WorldTraveller Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 There are no Democrats here. Just right wing christian fundamentalists and moderate independents. TheNewBills is above it all anyway, the last unbiased man. Just ask him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 (edited) I'm inspired by Romney's competence. LOL no you are not. You feel Obama is not competent and therefore and inspired to vote against him. People who feel Obama isn't competent to be President are not really in the pool of voters either candidate is trying to persuade w/ their campaign. They're in the bag for Romney already. 1) Strong record at Bain. 2) Strong record as Gov of Mass 3) Strong record at the oylmpics What's not inspiring? That he hasn't run a campaign about hope and change? Be honest. The reason you don't find him inspiring is because you're a Democrat. No that isn't true. First off, "inspiring" might be the wrong word. It's part of it but a broader word would work better. One that covers inspiring, likability, ability to relate...basically "this guy could be my leader" for a large number of Americans. W Bush had it. Hell I saw him speak at an event and the guy...for all that goes along w/ him (and I don't care to get into a discussion about him)...is actually quite hilarious and he's not nearly as dumb as he comes off had some smart and engaging things to say. Obviously many Obama qualities work for large segments of the population. Clinton and Reagan were 2 of the best. ETC Romney really doesn't have it. And I get the 3 pillars of Romney lol...I don't see it working for the majority of Americans (by majoirty I mean 8ish% who will make up their minds between now and the election). Ultimately Romney is going to have to speak to the people and convince them to pick him as their leader. He's not going to do that by talking about how profitable Bain was or the Olympics (honestly the Olympic thing is a joke) and he refuses talk about being Governor. If he wins he would be one of the first presidents I've seen who has almost no ability to just sell himself as a person. Barry tried the "inspiring" thing in 2008 and many (myself included) bought it. He's out of parlor tricks. I'll take the guy with real world experience, at several different major levels, even over a guy who "inspires." But that's just me. I know you will Doc. I know. Edited August 7, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 LOL no you are not. You feel Obama is not competent and therefore and inspired to vote against him. People who feel Obama isn't competent to be President are not really in the pool of voters either candidate is trying to persuade w/ their campaign. They're in the bag for Romney already. No that isn't true. First off, "inspiring" might be the wrong word. It's part of it but a broader word would work better. One that covers inspiring, likability, ability to relate...basically "this guy could be my leader" for a large number of Americans. W Bush had it. Hell I saw him speak at an event and the guy...for all that goes along w/ him (and I don't care to get into a discussion about him)...is actually quite hilarious and he's not nearly as dumb as he comes off had some smart and engaging things to say. Obviously many Obama qualities work for large segments of the population. Clinton and Reagan were 2 of the best. ETC Romney really doesn't have it. And I get the 3 pillars of Romney lol...I don't see it working for the majority of Americans (by majoirty I mean 8ish% who will make up their minds between now and the election). Ultimately Romney is going to have to speak to the people and convince them to pick him as their leader. He's not going to do that by talking about how profitable Bain was or the Olympics (honestly the Olympic thing is a joke) and he refuses talk about being Governor. If he wins he would be one of the first presidents I've seen who has almost no ability to just sell himself as a person. I know you will Doc. I know. For a moment there, what with you telling me how I actually feel, you came across as an arrogant prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 LOL no you are not. You feel Obama is not competent and therefore and inspired to vote against him. People who feel Obama isn't competent to be President are not really in the pool of voters either candidate is trying to persuade w/ their campaign. They're in the bag for Romney already. Not true. I don't think Obama is competent (I don't "feel" anything about it...it's evidence-based reasoning that leads me to conclude he's not competent). But that in no way puts me "in the bag" for Romney. I could as easily vote third-party, like last election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 I know you will Doc. I know. I would hope everyone would want to get rid of a guy who has proven to be incompetent. But again, that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 Do you know of the author, or just the article makes you think he's looney? I didn't get that impression from reading it. Don't know the man, and I read the article quickly this morning and posted it to another thread. Just something about it made me think birther/truther/malarkey(hey, didn't he draft a punter in the 3rd round ). He's probably less cracked than I am. I reread it and it sounds more like here's a finger-in-yer-eye there Harry/Barry. How do YOU like it? Wonder if the MSM will pick up on this story. If not, it should go viral. It would be great if Mitt did offer the challenge - his tax records for BO's full scholastic records. Might be the very last we ever hear about Mitt's taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 Not true. I don't think Obama is competent (I don't "feel" anything about it...it's evidence-based reasoning that leads me to conclude he's not competent). But that in no way puts me "in the bag" for Romney. I could as easily vote third-party, like last election. That's true I forget about third parties lol. Anyway, Obama would thank you for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 No that isn't true. First off, "inspiring" might be the wrong word. It's part of it but a broader word would work better. One that covers inspiring, likability, ability to relate...basically "this guy could be my leader" for a large number of Americans. W Bush had it. Hell I saw him speak at an event and the guy...for all that goes along w/ him (and I don't care to get into a discussion about him)...is actually quite hilarious and he's not nearly as dumb as he comes off had some smart and engaging things to say. Obviously many Obama qualities work for large segments of the population. Clinton and Reagan were 2 of the best. ETC And how does what you posted above translate into being a good President... unless you're moved by speeches? Romney really doesn't have it. And I get the 3 pillars of Romney lol...I don't see it working for the majority of Americans (by majoirty I mean 8ish% who will make up their minds between now and the election). Ultimately Romney is going to have to speak to the people and convince them to pick him as their leader. He's not going to do that by talking about how profitable Bain was or the Olympics (honestly the Olympic thing is a joke) and he refuses talk about being Governor. 1) The selling point on Bain is always going to be, "I'm good at rebuilding businesses". 2) He has talked about Mass, you're just not listening. 3) The olympics is a joke? I'd love to see your CV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 I haven't found a politician terribly inspiring in some time. Perhaps I've just become cynical and jaded, but as far as politicians go I like Romney quite a bit. He's not my ideal libertarian by any stretch, but he's a well-mannered pragmatist who doesn't seem to view political ideology too dogmatically. That's a big deal because he seems to understand how the economy works and has the intelligence & flexibility to handle situations as they arise with a measured & reasoned approach rather than a massive knee-jerk reaction based in some theoretical ideal. Personally I'd have preferred Rudy (but only if he promised never to again say "Sadam Hussein WAS a weapon of mass destruction") but I'm pretty happy with Romney as a candidate. He's far preferable to Newt, the sweater vest, John McCain, and the clueless tool currently occupying the office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 That's true I forget about third parties lol. Anyway, Obama would thank you for that. In that regard, Obama can go !@#$ himself. It not his vote, or Romney's vote. It's my vote. (Although I'm not required in any way to prove it is.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 I haven't found a politician terribly inspiring in some time. Perhaps I've just become cynical and jaded, but as far as politicians go I like Romney quite a bit. He's not my ideal libertarian by any stretch, but he's a well-mannered pragmatist who doesn't seem to view political ideology too dogmatically. That's a big deal because he seems to understand how the economy works and has the intelligence & flexibility to handle situations as they arise with a measured & reasoned approach rather than a massive knee-jerk reaction based in some theoretical ideal. Personally I'd have preferred Rudy (but only if he promised never to again say "Sadam Hussein WAS a weapon of mass destruction") but I'm pretty happy with Romney as a candidate. He's far preferable to Newt, the sweater vest, John McCain, and the clueless tool currently occupying the office. You do realise what's about to happen, right? Romney will win the election, and markets will have a November bounce, possibly reaching 15000 on the DOW, but then, once things have stabilised on the poli-bounce and consumer confidence front, and Romney has gone about instituting Chicago School trickle-down "reforms", reality will set in, and markets will spiral through their inevitable crash as they liquidate and normalize. Romney and non-socialists will be blamed, and the nails will be driven into the coffin of US free-markets for good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 You do realise what's about to happen, right? Romney will win the election, and markets will have a November bounce, possibly reaching 15000 on the DOW, but then, once things have stabilised on the poli-bounce and consumer confidence front, and Romney has gone about instituting Chicago School trickle-down "reforms", reality will set in, and markets will spiral through their inevitable crash as they liquidate and normalize. Romney and non-socialists will be blamed, and the nails will be driven into the coffin of US free-markets for good. I'm afraid you might be right. Every time interventionists fail (& they always fail) they dig in and claim that but for their failed policies things would be worse. Hell, even as their economic model fails all over Europe they only become more reassured that they need to double down on it. They were even able to convince a good portion of the country that the mortgage crisis was a failure of capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 I haven't found a politician terribly inspiring in some time. As a libertarian Paul didn't do it for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 As a libertarian Paul didn't do it for you? There's just something about Paul that makes me think he's nominating Gandalf for VP...he's just got some sort of Middle Earth vibe about him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 (edited) As a libertarian Paul didn't do it for you? Paul, as a candidate, is refreshing but not inspiring. He's a fantastic writer, but a lousy speaker. Paul's writings do a great job reaching people like me, who understand economics and enjoy thumbing through volumes apon volumes of reading materials; I'm a student of logic, and don't need to be inspired. The modern American Idol electorate do, however, and Paul failed to pull it off. It's just not who he is. Edited August 7, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 (edited) Paul, as a candidate, is refreshing but not inspiring. He's a fantastic writer, but a lousy speaker. Paul's writings do a great job reaching people like me, who understand economics and enjoy thumbing through volumes apon volumes of reading materials; I'm a student of logic, and don't need to be inspired. The modern American Idol electorate do, however, and Paul failed to pull it off. It's just not who he is. IDK I think he was a fairly inspiring candidate considering his movement was hardly mainstream. True he failed to steal enough established loyalty but I think he did better than many would have thought possible. Edited August 7, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 As a libertarian Paul didn't do it for you? He's about the only one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 IDK I think he was a fairly inspiring candidate considering his movement was hardly mainstream. True he failed to steal enough established loyalty but I think he did better than many would have thought possible. I disagree. Paul picked up most of his new bank of supporters from disaffected Democrats, leading me to believe his growth in popularity is due in large part to the failures of President Obama rather than the successes of Paul himself. Those former Democratic voters taking refuge in Paul's social liberalism and understanding of the Occupy Movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 I haven't found a politician terribly inspiring in some time. Perhaps I've just become cynical and jaded, but as far as politicians go I like Romney quite a bit. He's not my ideal libertarian by any stretch, but he's a well-mannered pragmatist who doesn't seem to view political ideology too dogmatically. That's a big deal because he seems to understand how the economy works and has the intelligence & flexibility to handle situations as they arise with a measured & reasoned approach rather than a massive knee-jerk reaction based in some theoretical ideal. Personally I'd have preferred Rudy (but only if he promised never to again say "Sadam Hussein WAS a weapon of mass destruction") but I'm pretty happy with Romney as a candidate. He's far preferable to Newt, the sweater vest, John McCain, and the clueless tool currently occupying the office. I don't know a ton about Presidential history but I think it's safe to say that the majority of them have been less than inspiring. Warren G. Harding.....woohoo!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 I disagree. Paul picked up most of his new bank of supporters from disaffected Democrats, leading me to believe his growth in popularity is due in large part to the failures of President Obama rather than the successes of Paul himself. Those former Democratic voters taking refuge in Paul's social liberalism and understanding of the Occupy Movement. You know this brings up an interesting point that I've thought about before. Basically wondering...should Paul or the libertarian movement have attached to the GOP? B/c really the way I see it historically the GOP has spent even though they are supposedly the party of fiscal conservatism. And they are obviously the party of social conservatism. And his war positions directly oppose that of the GOP more so than the Dems. I often wondered, given the accepted premise that he needed to infiltrate a major party in order to gain funding and "legitimacy" in the eyes of the voters ... whether the libertarian movement would have had an equally strong chance pushing the left its way as the right. The obvious reality is no matter what he wouldn't sway either party completely...but could he have pulled more Dems and then still poached moderate Repubs undercutting their spending position and leaving them w/ mere social conservatism and war policy. Not really making a point here and I'm not suggesting anything either way just thinking out loud..but I have often wondered if maybe the Libertarian movement could have netted more voters on balance had they chosen to sort of push the left their way and poach from the right as opposed to vis versa. Now obviously the basic economic philosophy is a big push. But no less a push than many of the foreign policy and social issues is to the right. And in general it's not like the GOPs economic philosophy was actually aligned w/ Paul to begin with (although it obviously was closer). Anyway...idk...thoughts? Stupid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts