EPTHow can he be polling around 25% in SC? :/.
Republican nominations - Page 308
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
How can he be polling around 25% in SC? :/. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10943 Posts
Even when you like Ron Pauls ideas, he is still to old for maaany people and therefore no "good" candidate... | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
Charleston, South Carolina (CNN) - Rick Perry is telling supporters that he will drop his bid for the Republican presidential nomination on Thursday, two sources familiar with the plans told CNN. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/19/breaking-perry-to-drop-out-thursday/ | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46317 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:21 xDaunt wrote: Another one bites the dust.... http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/19/breaking-perry-to-drop-out-thursday/ Thank It had gotten to the point where I was actually becoming angry every time it was his turn to speak. | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1603 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Thank It had gotten to the point where I was actually becoming angry every time it was his turn to speak. I think he is dropping out to give Ron Paul a chance at sucess. Though I'm not going to lie I live here in SC and I think Romney wins it. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46317 Posts
On January 19 2012 21:23 Derez wrote: What I don't understand is how Gingrich is in this race in the first place. He's incompetent, erratic, full of his own crazy ideas and completely unfit for the presidency. How can he be polling around 25% in SC? :/. South Carolina also ragequit the United States when we wanted to free the slaves. Don't read too much into this moderate appreciation for Gingrich. | ||
|
TS-Rupbar
Sweden1089 Posts
The article is in Swedish, but he's basically saying that Republicans are crazy: "Jämfört med dagens republikanska utmanare som verkar tävla i vem som har mest extrema åsikter, framstår George Bush den yngre som en trevlig och resonabel president." My translation: Compared to today's republican nominees, who seem to compete for who has the most extreme views, George Bush the younger comes off as a nice and reasonable president. He ends with: "Det man ändå kan hoppas på är att republikanerna nominerar en så extrem person så att Barack Obama trots allt vinner en andra period. Det tror jag är bäst för världen." My translation: What you still can hope for is that the republicans nominate such an extreme person that Barack Obama still wins another mandate period. That, I think is best for the World. Those are some pretty forward words for a mayor. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:42 TS-Rupbar wrote: The mayor of my town, Växjö's Bo Frank, on Republicans vs Democrats: http://www.smp.se/nyheter/lobbyn/viktigaste-valet-i-usa(3107617).gm The article is in Swedish, but he's basically saying that Republicans are crazy: "Jämfört med dagens republikanska utmanare som verkar tävla i vem som har mest extrema åsikter, framstår George Bush den yngre som en trevlig och resonabel president." My translation: Compared to today's republican nominees, who seem to compete for who has the most extreme views, George Bush the younger comes off as a nice and reasonable president. He ends with: "Det man ändå kan hoppas på är att republikanerna nominerar en så extrem person så att Barack Obama trots allt vinner en andra period. Det tror jag är bäst för världen." My translation: What you still can hope for is that the republicans nominate such an extreme person that Barack Obama still wins another mandate period. That, I think is best for the World. Those are some pretty forward words for a mayor. Completely unsurprising, really. Completely uninformed as well, but that's okay. | ||
|
EternaLLegacy
United States410 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: South Carolina also ragequit the United States when we wanted to free the slaves. Don't read too much into this moderate appreciation for Gingrich. That is one of the most ignorant recounts of the civil war period I've seen. They left because the Federal government was overstepping its bounds by violating the 9th Amendment, and Lincoln, who was nearly dictatorial with power, decided total war to keep the south subservient to him was okay. Lincoln had absolutely no interest in freeing the slaves, and only did so by decree in the South in order to cause turmoil and weaken the South. "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union." -Lincoln The reason Gingrich is polling around 25% in SC is because SC is full of racists, but it has nothing to do with secession. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:48 EternaLLegacy wrote: The reason Gingrich is polling around 25% in SC is because SC is full of racists, but it has nothing to do with secession. Does the ignorance in this thread know no bounds? Gingrich has no shortage of faults, but racism isn't one of them. Hell, labeling most any politician racist is simply a lazy liberal cop-out. EDIT: Also, I'm shocked that you would correctly state why SC seceded and still say something as stupid as this. | ||
|
don_kyuhote
3007 Posts
Thought he would at least wait and see the result on South Carolina. His debating skills are bad, but at least his team knew how to make a heckuva movie trailer.  | ||
|
Xivsa
United States1009 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:46 xDaunt wrote: Completely unsurprising, really. Completely uninformed as well, but that's okay. No, those are informed statements from the Swedish mayor. And both are correct. Bush is more moderate than the nominees running, if nothing else based on the fact of the proposed changes and reforms they have proposed to American policies that are largely unchanged from Bush's administration. Bush was not as socially conservative either, though granted that nominees like Romney aren't quite Tea Party enthusiasts. If you're a Republican who believes that the world is better served by someone other than Obama, then I suppose you're right in calling the second quote uninformed due to your own misguided opinion. | ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:26 NoobSkills wrote: I think he is dropping out to give Ron Paul a chance at sucess. Though I'm not going to lie I live here in SC and I think Romney wins it. Far more likely Santorum... I'm guessing most of the people that would have voted for Perry will vote for Santorum... with a smaller amount roughly equally going to Gingrich, Paul, and Romney | ||
|
HellRoxYa
Sweden1614 Posts
On January 19 2012 23:42 TS-Rupbar wrote: The mayor of my town, Växjö's Bo Frank, on Republicans vs Democrats: http://www.smp.se/nyheter/lobbyn/viktigaste-valet-i-usa(3107617).gm The article is in Swedish, but he's basically saying that Republicans are crazy: "Jämfört med dagens republikanska utmanare som verkar tävla i vem som har mest extrema åsikter, framstår George Bush den yngre som en trevlig och resonabel president." My translation: Compared to today's republican nominees, who seem to compete for who has the most extreme views, George Bush the younger comes off as a nice and reasonable president. He ends with: "Det man ändå kan hoppas på är att republikanerna nominerar en så extrem person så att Barack Obama trots allt vinner en andra period. Det tror jag är bäst för världen." My translation: What you still can hope for is that the republicans nominate such an extreme person that Barack Obama still wins another mandate period. That, I think is best for the World. Those are some pretty forward words for a mayor. He's a council member of your local municipality, not a (or the) mayor. It's also a random debate arcticle, even if he's right. On January 19 2012 23:46 xDaunt wrote: Completely unsurprising, really. Completely uninformed as well, but that's okay. Uninformed in what way exactly? Please, feel free to be specific. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
HellRoxYa
Sweden1614 Posts
On January 20 2012 00:15 xDaunt wrote: He's incorrect on the point of the candidates being "extreme." All of the republican candidates (other than Paul) are well-within the norms of American political values. Basically this is another case of a European looking at America with a minimal foundation of understanding of American politics and values. They are extreme positions to hold objectively speaking. If they are commonplace inside of American politics or not is irrelevant to the matter. But I will agree to that, and I think that it's disgusting and sad. | ||
|
nennx
United States310 Posts
On January 20 2012 00:15 xDaunt wrote: He's incorrect on the point of the candidates being "extreme." All of the republican candidates (other than Paul) are well-within the norms of American political values. Basically this is another case of a European looking at America with a minimal foundation of understanding of American politics and values. Normal politics and values of the last few years since racism and hatred and bullshit have become even more normal. | ||
|
TS-Rupbar
Sweden1089 Posts
On January 20 2012 00:17 HellRoxYa wrote: They are extreme positions to hold objectively speaking. If they are commonplace inside of American politics or not is irrelevant to the matter. But I will agree to that, and I think that it's disgusting and sad. From the debate article: För att förstå hur det ändå är möjligt för dessa republikaner att få framgång måste man förstå det amerikanska samhället och dess värderingar. Orden stat, politik, skatt, miljö, vapenkontroll, födelsekontroll, sjukförsäkring, etc har negativ klang för väldigt många och symboliserar ingrepp i den enskildes frihet. Detta är svårt för oss att ta till oss eftersom om just dessa ord i Sverige råder bred konsensus i förvaret av ett välfärdssamhälle eller välfärdsstat beroende på ideologisk tillhörighet My translation: To understand how it still is possible for these republicans [the nominees] to be successful, you have to understand the American society and its values. Words like state, politics, taxes, environment, gun control, birth control, health care insurances, etc. sound negative for many people and symbolize interference with individuals' freedom. This is hard to understand for Swedes because there in Sweden Sweden is a wide agreement on preserving the welfare society [don't know a better word for "välfärdssamhälle"]. | ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
On January 20 2012 00:17 HellRoxYa wrote: They are extreme positions to hold objectively speaking. If they are commonplace inside of American politics or not is irrelevant to the matter. But I will agree to that, and I think that it's disgusting and sad. There is no such thing as an Objectively extreme political position (ie a political position that is extreme in all societies). Now there might be some positions that are objectively immoral, or objectively poor at achieving a certain goal, but I don't think we could get solid agreement on that. The other thing to consider is what a Presidential candidate says they will do, and what they actually end up doing (partially because they may be lying, but partially because they have a limited ability to do what they want.. ie they still have to deal with Congress and the Courts) | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On January 19 2012 21:23 Derez wrote: What I don't understand is how Gingrich is in this race in the first place. He's incompetent, erratic, full of his own crazy ideas and completely unfit for the presidency. How can he be polling around 25% in SC? :/. Because that fits the general description of the Republican Party. | ||
| ||
