Go back
Ron Paul Blows His Chance in Iowa

Ron Paul Blows His Chance in Iowa

Debates

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Looks like Ron Paul peaked with his 20+% and 3rd place in Iowa. Going forward in other states, he will be even lower. And the 76-year old will fade away.

Vote Up
Vote Down

But Santorum is surging! Will the Santorum bubble pop?

4 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Kunsoo
But Santorum is surging! Will the Santorum bubble pop?
I think so. Santorum has no money. Also, all of his organization on the ground is in Iowa.

I think the anti-Romney vote will be split between Santorum, Paul, and Gingrich, as well as with Perry and Bachmann if those two stay in. None of those five will ever seriously displace Romney. Santorum not enough life line. Gingrich too high negatives. Paul was never viable. Perry maybe but highly unlikely. Bachmann, oh well.

Huntsman may make a dent into Romney in NH.

I am going with the conventional wisdom that Tea Party ideologues lose because the number one priority of the Republican party is to beat Obama. The hate-flavored kool aid in the red dixie cups not enough. Romney secures the nomination.


Originally posted by moon1969
[b]I think so. Santorum has no money.
Instead of going through this every year, why not just ask which candidate has the most money and which one Carl Rove wants to win which would save us all a great deal of time and actually spending the said money.

I hereby annoint Romney the next rhino stooge. He has a great deal to live up to when being compared with McCain and the greatest stooge of all time, "W".

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
Instead of going through this every year, why not just ask which candidate has the most money and which one Carl Rove wants to win which would save us all a great deal of time and actually spending the said money.

I hereby annoint Romney the next rhino stooge. He has a great deal to live up to when being compared with McCain and the greatest stooge of all time, "W".
Good point. Romney, McCain, and W were all the establishment candidate.


Originally posted by moon1969
Good point. Romney, McCain, and W were all the establishment candidate.
Good point? How could it have been a good point when I get two thumbs down? :'(

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
Instead of going through this every year, why not just ask which candidate has the most money and which one Carl Rove wants to win which would save us all a great deal of time and actually spending the said money.

I hereby annoint Romney the next rhino stooge. He has a great deal to live up to when being compared with McCain and the greatest stooge of all time, "W".
Who did you vote for in the 2000 and 2004 US presidential elections?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Who did you vote for in the 2000 and 2004 US presidential elections?
Don't remind me!! 😠

It won't happen again.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
Don't remind me!! 😠

It won't happen again.
I guess you are abstaining in 2012 then?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I guess you are abstaining in 2012 then?
Yes.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
I guess you are abstaining in 2012 then?
😀

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
Yes.
Gays in the military sure are glad Obama got elected instead of McCain. Made the difference that's for sure. Votes in 2008 made a difference in improving the quality of life for gays in the military. Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell would have never happened with McCain as president. McCain was by far the most vocal opponent of the repeal. Just one example.

Another example is appointments to federal judiciary, and also the people getting experience in the executive branch. Much better with Obama than would be with RINO Rom proving his point as a "conservative."