sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
Paul Ryan is not a fiscal conservative.
So Romney is looking for an "economic conservative, to his right" for VP...
- Thread starter wgadget
- Start date
Paul Ryan is not a fiscal conservative.
Amen on that, what a pandering pussy, and he was the guy conservatives were hailing as their "tough guy straight shooter".
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
An awful lot of vitriol for a dead person, here.
I agree flying the flag half mast was bizarre, but it isn't her fault.
I agree flying the flag half mast was bizarre, but it isn't her fault.
According to The Club for Growth, Mitch Daniels is.
Republicans rated fiscal conservatives as opposed to moderate Republicans according to The Club for Growth includes:
Prominent fiscal conservatives include former U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey, former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, Representative Mike Pence, former U.S. Senator Jack Kemp, U.S. Senator Tom Coburn (Oklahoma), Publisher Steve Forbes, and activist Grover Norquist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factions_in_the_Republican_Party_(United_States)
Last edited:
mosquitobite
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,821
Also of note in that list is Jeb Bush. *throws up in mouth*
sailingaway
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 72,103
there's a reason I'm supposed to care what club for growth thinks is a conservative? They are corporatists. Slightly more fiscally conservative than the Chamber of Commerce, but still corporatists
Liberty4life
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2007
- Messages
- 606
If Romney seriously thinks he can overcome democratic voter fraud, and not be another McCain. The ONLY way he is getting in is with a Paul ticket.
Christie, too shallow, Rubio, not eligible(even Romney's credentials are questionable) Palin(yawn) She missed her chance when she didn't endorse Ron Paul.
In ANY serious contenders mind, Ron Paul is the cream of the VP crop. We of course prefer the top spot, but this wall were up against is nearly insurmountable, nearly..
This time the voting populace is much more awake, because of inflation and war weariness, not to mention a myriad of other negative issues Obama has.
No one is going to fool the people this time, if their voice is allowed to be heard.
Christie, too shallow, Rubio, not eligible(even Romney's credentials are questionable) Palin(yawn) She missed her chance when she didn't endorse Ron Paul.
In ANY serious contenders mind, Ron Paul is the cream of the VP crop. We of course prefer the top spot, but this wall were up against is nearly insurmountable, nearly..
This time the voting populace is much more awake, because of inflation and war weariness, not to mention a myriad of other negative issues Obama has.
No one is going to fool the people this time, if their voice is allowed to be heard.
GeorgiaAvenger
Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2011
- Messages
- 4,945
I think they are pretty fair.
FYI they rate Paul Ryan appropriately and he is not at the top of their rankings.
rockandrollsouls
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,858
Made it clear it was Christie's fault. Calling her a coke-head is just stating the facts.
No, she has nowhere near the support in the GOP she had before the 08 presidential run and she gets no crossover votes, she is toxic....
trey4sports
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 12,588
i don't think anyone will be able to beat obama right now but id be interested to see if Rand would accept VP. Would make for an interesting campaign.
Lots of coincidences...
Romney's advisers (that used to work for Bush) worked with Mitch Daniels before.
The $3 Trillion War: After wildly low balling the cost of the Iraq conflict at a mere $50 to $60 billion, the Bush administration has been concealing the full economic toll. The spending on military operations is merely the tip of a vast fiscal iceberg. In an excerpt from their new book, the authors calculate the grim bottom line...Rumsfeld and Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels estimated the total cost of the war in the range of $50 to $60 billion, some of which they believed would be financed by other countries. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/stiglitz200804
Mitch Daniels Defends Bush's Budget, Saying Iraq And
Afghanistan Wars Played A 'Very, Very Small Part' In
Budget Deficit
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/21/mitch-daniels-iraq-afghanistan-deficit_n_974182.html
Daniels had Bush's back. As did Cheney. It will be like old times.
In my opinion.
Last edited:
Similar threads
