On January 16 2012 12:06 hmunkey wrote: His problem is his Mormonism and his "past" views. I mean, if you actually look at his views, he's pro gay rights, not particularly anti-abortion, not really religious, etc. This all makes sense if you look at his upbringing and education and it's certainly not a bad thing, but it hurts him with conservatives more than you'd think and it might be a problem in the general election when he needs to rally his base to show up at the polls.
If you look at Romney's views, he believes marriage should strictly be between a man and a woman, LGBT couples are definitely worse at parenting than straight couples, and thinks Griswold v. Connecticut was a mistake.
I direct you to the New Hampshire Republican debate (the one with Stephanopoulos as moderator, there were two back-to-back and I don't remember which one was which). The Economist and The Guardian have good writeups.
All recent. I'm mostly talking about his views before he ran for president and had to court the socially conservative. Keep in mind primaries always force candidates to act far more conservative than they really are, because the people who vote in primaries are the people who care most about specific conservative issues. They're registered Republicans who go out of their way as opposed to independents and moderate Republicans who don't care that much.
The people they have to go for are the same people who think gay marriage is a threat to the very fabric of American society, not the Republicans who don't really like homosexuality but aren't afraid of it.
The same applies for the Democrats too, but to a lesser extent since the more radical elements of the left aren't very affiliated with the Democratic Party in the way those of the right are with the GOP.
...George Stephanopoulos played a new TV ad running in South Carolina, from Colbert’s super-PAC (control of which was officially transferred to Colbert’s close colleague, Daily Show host Jon Stewart). The ad features a voiceover narration from actor John Lithgow, who declares alongside audio of Romney: “If Mitt Romney really believes ‘Corporations are people, my friend,’ then Mitt Romney is a serial killer. He’s — Mitt the Ripper!”...
On January 16 2012 12:14 hmunkey wrote: All recent. I'm mostly talking about his views before he ran for president and had to court the socially conservative. Keep in mind primaries always force candidates to act far more conservative than they really are, because the people who vote in primaries are the people who care most about specific conservative issues. They're registered Republicans who go out of their way as opposed to independents and moderate Republicans who don't care that much.
The people they have to go for are the same people who think gay marriage is a threat to the very fabric of American society, not the Republicans who don't really like homosexuality but aren't afraid of it.
Presidents almost always act on what they're elected on; flip-flopping in office is normally the exception, not the rule. Promises are usually not turned into reality due to Congressional action. However, the public remembers broken promises, and those are the ones highlighted.
Or, to put it shortly: the way nominees act is the way they try to govern.
On January 16 2012 12:14 hmunkey wrote: The same applies for the Democrats too, but to a lesser extent since the more radical elements of the left aren't very affiliated with the Democratic Party in the way those of the right are with the GOP.
On January 16 2012 12:14 hmunkey wrote: All recent. I'm mostly talking about his views before he ran for president and had to court the socially conservative. Keep in mind primaries always force candidates to act far more conservative than they really are, because the people who vote in primaries are the people who care most about specific conservative issues. They're registered Republicans who go out of their way as opposed to independents and moderate Republicans who don't care that much.
The people they have to go for are the same people who think gay marriage is a threat to the very fabric of American society, not the Republicans who don't really like homosexuality but aren't afraid of it.
Presidents almost always act on what they're elected on; flip-flopping in office is normally the exception, not the rule. Promises are usually not turned into reality due to Congressional action. However, the public remembers broken promises, and those are the ones highlighted.
Or, to put it shortly: the way nominees act is the way they try to govern.
On January 16 2012 12:14 hmunkey wrote: The same applies for the Democrats too, but to a lesser extent since the more radical elements of the left aren't very affiliated with the Democratic Party in the way those of the right are with the GOP.
Ironically some Conservative groups have never forgiven George Bush. But it will be interesting to see how Evangelicals/Social conservatives react when Romney gets the nod and he starts going into Moderate mode. Makes one wonder if he will choose a conservative VP.
On January 16 2012 13:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Ironically some Conservative groups have never forgiven George Bush. But it will be interesting to see how Evangelicals/Social conservatives react when Romney gets the nod and he starts going into Moderate mode. Makes one wonder if he will choose a conservative VP.
If he's wise I think this is the best way to play it. I'm not thinking that the independents are too happy with the tea party groups or evangelicals. He'll have to throw them a bone one way or another.
Everyone seems to forget that Romney is actually doing worse in the primaries so far than he did when he was running against Jon McCain in '08. Of course, he's the establishment candidate now, so I don't know if that will help him or hurt him.
On January 16 2012 17:25 NtroP wrote: Everyone seems to forget that Romney is actually doing worse in the primaries so far than he did when he was running against Jon McCain in '08. Of course, he's the establishment candidate now, so I don't know if that will help him or hurt him.
Hardly...
There has been one primary and one caucus: Romney essentially did the same in Iowa this year (down 6 votes from '08) and did about 22,000 votes better in NH this year than he did in '08.
Meh I am glad its Romney, he is by far the least crazy guy among the Republicans ['except for Huntsman but he was way too educated to win. I mean who would want a President who speakers mandarin? What a totally irrelevant and elitist language]
...George Stephanopoulos played a new TV ad running in South Carolina, from Colbert’s super-PAC (control of which was officially transferred to Colbert’s close colleague, Daily Show host Jon Stewart). The ad features a voiceover narration from actor John Lithgow, who declares alongside audio of Romney: “If Mitt Romney really believes ‘Corporations are people, my friend,’ then Mitt Romney is a serial killer. He’s — Mitt the Ripper!”...
On January 16 2012 11:26 jalstar wrote: What is even going on the past few pages it's like people are completely oblivious to the fact that Obama brought hundreds of thousands of troops home from Iraq.
Are you sure about him being anti-war? That was Bush's policy that ended the Iraq war and he promised to end it earlier...
>Well Since Obama took office he's:
• Authorized drone strikes in Pakistan murdering thousands of men, women and children in a sovereign country (an act of war)
• Expanded the war in Afghanistan murdering thousands more (an act of war)
• Started an incredibly massive bombing campaign against the civilians in Libya (an act of war)
• Continued the war on Yemen
• Started a covert war on parts of Northern Somalia (an act of war)
• Started building Drone bases in Ethiopia for air strikes.(an act of war)
• Sending troops to Sudan.
Obama somehow won the Nobel Peace Prize and somehow maintains the support of a large majority of the left even despite this horrendously atrocious record. Compare his actions with his own statement as candidate Obama:
“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,”
I ask you people please to not make false, specious excuses for the man's actions, please keep Bush's actions out of this and just explain why a the most staunch Anti-War candidate (Ron Paul) garners next to zero support among the anti-war left.
Not to mention indefinite detainment of People without a trial(NDAA).
Citations
- Drone strikes in Pakistan since 2004 and ongoing.
Yeah, because foreign policy is all about war.. lol.
I could also just say: "If you haven't attended a diplomat school, you should have no say about foreign policy".... And that would actually make more sense.
I love how the comments are censored. To be more accurate there aren't any because you can't post.
I don't like that guy. Why ? "I think Ron Paul , I would have dinner with that guy but his ideas are savage". Really ? Really ..........? You would have dinner with some1 who has savage ideas ? This is the kind of mentality who stops guys like me from not supporting Ron Paul because everyone who comes to it just bring ad hominem arguments and they have the rationalist reductionist sent, which I dismiss completely.\
I'm probably not the guy to talk to about Ron Paul because I really don't care enough to do all the research about his policies and how they would actually affect things in the country because I'm not an American . But coming with such a video is worse than that "let him die" video.
Plus I don't know who that guy was so he has zero credibility from my side . Yeah , wikipedia won't do any good for me. I don't think there is even a guy for example who I'll trust like that anyways .
For me for example it's ok to know that people like Joe Rogan or Bryan Callen support him ... Yes, the fucking fear factor guy and the guy from The hangover...because they don't take themselves very seriously. Let's talk about real politics ? What the hell is that supposed to mean anyways ? Conservative guys never get along, liberal guys never get along, libertarian people never get along. Literally all ideologies have fights inside them , no1 agreeing on anything and ALL OF THEM having false premises about the nature of the human being. Yeah ... I'll put my money on a rather free society, not a nany state who teaches us we are not responsible for our actions and get bust into our houses at every given time without a warrant if there is a strong enough suspicion .
I love how the comments are censored. To be more accurate there aren't any because you can't post.
I don't like that guy. Why ? "I think Ron Paul , I would have dinner with that guy but his ideas are savage". Really ? Really ..........? You would have dinner with some1 who has savage ideas ? This is the kind of mentality who stops guys like me from not supporting Ron Paul because everyone who comes to it just bring ad hominem arguments and they have the rationalist reductionist sent, which I dismiss completely.\
I'm probably not the guy to talk to about Ron Paul because I really don't care enough to do all the research about his policies and how they would actually affect things in the country because I'm not an American . But coming with such a video is worse than that "let him die" video.
Plus I don't know who that guy was so he has zero credibility from my side . Yeah , wikipedia won't do any good for me. I don't think there is even a guy for example who I'll trust like that anyways .
For me for example it's ok to know that people like Joe Rogan or Bryan Callen support him ... Yes, the fucking fear factor guy and the guy from The hangover...because they don't take themselves very seriously. Let's talk about real politics ? What the hell is that supposed to mean anyways ? Conservative guys never get along, liberal guys never get along, libertarian people never get along. Literally all ideologies have fights inside them , no1 agreeing on anything and ALL OF THEM having false premises about the nature of the human being. Yeah ... I'll put my money on a rather free society, not a nany state who teaches us we are not responsible for our actions and get bust into our houses at every given time without a warrant if there is a strong enough suspicion .
How is it an ad hominem attack when he discusses the ideas which he finds savage? I have no idea how you managed to stitch together so much drivel. Furthermore, if Chomsky or educated people's opinion in general doesn't matter to you then why the fuck does Joe Rogans? If you're not smart learn from people who are. If you are smart, educate yourself. Taking Joe Rogans views on politics as your own is as smart as taking a hobos advice on finances. If anything you are making an ad hominem attack on Chomsky, rather than discussing what he actually said.
On January 16 2012 23:23 Velr wrote: Yeah, because foreign policy is all about war.. lol.
I could also just say: "If you haven't attended a diplomat school, you should have no say about foreign policy".... And that would actually make more sense.
Don't you know about our American Imperialism is to build 900 bases in over 130 countries?
Anyways, you should be praising Ron Paul because he quotes your country having an excellent foreign policy to which I agree with.
On January 16 2012 13:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Ironically some Conservative groups have never forgiven George Bush. But it will be interesting to see how Evangelicals/Social conservatives react when Romney gets the nod and he starts going into Moderate mode. Makes one wonder if he will choose a conservative VP.
id say 90% chance he does. wouldnt be suprised to see someone like mccain or that guy whos always on the cover of mens health as VP -_-
all the republicans who arent part of the fox news hate machine have known from the beginning that romney was the odds on favorite. when it comes down to it romney is the only one out of the field of crazys who could possibly win an election. its all well and good backing whoever you like when it doesnt matter, but when you have to win over the centre ground to win the election theres no point backing a radical. unless you can scare the whole country in to believing your fighting a war on terror...
On January 16 2012 17:25 NtroP wrote: Everyone seems to forget that Romney is actually doing worse in the primaries so far than he did when he was running against Jon McCain in '08. Of course, he's the establishment candidate now, so I don't know if that will help him or hurt him.
but its not about how well you win within your own party, its about how well you win over the people who arent die hards for either side. winning by 1% or 90% in the gop polls doesnt mean a thing, its how voters view him compared to obama
On January 16 2012 11:26 jalstar wrote: What is even going on the past few pages it's like people are completely oblivious to the fact that Obama brought hundreds of thousands of troops home from Iraq.
Are you sure about him being anti-war? That was Bush's policy that ended the Iraq war and he promised to end it earlier...
thats because anti war or pro peice are stupid things to say, EVERYONE is anti war. doesnt mean you sit around saying ww2 was a waste of time. someone being anti war is just another stupid media phrase.
@turdburgler First of all you misspelled peace and secondly, how is being anti-war stupid? I don't think you understand how the neoconservatives and neoliberals think in US politics. They want to expand our American Empire, therefore they are not anti-war but, they are for creating this never ending war machine that will stop at nothing to consume the world.
Also, on the chomsky piece......
Chomsky and Paul mostly agree on:
- foreign policy
- media influence
- corporate power
They disagree on:
- economics
Other than that, I don't see why Chomsky had to say something like that about Paul at the end. o_O
EPT
