Time for the GOP to focus on 2016. 2012 is o-v-e-r.
That's what I thought in 2008 - I thought they had basically given up on the election and were concentrating on 2012. Now I think they're just a mess and can't get their act together.
They haven't spent enough time in the "wilderness." Time for them to spend more time doing some deep soul searching and less time ruminating over their blinding hatred of Obama.
If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, "Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb." I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don't have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
Guess what - you don't have to have a nuclear program to make a dirty bomb!
Time for the GOP to focus on 2016. 2012 is o-v-e-r.
That's what I thought in 2008 - I thought they had basically given up on the election and were concentrating on 2012. Now I think they're just a mess and can't get their act together.
Seriously. And to think Mittens was the GOP primary candidate that I thought would be their strongest in the general election.
I think their chances of taking back the Senate are starting to look slim too.
Post by jillboston on Sept 18, 2012 12:06:35 GMT -5
I was told for years by certain conservative members of my family that my tune would change when I started paying taxes. I've paid more taxes than all of them combined.. Guess they were wrong.
The social conservative party wing needs to die out. Sorry if anyone here is a social conservative. I had hopes of an adult convo on economics with Ryan, even if I wasn't voting for them, but barring some event in the economy or the ME, it is unlikely R/R will win or even really focus on jobs.
2016 is wide open. But, I really hope the Dems go for OMalley. The skeletons alone will be awesomesauce. Plus, add in more European fallout and our fiscal cliff and, weeeeeee, we are in for an interesting ride.
I was told for years by certain conservative members of my family that my tune would change when I started paying taxes. I've paid more taxes than all of them combined.. Guess they were wrong.
The social conservative party wing needs to die out. Sorry if anyone here is a social conservative. I had hopes of an adult convo on economics with Ryan, even if I wasn't voting for them, but barring some event in the economy or the ME, it is unlikely R/R will win or even really focus on jobs.
2016 is wide open. But, I really hope the Dems go for OMalley. The skeletons alone will be awesomesauce. Plus, add in more European fallout and our fiscal cliff and, weeeeeee, we are in for an interesting ride.
This is a serious question, because I am a bit baffled by the direction that R/R are choosing to take their campaign, but do you (or anyone else, for that matter) have any thoughts as to why they are seemingly abandoning the idea of substantive economic arguments? I'm not on board with a lot of their alleged viewpoints, but IMO, using economic policy as their #1 platform was their best chance of winning. I'd like to at least see them play out their ideas, but I feel like they have jumped ship on them.
The social conservative party wing needs to die out. Sorry if anyone here is a social conservative. I had hopes of an adult convo on economics with Ryan, even if I wasn't voting for them, but barring some event in the economy or the ME, it is unlikely R/R will win or even really focus on jobs.
2016 is wide open. But, I really hope the Dems go for OMalley. The skeletons alone will be awesomesauce. Plus, add in more European fallout and our fiscal cliff and, weeeeeee, we are in for an interesting ride.
This is a serious question, because I am a bit baffled by the direction that R/R are choosing to take their campaign, but do you (or anyone else, for that matter) have any thoughts as to why they are seemingly abandoning the idea of substantive economic arguments? I'm not on board with a lot of their alleged viewpoints, but IMO, using economic policy as their #1 platform was their best chance of winning. I'd like to at least see them play out their ideas, but I feel like they have jumped ship on them.
Because Ryan's budget plan, particularly the Medicare voucher idea couldn't even be polled because the people that were polled about it didn't believe any politician would actually propose it.
This is a serious question, because I am a bit baffled by the direction that R/R are choosing to take their campaign, but do you (or anyone else, for that matter) have any thoughts as to why they are seemingly abandoning the idea of substantive economic arguments? I'm not on board with a lot of their alleged viewpoints, but IMO, using economic policy as their #1 platform was their best chance of winning. I'd like to at least see them play out their ideas, but I feel like they have jumped ship on them.
Because Ryan's budget plan, particularly the Medicare voucher idea couldn't even be polled because the people that were polled about it didn't believe any politician would actually propose it.
Pretty much this. Plus, once you start getting into details about Ryan's budget plan, it quickly becomes apparent that it doesn't make a hint of sense. They are avoiding it because the emperor has no clothes.
Because Ryan's budget plan, particularly the Medicare voucher idea couldn't even be polled because the people that were polled about it didn't believe any politician would actually propose it.
Pretty much this. Plus, once you start getting into details about Ryan's budget plan, it quickly becomes apparent that it doesn't make a hint of sense. They are avoiding it because the emperor has no clothes.
I understand this part, and agree that it was totally not feasible. I guess I thought that they would propose another plan, though. Apparently I am an idiot.
Pretty much this. Plus, once you start getting into details about Ryan's budget plan, it quickly becomes apparent that it doesn't make a hint of sense. They are avoiding it because the emperor has no clothes.
I understand this part, and agree that it was totally not feasible. I guess I thought that they would propose another plan, though. Apparently I am an idiot.
Logically it makes sense to abandon a plan that has been widely criticized as unviable, but I don't know that it's an easy thing to do during a campaign. I think you have to really nail your ideas before you present them to the electorate. Otherwise, people who pay close attention will criticize you for not having a clear, decisive vision. People who aren't following closely will be fuzzy on the details. Many will see you as wishy-washy, even if you're changing to something that really will work. The problem is that they weren't able to come up with something that made sense in the first place, and the bigger problem is that none of them recognized it before people tore it to shreds.
What bothers me most about this is that it wont make any difference. No level of stupid will. Romney could just say "All poor people must be killed" in an interview but it would still make little difference. The right wing media wouldn't report it, so a large section of his supporters would never know about it, and those that hate Obama will vote for a sausage if its a republican sausage.