Who do we WANT to win Florida?

[Nathan Hale]

Obama was 2008's "safe" choice and Clinton was the powerful warhorse.

Not to pick at an off-topic, but make no mistake Clinton was the establishment "safe" choice and Obama was the outsider with the message.

 

[thoughtomator]

Not to pick at an off-topic, but make no mistake Clinton was the establishment "safe" choice and Obama was the outsider with the message.

Obama didn't have a message; he had marketing. Notice how few campaign promises he actually made - he mostly got away with alluding to optimal solutions that never got further elaborated. Once in office, one of his first acts was violating the one explicit promise he did make (closing Guantanamo).

The US hasn't seen a real "message" campaign since the days of JFK and Goldwater.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Obama didn't have a message; he had marketing. Notice how few campaign promises he actually made - he mostly got away with alluding to optimal solutions that never got further elaborated. Once in office, one of his first acts was violating the one explicit promise he did make (closing Guantanamo).

The US hasn't seen a real "message" campaign since the days of JFK and Goldwater.

Oh, his message was non-specific and ethereal (lots of "change" and "yes we can"), but it's a message nonetheless. He was the candidate who inspired primary voters to rise up against the party's chosen pick.

 

[cindy25]

I don't understand why this matters.....

it matters in the sense of do you prefer Romney/Paul or Gingrich/Paul as the final two

if Romney you win over the Palin people, if Newt you get the Beck people

 

[jolynna]

Not to pick at an off-topic, but make no mistake Clinton was the establishment "safe" choice and Obama was the outsider with the message.

Obama was the ONE bought by Wall Street and corporate interests.

Even Hillary Clinton couldn't defeat Wall Street's and Corporate Interest's carefully chosen, bought and packaged "brand".

Follow the money. And never underestimate its power.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Obama was the ONE bought by Wall Street and corporate interests.

Even Hillary Clinton couldn't defeat Wall Street's and Corporate Interest's carefully chosen, bought and packaged "brand".

Follow the money. And never underestimate its power.

Both were funded by wall street and corporate interests. My point was that Hillary Clinton was the party's chosen candidate and Obama was the one who came in from the outside.

 

[jolynna]

When the ship starts to sink, the corporate interests will be the first AND ONLY ones to get a lifeboat.

After they've picked your pockets.

As I said. They didn't pick Romney because they think he's smart, or capable. Massachusetts ranked 47th worst for unemployment out of 50 states. Which makes him the WORST man to have steering the ship during a period of high unemployment.

They picked him for the same reason they chose Obama. Both Obama AND Romney are at the bottom of the moral compass scale. There isn't anything Obama OR/AND Romney won't say while smiling at the camera sincerely with their fingers crossed behind their backs.

"I'll bring our troops home as soon as I'm elected" lasted all the way UNTIL Obama walked into the Oval office.

Romney's repeal of Obamacare will be done in an equally effective manner. As Obamacare heavily favors Bain's Healthcare branch, there isn't a snowball's chance that Romney will mess very much with the baby he says he is SO proud of in Massachusetts. He agrees with mandates. He agrees with more bureaucracy around healthcare. He agrees with top down government solutions. He AVOWS to grow the military and be TOUGHER in the Middle East than Obama. He SAID...flat-out said, he'd sign NDAA and supports Obama taking away our 200-year-old rights.

I'm not seeing why the choice of Romney would be better than Obama. I actually think Romney is worse. Because at least, BEFORE being elected Obama seemed to KNOW taking away liberties and war is nasty.

If the LAST atrocity committed in WWII Germany had BEEN the first atrocity, thousands would have risen up in protest. But, the first liberty lost didn't seem like much. People hardly noticed and nobody cared much because they were so busy with their day to day lives. And when the next bill was passed, that wasn't so bad either.

And then one day, the Nazis arrived, knocking on THEIR door, wanting THEIR children...

Nothing is more important than our civil liberties and a man that UPFRONT says it is OK for the US to give our rights up...that man is UNFIT for the office of president.

I cannot express my disgust enough for Romney's blase attitude...he was like so what. I think our freedoms are a VERY big deal. My father fought in WWII. My son is in the military. Is my son risking his life so that a bunch of corrupt bankers, health insurers and pharmaceutical companies can MAKE MORE PROFITS? Because so few seem to think the recent assaults on our freedoms are all THAT troubling.

A candidate running for POTUS got up on stage and tried to justify it and people cheered...a low, low moment in this country's history, imo.

 

[jolynna]

Both were funded by wall street and corporate interests. My point was that Hillary Clinton was the party's chosen candidate and Obama was the one who came in from the outside.

He came in from the outside propped up with Wall Street and corporate interest money.

Hillary wouldn't have been as manageable.

 

[affa]

Oh, his message was non-specific and ethereal (lots of "change" and "yes we can"), but it's a message nonetheless. He was the candidate who inspired primary voters to rise up against the party's chosen pick.

I assumed Obama was the chosen one the second he came onto the scene.

 

[jolynna]

As far as Romney appointing conservative judges rather than liberal ones to the Supreme court, don't vote for him for THAT reason.


Romney jurist picks not tilted to GOP

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/25/romney_jurist_picks_not_tilted_to_gop/

Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.

Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.

 

[jolynna]

I understand that this thread is about which candidate other than Ron Paul would be the best to win Florida and would increase the odds of a Ron Paul presidency.

But, when I see anything, anywhere suggesting that maybe Romney MIGHT be not-so-bad to elect in the end because he isn't Obama, I can't say nothing. I don't want any illusions out there about what a vote for Romney (or Obama) means.

One of most meaningful sentences I have read during this pre-election time came off of ZeroHedge. One of the Tyler's said, "America will elect the president it deserves".

 

[Nathan Hale]

He came in from the outside propped up with Wall Street and corporate interest money.

Hillary wouldn't have been as manageable.

Hillary received huge corporate and wall street contributions, and both the media and the Democrat party had been propping her up for months. Going into the primary, I remember it clearly, the Dem side was essentially going to be a coronation for Hillary. Then polls showed Obama gaining.

 

[affa]

Hillary received huge corporate and wall street contributions, and both the media and the Democrat party had been propping her up for months. Going into the primary, I remember it clearly, the Dem side was essentially going to be a coronation for Hillary. Then polls showed Obama gaining.

This does not mean Obama wasn't the chosen one. His anti-war rhetoric and lies distracted considerably from Ron Paul's message of peace. That he came from nowhere means nothing. In my opinion, he was clearly groomed for exactly the role he took.

 

[jkob]

Honestly I have no idea. We're in a tough spot either way, I think if Romney wins they'll try to declare the race over with.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

As far as Romney appointing conservative judges rather than liberal ones to the Supreme court, don't vote for him for THAT reason.


Romney jurist picks not tilted to GOP

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/25/romney_jurist_picks_not_tilted_to_gop/

Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.

Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.

Good grief!! Why hasn't Paul jumped on this yet? Or for that matter, Newt and Rick?

 

[randomname]

I kinda think it might be better to have RP facing Sanitarium instead of romneyich.

Reason is sanitarium is a TRUE neocon and will remind people of Bush and the misery he represented. Romneyich are not as easy to pin the bush label on.

It might not be as easy to pin the Bush label on them, but I do think that will be the main line of attack Obama will use. He can also still target their advisors and cabinet picks, which I guess will be mostly Bush people

 

[Nathan Hale]

This does not mean Obama wasn't the chosen one. His anti-war rhetoric and lies distracted considerably from Ron Paul's message of peace. That he came from nowhere means nothing. In my opinion, he was clearly groomed for exactly the role he took.

Perhaps that's the case, or perhaps not. All we're doing is speculating, and my inner strategist tells me that the party and the powers that be latched onto Obama when it became clear that he, rather than Queen Hillary, was capturing the hearts and minds of primary voters.

 

[AgentOrange]

Perhaps that's the case, or perhaps not. All we're doing is speculating, and my inner strategist tells me that the party and the powers that be latched onto Obama when it became clear that he, rather than Queen Hillary, was capturing the hearts and minds of primary voters.

The establishment would never put all their eggs in one basket. In any given election, I would guess they have several acceptable candidates in both parties....they may have a "preferred" candidate they would like to reward for years of dedication, but they would be happy with any of their acceptable candidates getting in office. If the public is enamored with one acceptable candidate, then it only makes sense they would especially push that candidate.

 

[Nathan Hale]

The establishment would never put all their eggs in one basket. In any given election, I would guess they have several acceptable candidates in both parties....they may have a "preferred" candidate they would like to reward for years of dedication, but they would be happy with any of their acceptable candidates getting in office. If the public is enamored with one acceptable candidate, then it only makes sense they would especially push that candidate.

Oh absolutely! I think Obama fits the bill there. That's my point.