Be a Supporter!
Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 8th, 2012 @ 08:29 PM Reply

At 1/8/12 06:42 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: At any rate, it' stuff like *this*, that gives the paul supporters just cause for outrage at the media.

Oh, I'm not arguing that Paul and his supporters don't have a legitimate beef with the media. It took months for them to even acknowledge that he was in the race or had any involvement in the early debates. Even the Daily Show had a bit on that.

However, his general appearance of kookery is not all manufactured. When he goes on national television and says that the uninsured deserve to die, regardless of it's utilitarian logic, that's not something people, no matter how staunchly right-wing, want to hear.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

SmilezRoyale
SmilezRoyale
  • Member since: Oct. 21, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 8th, 2012 @ 08:40 PM Reply

At 1/8/12 08:29 PM, Ravariel wrote:
At 1/8/12 06:42 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: At any rate, it' stuff like *this*, that gives the paul supporters just cause for outrage at the media.
Oh, I'm not arguing that Paul and his supporters don't have a legitimate beef with the media. It took months for them to even acknowledge that he was in the race or had any involvement in the early debates. Even the Daily Show had a bit on that.

However, his general appearance of kookery is not all manufactured. When he goes on national television and says that the uninsured deserve to die, regardless of it's utilitarian logic, that's not something people, no matter how staunchly right-wing, want to hear.

The ron paul is heartless line hasn't been thrown forward. Yet. I'm not saying it won't. But people suspect all republicans of being heartless, including other republicans. Remember that it was the people in the audience who cheered on to 'let them die'.

Again, it's almost entirely about foreign policy. People on the [progressive] left might think he's a kook because he wants to let the poor die, but they're not participating in this primary.


On a moving train there are no centrists, only radicals and reactionaries.

marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 8th, 2012 @ 09:40 PM Reply

At 1/8/12 08:29 PM, Ravariel wrote: When he goes on national television and says that the uninsured deserve to die, regardless of it's utilitarian logic, that's not something people, no matter how staunchly right-wing, want to hear.

Please show me where he said that.


BBS Signature
Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 9th, 2012 @ 11:55 AM Reply

At 1/8/12 09:40 PM, marchohare wrote:
At 1/8/12 08:29 PM, Ravariel wrote: When he goes on national television and says that the uninsured deserve to die, regardless of it's utilitarian logic, that's not something people, no matter how staunchly right-wing, want to hear.
Please show me where he said that.

I already did. Granted, that was an SNL parody of an actual debate, but it's not based on nothing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJi ao

The actual debate, and while he never says the actual words, he does an awfully quick stump spin on the issue when he's pressed, gives a "churches friends and neighbors" non-answer and then says that "alternative medicine" should be available as well.

You know what they call "alternative medicine" that works?

Medicine.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 9th, 2012 @ 02:25 PM Reply

I don't see what the whole hubub about socialized health insurance is.

We already have socialized medicine, we might as well enact a system that makes it cheaper...

marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 9th, 2012 @ 03:42 PM Reply

At 1/9/12 11:55 AM, Ravariel wrote: that was an SNL parody of an actual debate, but it's not based on nothing....

The actual debate, and while he never says the actual words...

Meaningless.


BBS Signature
Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 9th, 2012 @ 07:07 PM Reply

At 1/9/12 03:42 PM, marchohare wrote:
At 1/9/12 11:55 AM, Ravariel wrote: that was an SNL parody of an actual debate, but it's not based on nothing....

The actual debate, and while he never says the actual words...
Meaningless.

To the true believer, of course.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

VersusYou
VersusYou
  • Member since: Mar. 3, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 9th, 2012 @ 10:50 PM Reply

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/K4uAe.jpg[/IMG]

Enjoy and share. :P

marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 10th, 2012 @ 03:40 AM Reply

At 1/9/12 07:07 PM, Ravariel wrote: To the true believer, of course.

Typical black & white thinking: if I don't believe R.P. is a heartless monster, I must be a "true believer," eh? That kind of thinking is the mark of a weak mind, Ravariel.

In point of fact, I disagree with his Ayn Rand philosophy, but at least he HAS a philosophy beyond, "sell out to the highest bidder." However, I agree with him as far as ending the drug war, bringing home out troops and auditing the Federal Reserve goes, so that puts him head and shoulders above the rest of those Munchkins in my book. None of the others, including that lying bastard Obama, support any of that, because they are sold-out whores.

Ron Paul is a medical doctor. To believe he advocates letting people die is, frankly, stupid. So is citing Saturday Night Live as an indicator of his political positions. You might as well get your information from something like this.

(Oh, that Bob Hope! He was so funny! He was so fuckin' funny! :P)


BBS Signature
Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 10th, 2012 @ 08:02 PM Reply

At 1/10/12 03:40 AM, marchohare wrote: Typical black & white thinking: if I don't believe R.P. is a heartless monster, I must be a "true believer," eh? That kind of thinking is the mark of a weak mind, Ravariel.

No, to a true believer, no possible criticism is ever legitimate. Paul's perception issues must all be manufactured, and there is no way that any comments of his that cast him in a bad light could be anything but out of context.

So is citing Saturday Night Live as an indicator of his political positions. You might as well get your information from something like this.

The fact that he got parodied by SNL is proof that this perception has reached the greater social consciousness. And I did post the actual quote (after you refused to watch the first one), so that accusation is kinda disingenuous.

Is Paul better than Romney? Yeah, probably. However, he has very real perception issues. Not only his apparent heartlessness, but also in foreign policy, his isolationism is either unworkable or would have disastrous consequences in many areas of the world. These issues are not manufactured, they are created by HIS OWN WORDS. Sure, you "don't see it." I wouldn't expect you to, because you have a "different" perspective, one that is biased in favor of Paul. And if you decide to continue to have blinders on about them, then you'll be forever surprised at him not getting elected.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

RPGShadow
RPGShadow
  • Member since: Oct. 24, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Artist
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 11th, 2012 @ 01:42 PM Reply

well you know, romney is offially being backed by the republican establishment and the qant him to win.........................

:P :P :P

WallofYawn
WallofYawn
  • Member since: Aug. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 11th, 2012 @ 02:56 PM Reply

Why does Mitt Romney wear flip flops? Because they match his political strategy, lol.

Seriously, this guy gets mad every time someone calls him a flip-flopper, but how does a guy completely, and not partially, completely, change his entire mind about almost everything he supports, ten years later, when he decides to run for president, and then refuses to admit that,"yea, I admit, I had different views back then, and now I've changed."

Nope, it's,"I've been a conservative this whole time. I am not a flip-flopper, yadda, yadda, yadda." Trying to find a plausible explanation about how he has been consistent this whole time. It's horseshit.

Mitt Romney is exactly the kind of big-business minded, fuck the lil guy, type personality that everyone's been protesting against in the OWS movement. Putting him in office will only escalate the issues we already face.

He, like other candidates, believes that if Iran builds or gets a hold of a nuclear weapon, it will be considered an act of war on the US. WHAT. THE. FUCK.

I mean, uranium is a necessity out there...those people are poor and live in villages where raw sewage flows openly on the side of the road. They have many enemies, and live in an age where they could be easily wiped out by a nuclear weapon, if their enemies chose to do so.

In a nuclear age, if you don't have a nuclear weapon, and you have more enemies than allies, and you invade other neighboring countries, and threaten them, it's the equivalent to bringing a knife to a gun fight. At the same time, I understand the US needs to assess and prevent any possible threats to our country and it's national security.

However, we cannot afford another war. We got almost all of the candidates saying they might invade Iran, and one who wants to go back into Iraq. What. THE. FUCK.

I have to say, I don't like any of the GOP candidates, and that includes Mitt Romney. The guy is nothing but a spineless, hypocritical, big business touting, big government loving, big spending, little flip flopping fish. Nay, the worm on the hook that feeds the fish.

I wouldn't vote for him if my life depended upon it, and you can take that to the bank.

Iron-Hampster
Iron-Hampster
  • Member since: Aug. 27, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 11th, 2012 @ 08:58 PM Reply

Well the reason why it looks like everyone hates Romney comes from two factors:

1. He is called the front runner by the media, giving him the most attention. It sort of sets up the illusion that the media wants him to fail when the reality is the exact opposite. Despite all the negative attention, the media is also quick to dismiss the other candidates as "fringe" runners as soon as they mess up once. In the case of Apartment building 13th floor Ron Paul, they consider his very name a swear word.

2. All of his supporters are the same sheep who are too old for Internet sites like newgrounds 4chan, Reddit, anything that quickly spreads word of every candidates virtues and quirks like wild fire and contains people who constantly war over who sucks the least.

So you really don't get to see any real supporters very often on the Internet, and more media attention means more scrutiny.


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature
WallofYawn
WallofYawn
  • Member since: Aug. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 12th, 2012 @ 04:50 AM Reply

At 1/11/12 08:58 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: Well the reason why it looks like everyone hates Romney comes from two factors:

1. He is called the front runner by the media, giving him the most attention. It sort of sets up the illusion that the media wants him to fail when the reality is the exact opposite. Despite all the negative attention, the media is also quick to dismiss the other candidates as "fringe" runners as soon as they mess up once. In the case of Apartment building 13th floor Ron Paul, they consider his very name a swear word.

2. All of his supporters are the same sheep who are too old for Internet sites like newgrounds 4chan, Reddit, anything that quickly spreads word of every candidates virtues and quirks like wild fire and contains people who constantly war over who sucks the least.

So you really don't get to see any real supporters very often on the Internet, and more media attention means more scrutiny.

It could also be the fact that most of his supporters are probably old fashioned conservatives above the age of 50, because honestly, those are probably the only people who would agree with his policies.

Actually, scratch that, because most of those people are AARP members, and from what I've gathered from speeches he's made, he's always dodge the question of whether or not they're gonna stop cutting social security.

"I only get 1000 dollars a month, but I was wealthy before retirement, and now I have to cut expenses. What'll you do to fix it, Mitt Romney?" "don't worry, social security will be there in the future. See, what we need is to let big business thrive, because when big business thrives, it'll create more jobs, and more money will become available, and that will ensure social security is there in the future." "but that's not what I asked-" "next question please."

Zultra
Zultra
  • Member since: Jan. 12, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 12th, 2012 @ 07:36 PM Reply

To those who said that RP is a heartless man, he has delivered over 4,000 in his medical career.

Romney is just a Stooge, he is a warmongering idiot.

WallofYawn
WallofYawn
  • Member since: Aug. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 12th, 2012 @ 10:08 PM Reply

At 1/12/12 07:36 PM, Zultra wrote: To those who said that RP is a heartless man, he has delivered over 4,000 in his medical career.

Romney is just a Stooge, he is a warmongering idiot.

I don't think RP is heartless, just completely wrong on so many levels it's not even funny.

As for Romney: couldn't agree more.

marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 12th, 2012 @ 11:53 PM Reply

At 1/10/12 08:02 PM, Ravariel wrote: I wouldn't expect you to, because you have a "different" perspective, one that is biased in favor of Paul. And if you decide to continue to have blinders on about them, then you'll be forever surprised at him not getting elected.

One of us is wearing blinders all right, but it isn't me. If you'd followed ten percent of what I've written in the Political Forum, you'd know that I won't be surprised when Paul loses at all. He'll never win under any circumstances, because the elites don't want him, and what they want, they get. Romney is going to be the Republican nominee, and barring some Earth-shattering event, Obama will win re-election and get four more years.

I've seen the handwriting on the wall regarding this since 2008. I like Paul, but if you read back over what I've said, you'll see that I've never said anything except that he doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell. Romney is the Republicans' Designated Sold-Out Whore. I've known that for over three years.

You don't know me at all.


BBS Signature
Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 13th, 2012 @ 01:06 AM Reply

At 1/12/12 11:53 PM, marchohare wrote: One of us is wearing blinders all right, but it isn't me. If you'd followed ten percent of what I've written in the Political Forum, you'd know that I won't be surprised when Paul loses at all. He'll never win under any circumstances, because the elites don't want him, and what they want, they get.

Perhaps I spoke wrongly there, for you are right. You have never claimed that Paul would or could win an election. However, you do illustrate probably the better point that I was (badly) trying to make. You see any bad press or negative image issues that Paul has with the electorate as some fabrication of an elite conspiracy created to hold Paul back. That, without the active elite media campaign against him, he would be a shoe-in.

As someone who, believe it or not, tends toward the libertarian (though, admittedly not quite so far as Paul, Ayn Rand, or other NG posters like Smilez) I can tell you that there is a significant image (and charisma) issue with Paul that no elite media conspiracy could create. That is what you don't see because you have bought into his message. He comes across as a crazy old man who wants America to abandon the world and live like a hermit in the woods, and make sure no one can tell anyone else what to do. That's going to be a problem for someone trying to get elected.

His electoral problems are not a manufactured strategy by any political elite.

...let me rephrase that. Whatever struggles he may have going against the status quo are MAGNIFIED by his charisma and image issues which, while not manufactured by those interested in keeping power, certainly help them in their quest to back their own preferred candidates.

Also, if there's some elite conspiracy against RP, and they are as powerful as you imply, then he would never get to a national presidential campaign, nevermind running a solid(ish) second place after the first two states.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 14th, 2012 @ 10:26 AM Reply

At 1/13/12 01:06 AM, Ravariel wrote: ...there is a significant image (and charisma) issue with Paul that no elite media conspiracy could create. That is what you don't see because you have bought into his message.

You really need to read more of what I write before you comment on it. I have said repeatedly that I strongly disagree with gutting the safety nets (for the little guy -- go ahead and gut welfare for the rich) in the U.S. at the juncture. I simply do not believe that any president has enough power to do it, and frankly, I don't believe Dr. Paul is heartless or crazy enough to push it that hard. He was a medical doctor before he was a politician.

The economy is falling apart at the seams. Americans would die in droves.

At 1/13/12 01:06 AM, Ravariel wrote: He comes across as a crazy old man who wants America to abandon the world and live like a hermit in the woods....

If you call that crazy, then so was the Father of Our Country:

"...nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest."

-Washington's Farewell Address 1796

In point of fact, I agree with every word of it. We can either pull back and address our problems here at home, or we can go down like the Late, Great Soviet Union. Don't think it can't happen. It's happening now and the endgame is far closer than you think.

Funny how everybody thinks the idea of the towers falling is bad science fiction until the towers fall, isn't it?

We need to end the stupid fucking drug war as well, and use that money to take care of our own people. There's nothing with Dr. Paul's ideas on those fronts.

At 1/13/12 01:06 AM, Ravariel wrote: Also, if there's some elite conspiracy against RP....

It isn't a conspiracy. It's business as usual, and it has been since 1980 at the latest. The corporate press tells voters who's legitimate and who isn't, a majority predictably salivates like Pavlov's dogs, and the pack is quickly narrowed down to a choice between two sold-out whores.

Corporate control of the media and the rules (what rules?) for campaign financing guarantee it. The majority is owned.

Romney and Obama are both puppets, but as I said, barring an Earth-shattering paradigm shift, here's how things will go down: Romney will win the Republican nomination and Obama will win the general election.

That's how it's going to be. Happy?


BBS Signature
marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 14th, 2012 @ 10:39 AM Reply

Regarding my post above, I have two corrections and a rant:

1. The second sentence of my first paragraph should read, "I have said repeatedly that I strongly disagree with gutting the safety nets (for the little guy -- go ahead and gut welfare for the rich) in the U.S. at this juncture."

2. The last sentence in my second response (the one with the Washington quote) should read, "There's nothing wrong with Dr. Paul's ideas on those fronts."

3. And finally, Newgrounds' code writers should spend less time on things like cute orange cityscapes behind this reply window and borders with rounded corners on everything and GIVE US A FUCKING PREVIEW AND EDIT BUTTON LIKE EVERY OTHER BBS ON EARTH INSTEAD!


BBS Signature
WallofYawn
WallofYawn
  • Member since: Aug. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 14th, 2012 @ 08:02 PM Reply

At 1/14/12 10:26 AM, marchohare wrote:



At 1/13/12 01:06 AM, Ravariel wrote: He comes across as a crazy old man who wants America to abandon the world and live like a hermit in the woods....
If you call that crazy, then so was the Father of Our Country:

"...nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest."

Just thought I'd point out that this was written by a guy in the 1700s and applies to the 1700s. The days for the US to be a neutral country are long gone. There's absolutely no chance for it in today's world, and any attempt to even do so will be shot down. On top of this, the US relies much too heavily on the world market/economy, and is now a major player in that stage.

-Washington's Farewell Address 1796
marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 14th, 2012 @ 10:07 PM Reply

At 1/14/12 08:02 PM, WallofYawn wrote: The days for the US to be a neutral country are long gone. There's absolutely no chance for it in today's world...

Of course there is. Conditions haven't changed to the point that it couldn't be done. We just haven't done so because various parasites (the military-industrial complex, et al.) are on a feeding frenzy, and they've indoctrinated the public with the stupid notion that it's impossible.

It isn't.

At 1/14/12 08:02 PM, WallofYawn wrote:

:...and any attempt to even do so will be shot down. On top of this, the US relies much too heavily on the world market/economy, and is now a major player in that stage.

Oh, yes, it'll be shot down all right -- or the parasites in power will do their best to ensure that it is. Your last sentence goes to exactly what I was talking about: the MIC, the Banksters, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Agriculture, Big Insurance, etc., etc., etc., don't want it to happen.

Nevertheless, it CAN happen, and we'll get a window of opportunity sooner than you think, because our current paradigm is not sustainable.


BBS Signature
Ravariel
Ravariel
  • Member since: Apr. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 12
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 16th, 2012 @ 06:58 AM Reply

At 1/14/12 10:26 AM, marchohare wrote: It isn't a conspiracy. It's business as usual, and it has been since 1980 at the latest. The corporate press tells voters who's legitimate and who isn't, a majority predictably salivates like Pavlov's dogs, and the pack is quickly narrowed down to a choice between two sold-out whores.

You deny with one breath, then reaffirm with the next. Potayto, potahto. Take your pick.

That's how it's going to be. Happy?

I don't disagree. I just don't see the grand conspiracy ("status-quo," media control, whatever) making the whole thing a foregone conclusion. 3 years ago we had two decidedly unconventional frontrunners (even if one, the probative frontrunner, was of previously presidential lineage). If the Status quo was to be upheld, then Biden likely should have been the nominee. That said, Dems and Reps do tend to choose their candidates differently. Reps toy with unconventional picks in early states then gradually shift to the establishment candidate, while dems tend to have an ideological battle between their candidates.

Anyway, we are down to 5 in the primary now, as Huntsman, the lone voice of sanity in the clown car that has been the Rep primary, has decided to withdraw. He'll be making it official tomorrow, or rather, later today, I believe. Sad to see him go. He would have been the only one who could have gotten my vote on that side.


Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

marchohare
marchohare
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 16th, 2012 @ 03:41 PM Reply

At 1/16/12 06:58 AM, Ravariel wrote: You deny with one breath, then reaffirm with the next. Potayto, potahto. Take your pick.

I simply know how it works. My BA is in Journalism, and although I never used my degree for that (I finished school and went into graphic design; it was more fun and the pay was better) I kept up with my some of my classmates and older alums. They either developed a taste for the mainstream, what they could say and what they couldn't, or they were history. Your bosses won't spell it out. They'll allow you one screwup. Mess up twice, and you're gone.

One of the most blatant examples would be what you're allowed to say about Israel. You don't have to be an insider to know how that works. Just ask Helen Thomas. However, you'd better support the status quo in every way, or you'll find yourself writing for examiner.com or your local entertainment rag so fast it'll make your head spin.


BBS Signature
Akkere
Akkere
  • Member since: Jan. 26, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 18th, 2012 @ 12:47 AM Reply

At 12/26/11 03:07 PM, marchohare wrote:
At 12/26/11 02:29 PM, Camarohusky wrote: I was saying the man is weird. Ron Paul comes off as a crazy old cook.
I assume you mean "kook." I just don't see it.

May have something to do with the fact his economic policies are less than... easing.
Wanting to switch to gold standard and lowering the tax has much more gravity on the situation than anything else.

Or he reminds you of that senile old man you know whenever he speaks

Don't get me wrong, RP's probably the best candidate, but that's not necessarily a good thing when everyone else is a whack-job. Can't say I'm a fan of the Obama-like Hype that's revolving around RP.


"A BLIND, DEAF, COMATOSE, LOBOTOMY PATIENT COULD FEEL, MY ANGER "

Halberd
Halberd
  • Member since: Aug. 22, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 30
Movie Buff
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 18th, 2012 @ 04:14 AM Reply

Who was the badass Republic candidate who kept getting into massive arguments with all the young people and liberal people and he was a complete fucking moron?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NguTypiXqqY
ILLEGAL MARIJUANA RELATED ACTIVITIES
The hand I killed your children with masturbates to the memory of it

VigilanteNighthawk
VigilanteNighthawk
  • Member since: Feb. 13, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 18th, 2012 @ 04:15 AM Reply

I have a somewhat different question. Presuming Romney wins the nomination, how does this play out? On past policy, I'm having difficulty finding any significant differences between him and Obama. How are the far right factions of the party, especially the Tea Party, going to react? One of the biggest complaints by the right is "Obamacare", but Romney's Mass. plan was basically the prototype. Will the Tea Party line up behind Romney because he's the Republican's horse, or will they split off and try to elect someone more in line with their ideology?

To be honest, if the Tea Party doesn't back Romney, I don't see how he stands a chance. He isn't different enough from Obama to really sway anyone who isn't undecided, so becomes at best a contest of who you like better. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if many independents either sit home or vote third party this election. If the Tea Party goes their own way, it will just end up draining votes from Romney. Even with the Tea Party, I still have my doubts that Romney will win. I'm not particularly excited about 4 more years of Obama, but I don't see how someone who is effectively his clone is going to unseat him.


The Internet is like a screwdriver. You can use it to take an engine apart and understand it, or you can see how far you can stick it in your ear until you hit resistance.

WallofYawn
WallofYawn
  • Member since: Aug. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 18th, 2012 @ 07:16 AM Reply

At 1/18/12 04:14 AM, Halberd wrote: Who was the badass Republic candidate who kept getting into massive arguments with all the young people and liberal people and he was a complete fucking moron?

All of them, save for the badass part. None of them were badass. Herman Cain was badass, but not for the reasons you'd think. He was badass for reasons completely unrelated to politics. Politically, he was a baboon.

WallofYawn
WallofYawn
  • Member since: Aug. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 18th, 2012 @ 07:39 AM Reply

At 1/18/12 04:15 AM, VigilanteNighthawk wrote: I have a somewhat different question. Presuming Romney wins the nomination, how does this play out? On past policy, I'm having difficulty finding any significant differences between him and Obama. How are the far right factions of the party, especially the Tea Party, going to react? One of the biggest complaints by the right is "Obamacare", but Romney's Mass. plan was basically the prototype. Will the Tea Party line up behind Romney because he's the Republican's horse, or will they split off and try to elect someone more in line with their ideology?

I'm not so sure. Romney is a tough nut to crack really, but to sum things up:

Romney is full of himself. He's not sure WHAT he believes. Years ago you could almost consider him a progressive moderate, now he's a right wing conservative. The dude is a conflicted fellow.

He tries to appeal to conservatives because he's a mormon, and most of his supporters are republican. Also, campaign contributions, and money. He's a two-faced liar. He has no real political barrier.

We're talking about the guy who bought up, and gutted smaller companies, and this just shows his political strategy: he will stop at nothing to win, and he will change his entire political ideology if it'll make him a millionaire, or president.

He is nothing like Obama, because you don't see his reasons for passing/proposing that legislation. He is right when he said,"it was for michigan but wouldn't work for the whole country and yadda yadda" But not for the reasons you'd think. He did that to gain support in his state. He probably doesn't personally care or support it himself, he just did it at the time to stay governor.

He is the kind of guy who will do anything to gain support. He will even go against shit he used to support in the past if it'll gain him votes. Give him a cigar and a fidora, because Romney is one bad motherfucker, and I mean baaaaadddd. Probably'd disown his own grandmother if it'd get him elected.


To be honest, if the Tea Party doesn't back Romney, I don't see how he stands a chance. He isn't different enough from Obama to really sway anyone who isn't undecided, so becomes at best a contest of who you like better.

Eh, even if they back him, I don't think he'll win. But I've been surprised before. I mean, back when the tea party was formed I was like,"there's no way these people are going to be taken seriously" and now look at them. They've hi-jacked congress.

I still don't think he'll win, though. I do think he'll be the nominee, though.

In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if many independents either sit home or vote third party this election.

Y'know, I've wondered whether third party voters are even counted, considering third party candidates are virtually unheard of. I'm probably wrong, but I've had my suspicions about this for a while now.

If the Tea Party goes their own way, it will just end up draining votes from Romney. Even with the Tea Party, I still have my doubts that Romney will win. I'm not particularly excited about 4 more years of Obama, but I don't see how someone who is effectively his clone is going to unseat him.

Again, not a clone. A two-faced jigger who would stop at nothing to get power. A power-monger. I mean, all politicians lie, but at least Obama hasn't completely switched gears on us yet. Rick Perry was surprisingly right about something for a change, when he said, "what mitt romney are we voting for? Is it the mitt romney who supported obamacare, or the mitt romney who is now against it?" Well, he stuttered and mumbled it, but he wasn't far off the mark.

Romney will do anything to get what he wants, and that includes stabbing his own cronies in the back. He is two-faced. He went from being a moderate, borderline liberal, to being a far right conservative. You don't do that unless you're desperate, and will stop at nothing to win, even if that includes alienating people, I'm sure.

He is only against Obamacare because Obama is competition. He will do anything to distance himself from the president, so that he can usurp his position for himself. If that isn't the definition of a backstabber, I don't know what is.

Now, I'm not particularly excited about Obama either, but I can tell you compared to the other candidates, he's still our best bet. The rest of them will cripple America. Completely cripple her, and it will be like 1930s all over again, only possibly worse this time. Obama is our only hope at this point, and it's all riding on him. If he can't do it, no one can, really. I hate to say it, but it's true.

SmilezRoyale
SmilezRoyale
  • Member since: Oct. 21, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Blank Slate
Response to Mitt Romney Jan. 18th, 2012 @ 08:10 PM Reply

At 1/18/12 07:39 AM, WallofYawn wrote:\

Now, I'm not particularly excited about Obama either, but I can tell you compared to the other candidates, he's still our best bet. The rest of them will cripple America. Completely cripple her, and it will be like 1930s all over again, only possibly worse this time. Obama is our only hope at this point, and it's all riding on him. If he can't do it, no one can, really. I hate to say it, but it's true.

We're already living in the 1930's... We had our big interventionist herbert hoover, and our bigger interventionist Roosevelt, the only difference is this time around our Roosevelt is less inspiring. This recession is not going to end any time soon, and I can guarantee you that it will get worse before it gets better.

At any rate, if you really do want Obama to win, then perhaps endorse the republican that you feel has the worst chance against him.


On a moving train there are no centrists, only radicals and reactionaries.