Republican nominations - Page 459

On February 20 2012 10:17 hillman wrote:
Ron Paul is the only candidate with an understanding and/or the political will to make changes to US fiscal policy....he also is the only candidate who is requiring that the Federal reserve have some god damn accountability. If he doesn't win then we're going deeper and deeper into money pit and may never get out. The establishment in Washington clearly doesn't want him to win but he is far and away the soundest candidate out there. This whole left-right paradigm in Washington is so despicable and played out...vote for change..quit fooling yourself that the political BS actually matters...

Gallup's daily tracking poll shows Rick Santorum continuing to gain momentum among national Republican voters, with the former senator now holding an 8 percentage point lead over Mitt Romney.

Santorum earned the support of 36 percent of voters, up one percent from Saturday. Romney fell by one percent to 28 percent. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) held steady at 13 percent and 11 percent respectively.

On February 19 2012 17:16 itkovian wrote:


All the republican nominees are trying really hard to get that far right wing, teaparty vote and a lot of them are compromising the appeal to the middle ground to do it. I think its coming back to bite them in the general overview, though it may be boosting their poll numbers in the republican primaries. I'm not complaining though haha, they can fight all they want and move farther and farther to the right for all I care. It will just make them less appealing to moderates in the long run.

On February 20 2012 11:02 Sufficiency wrote:
By the way, was the 2008 Democrat Nomination battle this ugly?

On February 20 2012 09:44 Attican wrote:

Well that free ride must have been very nice for you, sadly not everyone has had your exact experience with public school. By the way the public school I went to when I lived in Wisconsin was awesome, I would take that over being homeschooled anytime. Public school is also very useful for helping kids develop social skills, unlike homeschooling where you just stay home all the time.

On February 20 2012 09:44 Attican wrote:

Well that free ride must have been very nice for you, sadly not everyone has had your exact experience with public school. By the way the public school I went to when I lived in Wisconsin was awesome, I would take that over being homeschooled anytime. Public school is also very useful for helping kids develop social skills, unlike homeschooling where you just stay home all the time.

On February 20 2012 11:10 aksfjh wrote:

Even though this is slightly off topic, homeschooling doesn't really help or hurt the development of social skills any more than public school. As long as the parents aren't locking kids up in their rooms for 18 years, they'll develop the same social strengths as any other kid.

On February 20 2012 11:08 aksfjh wrote:

Not even close. The most mudslinging amounted to "We need somebody who isn't all talk!"

On February 20 2012 11:56 SerpentFlame wrote:

iirc, Hillary Clinton tried plenty of dirty tricks against Obama in 08

On February 20 2012 11:10 aksfjh wrote:

Even though this is slightly off topic, homeschooling doesn't really help or hurt the development of social skills any more than public school. As long as the parents aren't locking kids up in their rooms for 18 years, they'll develop the same social strengths as any other kid.

MI may be moving on a different track than elsewhere because our AZ numbers (out tomorrow) and WA ones (out Tuesday) are good for Santorum

The Republican race for President in Michigan has tightened considerably over the last week, with what was a 15 point lead for Rick Santorum down to 4. He leads with 37% to 33% for Mitt Romney, 15% for Ron Paul, and 10% for Newt Gingrich.

The tightening over the last week is much more a function of Romney gaining than Santorum falling. Santorum's favorability spread of 67/23 has seen no change since our last poll, and his share of the vote has dropped only 2 points from 39% to 37%. Romney meanwhile has seen his net favorability improve 10 points from +10 (49/39) to +20 (55/35) and his vote share go from 24% to 33%.

What we're seeing in Michigan is a very different story from Florida where Romney surged by effectively destroying his opponent's image- here Romney's gains have more to do with building himself up.

Groups Santorum has double digit leads with include Protestants (up 47-30), union members (up 43-23), Evangelicals (up 51-24), Tea Partiers (up 55-20), 'very conservative' voters (up 54-23), and men (up 40-28).

Romney is leading the field with women (38-34), seniors (42-34), moderates (35-24), 'somewhat conservative' voters (40-34), and Catholics (43-31).
Newt Gingrich's continued presence in the race is helping Romney a lot. If he dropped 45% of his supporters would go to Santorum, compared to only 29% for Romney and it would push Santorum's lead over Romney up to 42-33. 47% of primary voters think Gingrich should drop out while only 40% believe he should continue on, but he's certainly not showing any indication he'll leave.

Santorum's advantage over Romney seems to be a reflection of voters being more comfortable with where he is ideologically. 48% of voters think Santorum has more similar beliefs to them, compared to only 32% who pick Romney on that question. 63% of primary voters think Santorum's views are 'about right' compared to only 42% who say that for Romney. 37% believe that Romney is 'too liberal.'

On February 20 2012 11:08 aksfjh wrote:

Not even close. The most mudslinging amounted to "We need somebody who isn't all talk!"

On February 20 2012 10:28 Whitewing wrote:


Yeah, about half his policies are good, but the other half are legitimately batshit insane.

This puts him in the upper 90% of Republican politicians when it comes to those I'd like to see in the White House, he's only half nuts.

On February 20 2012 15:04 Whitewing wrote:


We've been over this about 6 or 7 times in the thread, I don't feel like getting into it again. If you'd like to scroll back and read the previous arguments and then respond to those, be my guest.

On February 21 2012 01:38 BioNova wrote:


Yes, Batshit Insane as you said... We got ya. We disagree. You win..

I've been lurking this thread a long time, I'm just bored to tears at this point. My question to you is when is the democratic party ...you know. gonna run a real democrat. They won't You cannot mock the republican values because the democrats work for the same pimp. /throws Obama's Eric Holder and Robert Gates at your feet... defend yourself.
Geitner? Bernacke? Throw hope out the window, and please just pass some change.

You say you don't want to get into it..again...don't reply There is NO defensible democrat. Nader himself wants the fringes to align against the middle, as the middle has against it. In a sad sad truth, both parties are dead, as far as what low ranking(us) party members might want.

Bush ruled as the King
Obama rules as the King and I
Neither pleased their base. Romney will do the same. Santorum might seem rigid, but he would be putty in the hands of the CFR. Gingrich is unremarkable, in the sense only the naive believe his rhetoric, tho some die hards might see him as capable as a stong leader(insider). There is always Roseanne. Go Go Broker-Ace aka Ron Paul