voters away from Obama was Ron Paul.
Exactly. I really wanted a Romney-Paul ticket since that, I think, would have been a guaranteed GOP win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-15-2012, 04:27 PM
 
Location: South Carolina
1,991 posts, read 3,397,919 times
Reputation: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ12321 View Post
Exactly. I really wanted a Romney-Paul ticket
Kinda hard when Romney scrambled to change Republican rules so that Paul, even with the delegates he rightfully won at the ballot box, was forbidden from speaking at the Republican Convention. Romney didn't even want Paul THERE. Talk about voter suppression! Mitt wanted to suppress that vote even AFTER it happened.

Guess Paul got the last laugh though because now it's the Republican Party that doesn't want Romney around and is basically telling HIM to ST_U! LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 04:31 PM
 
755 posts, read 611,878 times
Reputation: 438
The refrain is always the same. Those who didn't get their nominee always think he (or she) would've been a lock.

If Ron Paul had (somehow) been the nominee and duly lost to President Obama, these boards would be filled with posters insisting that if the GOP has just nominated Mitt Romney, he would've beaten President Obama handily.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,828 posts, read 9,827,294 times
Reputation: 7981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
The refrain is always the same. Those who didn't get their nominee always think he (or she) would've been a lock.

If Ron Paul had (somehow) been the nominee and duly lost to President Obama, these boards would be filled with posters insisting that if the GOP has just nominated Mitt Romney, he would've beaten President Obama handily.
Not true. The present-day Republican party is dying, unable to attract women, minorities and the young. I have been saying that Romney was going to lose in a landslide for Months. It was obvious, almost like an intentional fall.
Flat out speaking-You need at least a small fraction of these groups as they will only become more influential in the future.
They needed a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson to ignite a spark.

Ron Paul had huge numbers of the young supporting him, and would have done much better with women and minorities than Willard Romney for obvious reasons.

The debates would have had more substance because Obama and Paul's views are so vastly different. All Romney and Obama could do was attack each other personally, further dividing their two camps and then ended the final debate by agreeing to a tee on foreign policy.
It was a train-wreck of an election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 05:57 PM
 
Location: Texas
23,820 posts, read 10,001,826 times
Reputation: 5326
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55 View Post
What do you mean it didn't work. The bain capital stories and tax returns played a role in hurting mitt. If you put Ron Paul on the spotlight for everybody to see, the racist newsletters and the voting against the CRA would be enough damage by itself.
When I said it didn't work before I meant it didn't work before.
Again, It was tried during the republican debates and it failed misreably.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Texas
23,820 posts, read 10,001,826 times
Reputation: 5326
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55 View Post
what question are you talking about? I'm just making a point that Ron Paul leaves himself open to be attacked by democrats on a number of issues. By the time they are done, obama and the media would have ron Paul looking like the leader of the KKK.
And of course you are wrong. It didn't work before so why take your word on it? Another example of repeating the same things over again, even though it didn't work before. Ironic since that is just what Obama did with his policies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Texas
23,820 posts, read 10,001,826 times
Reputation: 5326
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55 View Post
republicans and democrats don't have to do anything, its your party that is the 3rd party that only 0.1% of the country cares about. We know our weaknesses and strengths, its the libertarians that are delusional. Your platform is so easy to destroy and manipulate, and the fact you don't see that tells me that libertarians would get run over in a presidential election.
Delusional are the ones who think doing the same thing over and over again will different results.
Hows the economy? We still in never ending wars in the Middle East?
thought so!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 06:01 PM
 
Location: Texas
23,820 posts, read 10,001,826 times
Reputation: 5326
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHABAZZ310 View Post
YES i did listen to the video...

To start succession is not a key issue. It is one that was already resolved...

next...
Doesn't surprise you completely missed the key point of the video even though I quoted it. I'll quote it again and I bet you miss the key point again.
"The issue of leaving is the key to deciding if we live in a free society"

next...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 06:05 PM
 
755 posts, read 611,878 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a View Post
Not true. The present-day Republican party is dying, unable to attract women, minorities and the young. I have been saying that Romney was going to lose in a landslide for Months. It was obvious, almost like an intentional fall.
Flat out speaking-You need at least a small fraction of these groups as they will only become more influential in the future.
They needed a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson to ignite a spark.

Ron Paul had huge numbers of the young supporting him, and would have done much better with women and minorities than Willard Romney for obvious reasons.

The debates would have had more substance because Obama and Paul's views are so vastly different. All Romney and Obama could do was attack each other personally, further dividing their two camps and then ended the final debate by agreeing to a tee on foreign policy.
It was a train-wreck of an election.
Yes, true.

Sorry, the fact that you never liked Romney has no bearing on the fact that, if he had lost the nomination, these boards would be filled with "Romney would have won!" claimants.

The fact that you think Ron Paul would have done better than Romney makes you no more credible than people on the left who think Dennis Kucinich would win a general election in a landslide. You all live in weird, reality-averse bubbles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2012, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Texas
23,820 posts, read 10,001,826 times
Reputation: 5326
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
RP couldn't even win the primary, how could he have beaten Obama?
I doubt he would have won. For one thing people don't change quickly. That's one thing for sure. We don't like drastic changes.
It would have opened the peoples eyes more, no doubt about that. Going one on one with Obama using different policies would have shown actual differences.
I don't know if you watched the republican debates but exchanges between Newt and Romney endedwith "so you did too". They were similar enough same with with Romney and Obama. There were few differences between the candidates. Just different on how to manipulate the economy and who the hand picked winners and losers were.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top