*yaaaaawwwwwwwnnnnnn!*

Which Mitt? The one that was a moderate pro-choice governor of Massachusetts, or the newly retooled staunch conservative running for president?

Zitt Bombme will never be the man that Hillary is. Just ask her one "man" organ...........ization.

I've been saying for months, it will be Hillary verses Romney with Hillary taking the presidency. Voters are so ignorant that the judge presidential candidates like they are judging a beauty contest. Ugly contestants don't have a chance.

Actually he's the one who was successful in business as well as in governing a state. How's that stack up against your two forerunners - one who's running on charisma, the other on her name, but little in the way of credentials.

Romney is the son of former Michigan Governor and 1968 presidential candidate George W. Romney, and 1970 U.S. Senate candidate Lenore Romney. He was named "Willard" after hotel magnate J. Willard Marriott, his father's best friend. Mitt, his middle name, comes from his father's cousin Milton Romney, who played quarterback for the Chicago Bears from 1925 to 1929.

I can't imagine how challenging it must have been to be financially successful with this background.
Oops, I might be accused of "class envy" for bringing up this stuff.

I like Romney--more than McCain and Huckster--want to hear more like Oohrah.

The Dems caucus results are supposed to come in by 1:00 PST I think?

And SC is voting--Repub only. How expensive is it for the state to have two different days for their primary?

The loser for the SC primary are the weathermen who predicted snow.

It's a toss between McCain and Huckster.

Murphy

Paul now very much behind McCain to take third--

Still a good show for him.


Murphy

It snowed about an inch in SC the other day and they closed the schools.

He's trying to bid up for social conservative votes. If he were sticking to fiscal conservatives... I do not believe that this country needs a socially conservative President, or at least not the the extremes that some would want us to go (or so it appears).

Now, I've just seen a Poker Players Alliance guide to the candidates. The PPA likes Clinton (as she would push for regulation of the online gaming industry rather than attempting to shut it down; Edwards and Obama they're not so keen on) and (not surprisingly) Paul (as it appears all of the other Republican candidates see online wagering as... morally reprehensible, for practical purposes, although they may also just be trying to get the evangelical vote).

Yes I know, a very odd issue to base on, but I see it this way: if the government can leave me alone and let me pish my money off in a manner that won't hurt anybody else, I'll be much more comfortable with it.

Paul now very much behind McCain to take third--


Two things are consistent here.

paul is beating out other "top tier" candidates.

and

the press isn't saying shit about it.

Being photogenic is surely an asset, but that doesn't correlate into being an empty suit. Look at someone's experience, successes, etc.

Yes good looks alone don't win the presidency. A successful candidate has to be a good bullshiter and a congenital liar - tell the idiots what they want to hear. That's the mark of success in politics.

I'm sorry but I can't take any person seriously who believes that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri. Ever BEEN to Missouri?

However, gotta love the magic underwear concept. Think he would make all of the members of his cabinet wear them?


What a fucking joke.

Romney Wins Nevada GOP Caucus

Corporate America has spoken.

Well--for some people like Miniman--all religions have weird tenets and histories.


Murphy

That trip with the dog on top of the car tells me all I need to know about this guy.

He's no damm good and not to be trusted with anything.

Actually he's the one who was successful in business as well as in governing a state. How's that stack up against your two forerunners - one who's running on charisma, the other on her name, but little in the way of credentials.

Born on third base thinks he hit a triple. If he gets the nomination he'll be skewered for opposite stances on nearly everything he stood for last year when his term as Mass. Gov. expired.

OOHRAH

What about the inconvenient parts of Romney's religion that are so at odds with mainline Christianity? That doesn't bother you as an evangelical?

Obama ahead of Hillary in NV early returns in the caucus.

Edwards will win Third!

Murphy

Nevada so far:
Obama: 39
Clinton: 38
Edwards: 4
3% reporting

paul is beating out other "top tier" candidates.

and

the press isn't saying shit about it.

Posted by Axiom


Because Paul beating Guiliani and Thompson and to an extent Huckabee, is not the story. The story is the absolutely dreadful campaigns of Guiliani and Thompson, and Huckabee's failure to gain any momentum after his surprising Iowa win.

Paul supporters act like the only headline the NY Times should be allowed ot print is: Paul Yet Again Comes In Third!

Yeah, he's losing by less then people thought he would lose by, but has he won a state? Will he? Doubtful.

The story isn't Paul. The Story is how nobody gives a crap about any of the GOP candidates (and also that neither Hussein or Hillary are capitalizing on that indiffernce).

The story isn't Paul. The Story is how nobody gives a crap about any of the GOP candidates (and also that neither Hussein or Hillary are capitalizing on that indiffernce).

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

Hussein!!!
Bwa Ha Ha!!!!
Bwaaaaaa Haaaaaa Haaaaa!
Do you write your own material?

Rasta... always good for the reaction I was looking for.

thank you kind sir...

Paul supporters act like the only headline the NY Times should be allowed ot print is: Paul Yet Again Comes In Third!


What would be nice is to even consider Paul a candidate. How can you ignore it? A person who has consistently beaten out the other candidates chosen by the media is ignored.

The other day I was called by Huckabee's committee here in South Carolina. The survey they gave me didn't even mention Ron Paul, despite his percentages.


Yeah, he's losing by less then people thought he would lose by, but has he won a state? Will he? Doubtful.


To me, at this point, it doesn't matter that he hasn't won a state. The damage was done by the media and people such as yourself a while back by excluding him as a serious candidate.

What would be nice is to even consider Paul a candidate. How can you ignore it? A person who has consistently beaten out the other candidates chosen by the media is ignored.


But he's not... he's never come close to winning.

He hasn't beaten Thompson and Guiliani as much as their candidacies have imploded. Before Thompson was even in the race he was leading the pack in SC with 25% of the vote... now he's at like 5%. These two have run horrific campaigns.

To me, at this point, it doesn't matter that he hasn't won a state.

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with how our electoral system works?

The guy has millions of dollars and a die hard (although looney) base. He's had his chance to get his message out, media or not. The people don't like him...

And he sunk himself when he said that United States policy bore some responsibility for 9/11 in one of the earlier debates. Right or wrong, as a politician you don't say that, especially not in the way he did.

Paul (as it appears all of the other Republican candidates see online wagering as... morally reprehensible,

So now he wants to legislate morality? So libertarian of him.

Rob: the only kind of campaign Rudy can run is dreadful by default.

The guy is a loser and, as hard as it is to believe, he would be even worse than Bush.

I said all along Rudy had no chance, now it's only a matter of when, not if, he'll pull out.

This is on the front page of Drudge Classic now:

50.54% Current Nevada Democratic Caucus Results:
CLINTON 50.09%
OBAMA 44.59%
EDWARDS 5.03%

Rob: the only kind of campaign Rudy can run is dreadful by default.


He could have made his work as mayor the central focus at least. That's why I was voting for him and supporting him. He did great work in NYC, but instead of focusing on that, he chose to focus on his one day, and made that the central theme. Got really annoying.

In a way it reminded me of Kerry in 04. Kerry had been a Senator for years and years, and should have focused on that and Bush's record as President, but instead, he made his work as a soldier 40 years ago for a year or two his central focus... Its just nuts.

Showing Hillary in front now ahead of Obma..only 35% reported.

Edwards still takes third place!


Murphy

Obama is leaving LV for home--appears he thinks he lost and won't stay for any speech..

Murphy

And he sunk himself when he said that United States policy bore some responsibility for 9/11 in one of the earlier debates. Right or wrong, as a politician you don't say that, especially not in the way he did.

Few politicians have the balls to tell Americanus boobus what they don't want to hear. Americans always say they want a president with the courage to tell the truth. When one comes along, he scares them.

Projected winner is Hillary--

If Obama wants to do better--he needs to have Johnny boy drop out and Obama would be the beneficiary.

Murphy

I just can't understand how why the unions have deserted John Edwards.
He has always championed in favor of the unions and is a true man of working America, Edwards knows what it's like to work hard having come from humble beginnings and is a self-made man. Yet these union toadies grovel over to the big business/globalist/corporatist camp of Hillary CLinton who once she gets elected will do everything she can to destroy them go figure.

Hillary and the Corketeers come through! Yay! A triumph!

Hillary and the Corketeers come through! Yay! A triumph!

It's a triumph for the globalists -- not for America.

"Thank you, thank you very much!" - Best Elvis impression

If Obama wants to do better--he needs to have Johnny boy drop out and Obama would be the beneficiary.

Not necessarily... Edwards does well with Unions, but Hillary is no slouch in that area either... she would certainly get some of his support.

NBC is calling it for her now too...

CBS called it for Clinton?
When less than 1% of the votes were in it was 86% for Obama. What happened? Usually that's an indicator of what how the votes will go. What happened to change that trend.


hmmm, I smell gas in this kitchen.
later. got things to check out now.

On the way to the beach earlier their was a Ron Paul rally at a major traffic intersection, which is kind of a shocker down here in the ultra-Repube land of Naples.

CC--Edwards is a reptile, he is depressing and a trial lawyer who lied with voodoo science to make his fortune.

He is disengenuous. His talk on two Americas is BS and people see that.

The sooner he is out the better for Obama--but he won't go until after Feb 5th and maybe not until the convention. He is pathetic.

If he was out for the caucus today Obama would likely have received his 5%.

Murphy

Why should Edwards or anyone else drop out? Are they obligated to make things easier for their rivals and the media?

If Edwards dropped out before SC, Obama would have a heart attack.

Facts are facts in SC, and in SC Obama gets most of the black votes and Clinton gets most of the white votes.

And although most of Edwards supporters might go to Obama in other places, in SC they would likely split in her favor.

Now we will have to hear Bill cry about voter suppression--which the Dems always claim is the handywork of the Repubs--now he bashes some unions or the union--whatever.


Murphy

When less than 1% of the votes were in it was 86% for Obama. What happened?

They counted the rest

If he was out for the caucus today Obama would likely have received his 5%.

He might be rewarded in a Hillary presidency with a post as Attorney General. That's the nature of the game.

Why should Edwards or anyone else drop out?

Self respect...

Are polls in South Carolina closed yet? When do those numbers start coming in?

Bob Bennett on CNN has already opined that since it was less than 10 points, Clinton's win isn't impressive. Also that Obama losing proves that there is still a "disappointing racism" in the Dem Party.

Would it be illegal to waterboard him?

"I Got a Crush...On Hillary" (take that obama girl!)

www.youtube.com

I watched 15 seconds of that and had to turn it off... another 3-5 seconds and I would have been as gay as the kid singing...

You should always look to improve yourself, Rob.

I made it through more of 2girls1cup then I did of that awful video...

Nevada made a huge mistake voting for Clinton. Anything but Obama is a bad choice.

Why should Edwards or anyone else drop out? Are they obligated to make things easier for their rivals and the media?

Posted by rcade at 2008-01-19 04:19 PM

Exactly, Rcade.
The best thing is that so far there is no "sure thing" for a winner in the Republican convention and it's still a close race among the Democrats -- let's make them ALL work for their nomination.

If the corporate media keeps surppressing the voices of the other candidates (Edwards, Ron Paul, etc.) then the corporate media (at the behest of their CEOs) are the ones doing the choosing of our next President -- not us.

It's about time this country went back to letting the people of this nation decide their nominees for President -- after ALL the nominees have been thorougly vetted on the campaign trail as to ALL the issues.

If the corporate media keeps surppressing the voices of the other candidates (Edwards, Ron Paul, etc.)

excuses, excuses... Paul and Edwards have millions of dollars and they have been in plenty of debates. Just because they suck it doesn't mean there is some vast conspiracy against them...

Rudy and Thompson were media favs and they can't break 10% of the vote...

Obama didn't do poorly for a guy who was down 25 points in Nevada a month ago.

No surprises here.

Well--for some people like Miniman--all religions have weird tenets and histories.


Murphy

Posted by MURPHY


Yes, and rational adult human beings don't BELIEVE in those weird tenets. If they do, why the HELL would you trust their beliefs in other areas?

Sorry, but no cultist, hocus-pocus-believing TOTAL flip-flopping phony will get the vote of any rational person - only those from genetic republicans who would vote for Hitler if he were running - strong, patriotic, pro-national defense type that he was, after all.

Well--for some people like Miniman--all religions have weird tenets and histories.


Murphy

Posted by MURPHY


Yes, and rational adult human beings don't BELIEVE in those weird tenets. If they do, why the HELL would you trust their beliefs in other areas?

Sorry, but no cultist, hocus-pocus-believing TOTAL flip-flopping phony will get the vote of any rational person - only those from genetic republicans who would vote for Hitler if he were running - strong, patriotic, pro-national defense type that he was, after all.

NG3 re your 1552:

I'm going to assume you misread my post completely. The quote was:

The PPA likes Clinton (as she would push for regulation of the online gaming industry rather than attempting to shut it down; Edwards and Obama they're not so keen on) and (not surprisingly) Paul (as it appears all of the other Republican candidates see online wagering as... morally reprehensible, for practical purposes, although they may also just be trying to get the evangelical vote).

Women, Latinos, and those who thought the economy was most important broke big time for Clinton.

Women were 58 percent of the electorate, and voted 52 Clinton, 35 Obama, 10 Edwards.

Rogers, has your wife talked the gardener into voting for her her yet?

Heh. I'm beginning to think Obama's goose is cooked because Clinton has locked up the Hispanic vote. But we'll see what happens in South Carolina and how that plays nationally.

If NV would just end the way it is now, it would be great, Paul second, and Fredisdead ahead of Huckabee. Stay tuned folks, it aint over till it's over.

SC WILL be interesting.

Given some more time she might catch up again, and I don't think he'll get a double-digit win anymore, but he'll likely still win.

But it's all about counting delegates now.

Nice comeback for Obama, who was down 25 points a month ago in Nevada.

Ray,

I liked what Obama said about himself. He said, "If you are a black guy named Barack Obama running for President, you better have hope!"

Had Obama won NV and SC, he woulda had Big Mo going into Florida and Feb 5th (don't discount FL. A Fed judge has said our votes WILL count).

Now he has lost momentum from NV, but is still expected (expectations are big) to win in SC, where his 13-14 point lead is back to single digits.

And with John Edwards getting 4 percent? What is that about?

If he is seen as somehow not viable in SC, it is better than 50/50 that those votes could go to Clinton.

Just sayin'.

Corky
He's got the voice, but he can't pass a beauty contest.
I pick Romney verses Hillary with Hillary the ultimate winner.
Michael Savage has a theory that the prize goes to the one with the longest hair.

A successful candidate has to be a good bullshiter and a congenital liar - tell the idiots what they want to hear. That's the mark of success in politics.

Posted by Ray at 2008-01-19 03:02 PM | Reply

Something to keep in mind whenever RAY praises a particular candidate.

And with John Edwards getting 4 percent? What is that about?

The spoiler gets to be Attorney General.

You haven't been paying attention to my posts Vern.

Chris Matthews (MSNBC) continue to amaze. His take on Senator Clinton's win in Nevada is that the Clintons wanted it to appear that Senator Obama would win, thus if Senator Clinton would win it would appear to be an upset.

This is suppose to be an political expert, this fuck knows crap..What a fucking idiot, this Asshole belongs on FAUX NOISE.

Nevada, 95% reporting:

Paul is beating McCain and Fredisnotsodead Thompson is for the moment beating the Huckster.

1 HOUR TILL SC POLLS CLOSE!

I guess it's true what they say, "Too many chefs spoil the broth," certainly for Obama it was spoiled.

Of course it was Obama who came out and said that that Union's endorsement was as good as a win.


How did Latino's vote?

3 to 1 for Clinton.

That will be more than significant if it holds up in other states, along with women coming out at 58 percent of the electorate.

Reports of 'Barack Hussein Obama' robocalls in Nevada.

Seems Hillary's people play like Rob The Ahole

Now he has lost momentum from NV, but is still expected (expectations are big) to win in SC, where his 13-14 point lead is back to single digits.

I'd say Obama has the momentum. He's closing the gaps in FL and CA to single digits - up from 20+ points down a month ago.

You're right, Corky. It's all going to be about hte delegate counts.

Currently Obama and Hillary are tied.

Small percentage point leads by Hillary in NH and NV are not big wins by any means. It's wide open until after next Saturday and Florida on the 29th at least. Obama does not want to appear over-confident, which he may have in Nevada.

Don't forget where the polls were three months ago.

Don't rule out Edwards dropping out of the race after SC. His voters will swing to Obama.

If Edwards stays in with no conceiveable chance at the nomination, then I think he's been offered the VP or AG spot by the Clintons.

Edwards is against everything Clinton stands for and his supporters are much more closely aligned with Obama.

Ah, gonna be an interesting couple of months, that's for sure.

Fox News, Beltway Boys have spent the entire show trying to say that the Democrats have a Black and Woman problem because they are going for there own candidate. What Assholes, at least the democrats have a Black and Woman Candidate, it at least looks like America. Not those lily white Repubs Assholes.....Fox News has spent the past week putting gas on the fire concerning the so called racial problem for the democrats, Ain't going to wash ASSHOLES!!!!!

Funny how Hillary, who was up by 25 points a month ago, somehow claims a 'come from behind' win. LOL!

Ain't politics fun?

Reports of 'Barack Hussein Obama' robocalls in Nevada.

Seems Hillary's people play like Rob The Ahole

Posted by AMERICANUNITY


Or maybe I was right all along and libs who thought it wouldn't happen were a tad naive...

The guys freaking name is HUSSEIN and we're at war with muslims! Even though he's a Christian, did you really think that wouldn't come up?

ROB

Ya, but not from a fellow Democrat like Hillary. That girl's folks will do anything to win - robocalls, mailers claiming Obama is against aborition rights, you name it.

Still, Hillary's negatives are light years higher than Obama's. Even if she wins the nomination she'll be starting from behind.

Ya, but not from a fellow Democrat like Hillary

Honestly I'm shocked it took this long to hear from it...

Although there were was the case of the Iowa worker spreading the email, and the NH volunteer worker saying on TV he was a muslim.

Politics always goes dirty, and primaries seem to be no exception.

If I'm reading the results correctly.....in Nevada with 94% of Dem precincts counted and 98% of Repub precincts counted RON PAUL has received more votes than Clinton or Obama received (look at the raw vote numbers)!

Ride_On: The numbers we're seeing out of Nevada count delegates, not votes.

Is the "delegate" count derived for the Dems a different formula than the Repubs formula in Nevada?

I don't know for sure, but my guess would be yes they count and award delegates differently.

Waiting for the Paulies to start claiming the vote was rigged...

Ron Paul finishes second, will Jeff leave the socialist hellhole known as Denmark to make it in Freedomland, America?
Not likely.

I think even chico, the janitor at the MGM, got more votes than RudiG. And SC sounds worse.

The Repubs had a primary, you're seeing raw vote numbers for the GOP, the actual number of voters.

The Dems had a caucus, so you're seeing the results of the caucus, the delegates won from each individual caucus, not the actual number of people at each caucus.

Nevada seems to be doing it wierd, because Iowa released the raw vote numbers, even though they had a caucus.

Posted by OohRah at 2008-01-19 06:58 PM | Reply

Excellent post--I agree with most of what you have written.

Thompson was/is a big disappointment. He is pulling for third I think in SC--

And none of the Repubs are going to be dropping out--maybe Fred--maybe not.

I don't care for McCain and really don't think Huckabee is a winner. Both people are fine guys in their own right--but down on the list for me.

I am really looking at Romney--my own personal preferences when reviewing these guys is experience, and then the issues. I completely understand his pro-choice to pro-life turn about.

The biggest disappointment is Rudy--my Dad still thinks he can pull this out.

Murphy

Is the "delegate" count derived for the Dems a different formula than the Repubs formula in Nevada?

The Dems caucus, the Reps vote. Totally different numbers. The numbers that turned out for Dems far surpassed the Reps. Same in every state so far.

The only numbers you see on the Dems side are delegate votes. The numbers you see on the Rep side are the actual votes.

Has your Dad received any delegates yet?

Norm already said it. Sorry for the redundancy.

First post on your site. Reading the recent posts, and listening to the different news broadcasts, I just gotta say.

What is it that they are so terrified of. Losing some of their tax credits and subsidies? Losing profits over the backs of illegals? Having to contribute to a Health Plan for their employees? Seeing to that all the children get a good education? What is it, just can't stand the thought of being ousted by a woman?

Sen. Clinton is qualified, intelligent, charming, worldly, compassionate, focused, specific, strong, determined, experienced, and yes the 8 years as First Lady in Washington and 4 years First Lady in Arkansas count big time because she worked there too.

I back Sen. Clinton 100% because of the above and because she is a woman. I believe it is time for a woman to take the power of the white house and get the USA on track!

I know how women are more than qualified to handle the tasks and pressures and get things done - women have been preparing for this for centuries!

Ladies take your right to vote and take Sen. Clinton seriously, she is a can do and will do candidate. Ignore the idiots on the news, they are lost off in la la land.

Welcome to Corky's mother

Once a troll......

Hillary is an absolute socialist and I don't care for Bill to be there as he will be running the country--not her.

She has no experience-She was the hostess with the least --and that is her claim to fame for experience? Because she was there? THAT is her experience! HA! Next Chelsea will run because she was Firt Kid for 8 years too!

This country is tired of Bush Clinton Bush and won't go for another Clinton.

The Dem Party is becoming divided because of the black vote and now appears to be going for Obama--leaving the plantation--as the Dems like to say about blacks in the Repub party--payback is a bitch.

Murphy

I think Fred's throwing in the towel - on TV - right now.

Lol! Fast Freddy faked out the networks... didn't drop out.

"Which Mitt? The one that was a moderate pro-choice governor of Massachusetts, or the newly retooled staunch conservative running for president?"

Newly retooled my ass. When his legislature made gay marriage legal, Mittens pissed all over himself trying to get the issue put to a popular vote. That's right- putting people's rights up to a popular vote. In America. In the country that granted full civil rights to people of color forty-four years ago. In the twenty-first century.

This man is a Mormonazi, and the sooner people wake the hell up, the better. We've been through enough religious conservatism during Bush and Cheney's terms to last this country for the next millennium. I'm sick to goddamn death of this country being run by one fucking Elmer Gantry after another.

No one is dropping out!

You would think Edwards would be out--but he's not going any where either..

And now there is talk of Bloomberg getting into the race!

I hope he does--he'll pull votes from the Dems--from Hillary--egocentric pompous billionaire!

Murphy

"Murphy"...One would take you right wing hacks more seriously about this country being tired of this BUSH...ClINTON...BUSH...CLINTO N
N sernario had you taken that view back in 2000 when Bush Jr. was running, you idiots would have saved this Counrty for the past 7 years of SHAME!!!

I always wonder which people hated most about the Clinton years, the peace or the prosperity?

Celery--Blah blah blah--

So we should continue then right?




Appears McCain is going to win SC--still too early--but lead is there..


Murphy

well corky.it sure got us a lot more blowjobs since blowjob billy proved to us that it wasnt sex.

and I am not talking about this in a negative way....I mean, come on....what man cant use more blowjobs.........lol

READ BRODER'S article in the times............even he talked about how a manager is needed in the white house and how those are the kinds of people we have elected to the office..
people who have managed states and cities and things like that.....and even he says.....
THERE ARE NO DEMS WHO THIS APPLIES to......but it does to mitt..........I agree with him.....this is a real problem for the dems.....

Sorry folks,
Your good prosperous days are over. All those posh cars, million dollar homes, private schools, private jets? You can still have them you just have to cut down a bit and pay your fare share.

Go Hillary Go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bring back a balanced budget, Help the US$ rise again. Show the world that respectability will only come when our foreign policy is fixed. Get rid of the printing press in control of the Fed. Reserve.

My pockets are worn out taking from one side to pay the other.

Ignore these penis driven men, all they talk about is past indiscretions ONLY because they haven't gotten caught yet.

He's right on the hot buttons of abortion, gay marriage. I believe he's right on taxes, immigration... though I'd want to hear more.

OOHRAH

Yes, but he had different stances on all the above

He's right on the hot buttons of abortion, gay marriage. I believe he's right on taxes, immigration... though I'd want to hear more.

OOHRAH

Yes, but he had different stances on all the above last year

THAT doesn't bother you? Doesn't it seem like he's pandering to win the WH? Add that to 'Jesus lived in Missouri and is Satan's brother" (according to their teachings) and I'd think you'd have a big problem with him.

Did Hunter drop out?

Why don't they call this for McCain?


Murphy

Income redistribution is Hillary's middle name--
Great reason to vote for her.
Socialist.


Murphy

well it does and it doesnt.....
it does because it can be used by people who have little else to go on in debating issues..

in my own case.......I was a child of the 60's and I thought that a woman had a right to chose about her body and then I grew up.....just like I used to like john lennon...but then I grew up......and then with a couple of personal things happening, I knew that abortion was wrong.......
I used to believe in all sorts of things but then I grew up and started paying taxes and all sorts of ideas changed.....
there has to be some room for a person to change thier views.........
and I know that some of you will bring up the rights accusation of flipflops and kerry....but in that case we were looking at things he did.....not in things that he professed to be on either side of an issue..........

it bothers me in that it will be an issue in the campaign and as in the case of abortion.......its an issue for the states.........

Excuse me, how is it that Clinton won, yet Obama won more delegates in Nevada. If you win the most delegates, you won the state right?

The delegates won't actually be verified or awarded until April, after county and state conventions.

Clinton won the caucus.

Clinton won the caucus.

That's spin. If Clinton won the vote and Obama won the most delegates because of how those votes were apportioned, it's a split decision. The media's spun this one too much for Clinton.

"Paul and Edwards have millions of dollars and they have been in plenty of debates. Just because they suck it doesn't mean there is some vast conspiracy against them...

Rudy and Thompson were media favs and they can't break 10% of the vote..."


Is the public more likely to catch 30 second candidate commercials and 10 minutes of debate answers... or months and months of drilling home who the top tier candidates are in the mainstream media?

Is the public more likely to catch 30 second candidate commercials and 10 minutes of debate answers... or months and months of drilling home who the top tier candidates are in the mainstream media?

Posted by Bowie


I won't deny its a disadvantage, but to claim that Paul and Edwards didn't have a chance to get their message to America is silly. They had more then a fair shot at getting their message out and it clearly has not hit home.

NG3,
Why do you make fun of me for living in Denmark?
Name calling is a scoundrels last refuge in debate.

Don't get mad just because the truth is that Ron Paul is just starting to gain momentum and your candidate is a total corporate whore. Does it bother you that people are waking up to that fact?
Just open your eyes to reality, and admit that you are wrong.
Vote for Ron Paul, and change the future of your children for the better.

But I understand, Rogers.

55 percent of married men say they will never vote for her.

"When his legislature made gay marriage legal, Mittens pissed all over himself trying to get the issue put to a popular vote. "

Just a minor correction...the Mass legislature didn't make gay marriage legal. It was a court decision.

Is this Romney 2.0 or 2.1?

I love multiple choice Mitt. King of the Flip Floppers.

Obama only lost because of Las Vegas. He won 90% of the rural precincts and more delegates. He's the only Democratic candidate who can win independents and some Republicans in the fall.

Hillary will be the rallying cry of the GOP, Bloomberg will enter the race, and the WH will go GOP.

"I believe it is time for a woman to take the power of the white house and get the USA on track!"

Why?

What does being a woman have to do with anything? How vapid are some democrats that they are actually basing their vote on the color of someone's skin, or the reproductive organs they were arbitrarily born with?

Bring back a balanced budget, Help the US$ rise again. Show the world that respectability will only come when our foreign policy is fixed. Get rid of the printing press in control of the Fed. Reserve.

Do you understand anything about Hillary's platform? None of these positions apply to her platform, in fact, you just described Ron Paul's platform. Hillary wants to take an economy that is already 53 trillion dollars in debt and add another socialist health care program that our future generations will not be able to afford without further taxing the shit out of us. She doesn't want out of Iraq, at least not anytime soon. She certainly could care less about the existence of the Fed and printing money.. And she believes that the way to stimulate the economy and prevent recession is to help poor people out with their heating bills. She is half neo-con - half socialist - 100% greedy politician.. A vote for her is a vote for the further destruction of our country, our finances, and our rights. At least if you are going to support someone, make sure you understand their platform...

So now he wants to legislate morality? So libertarian of him.

Posted by northguy3


If you need to label people, would you like to be labelled a Democrat or Republican?

Would you actually say, in public, that you are a Democrat or Republican? People are just too shy about those things.