The winning ticket for the GOP in 2016?

Romney would fare better against Hilary than he did against Obama.

I think Romney would have fared better against Obama if he was Massachusetts Mitt instead of Severe Conservative Mitt
 
Well if you look here he had tons of outright lies

http://theweek.com/articles/471342/factchecking-second-obamaromney-debate-who-told-biggest-whoppers

But the lie in question was he said Obama never mentioned the world Terrorism after Benghazi. I blame his staff more then Romney though that didn't do their proper research and just believing right wing "journalism"



That isn't as much as lying than it was not being properly prepared or briefed before his debate.

Also ALL politicians lie just like the time Obama told the nation you could keep your doctor. They all lie.
 
Last edited:
That isn't as much as lying than it was not being properly prepared or briefed before his debate.

Also ALL politicians lie just like the time told the nation you could keep your doctor. They all lie.

I think Romney was so happy he thought he caught Obama in a lie, he ended up looking like a fool. it's as if Obama purposefully set up a trap for him. If Candy didn't point out Romney is wrong the fact checkers would have a field day.

All that being said with a little more preparation he could have worded his statement better and called Obama out, but he and more likely his staff bought to much into the right wing talking points

Personally I think they should have avoided Benghazi all together but given what Happened instead of trying to blame Candy, I would have doubled down on the fact that maybe what I said wasn't 100% worded correctly but it did take them 2 weeks to get past the video story(something which Candy even admitted herself when she said Obama used the term acts of terror). I would have also pushed how derogatory Obama sounded when he was speaking to Candy(huge missed opportunity their). The right was so mad a Candy for ruining their fantasy that Obama never said the word terror, that they missed 2 great arguments after the fact

As for Candy the worse thing she did was cut the argument short
 
Last edited:
So the fact he made an outright lie(which basically was a right wing media talking point that was complete BS) wasn't reason enough for him to lose?

They both lied during debates. Media outlets fact check them. Obama said Romney happily closed down a coal plant, I forget where, when it was still open.

It's not a debate between Romney and Obama/Crowley. Obama can refute on his own, he's a big boy.
 
Rubio/Jindall

but the ticket will probably be

Jeb/Rubio
 
Dear God, If Rubio/Jindall actually won the country would collapse from their stupidity
 
They both lied during debates. Media outlets fact check them. Obama said Romney happily closed down a coal plant, I forget where, when it was still open.

It's not a debate between Romney and Obama/Crowley. Obama can refute on his own, he's a big boy.

If you watch the video I posted:

Romney pushed the point, while Obama told him go read the transcripts, even after Obama made that comment Romney wouldn't let it go. If all Romney did was say, ok we'll see after Obama told him to read the transcript, Candy wouldn't have stepped in and then the fact checkers could prove Romney lied.

The funny thing is you can clearly see Obama goating Romney on
 
Last edited:
Candy shouldn't have asserted period. Moderators don't debate.
 
Candy shouldn't have asserted period. Moderators don't debate.

Romney shouldn't have kept on pushing the issue trying to take over the debate, he made his point, Obama made his, Romney should have let it be after that. But hey it's Candy's fault that Romney was caught in a lie(don't blame Romney or his staff for not researching that issue better)
 
So the fact he made an outright lie(which basically was a right wing media talking point that was complete BS) wasn't reason enough for him to lose?
First of all, moderators are not meant to be a part of the debate. Crowley injected herself into the debate. Second, even though Romney was totally off with Benghazi (because let's face it, the right doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to Benghazi), Crowley still had the gall to correct him on the ONE THING THAT ROMNEY WAS CORRECT ABOUT!

But before Crowley saved Obama's ass, he was just sitting there taking it not knowing how to counter it. And with the way Obama acted, you could tell that he knew that Crowley saved him on that one. Presidential debates are about presentation and style, not facts. It's the same reason why Romney won the first debate. It's why Kennedy beat Nixon in the debates. Obama wasn't doing so well in the second debate until the moderator, who was a total Obama dick rider, saved his ass, made Romney look like a fool, and gave Obama the opportunity to compose himself.
 
But before Crowley saved Obama's ass, he was just sitting there taking it not knowing how to counter it.

I thought Obama did a great job telling Romney to keep on talking, then read the transcripts. It was like keep talking your digging yourself a hole. If Candy didn't point out Romney was wrong, the fact checkers would

Crowley still had the gall to correct him on the ONE THING THAT ROMNEY WAS CORRECT ABOUT!

What was he correct about? Obama said he called it an act of terror the day after the fact and Romney started getting all giddy saying he didn't
 
Last edited:
Even if Obama had waited two weeks to publicly call it a terrorist attack...

giphy.gif


Labeling it one thing or another doesnt bring back the dead, change the past, or end the world. There was nothing to counter. Or I should say, I don think he needed to counter some weak **** like that.
 
There is 1.7M Jews in NY, Obama beat Romney by 2M votes

I think the Jews would have to vote like at 75%+ for the Republicans to win NY, even then the Republicans might not win

All that being said is one thing you are ignoring is Hillary Clinton is not Obama when it comes to the Jewish vote and given her and her husband's history with Jewish voters that is a good thing for her(especially in Florida). Hillary Clinton basically is so Jewish that she would beat actual Jewish American Bernie Saunders among jews.

More information is needed here. How many Jews voted in New York in 2012?

Jews are a very educated group who might vote more often in terms of their group percentage. They also have power in the business and the media two critical areas for any candidate.

48% of the billionaires in the USA are Jewish. This is amazing when they are but 1.5% of the USA population

http://politicsinn.com/48-percent-of-u-s-billionaires-are-jewish/

If half of the Jewish vote and money went to the GOP....the Dem's would feel it. The GOP should go after this vote.

At 50% ( Vote and money ) New York is in play and less money will be spent in battle ground states.

As for Hillary Clinton, there was a case where she used a slur. She's an elitists 1% type.
 
It's not a debate between Romney and Obama/Crowley. Obama can refute on his own, he's a big boy.

LOL, I expected the Left to pull that especially after Romney handed Obama his a*s in the first debate. I was laughing as Chris Mathews was crying about doom and gloom lol.
 
Last edited:
Romney was actually a rather decent debater. He killed it in the first debate. The third debate was a draw IMO with an Obama who was more engaged. And Romney lost the second debate because Candy Crowley is one of the biggest Obama dick riders ever.

:gngl:

I live in Europe, but if I'd live in the US, I'd out myself as a libertarian Democrat.

The GOP is too much under influence of the Tea Party, especially when it comes to social issues.
 
I would like to see Trump and Santorum be the GOP ticket, but they have zero chance to win. Look at the polls. :sly:
 
I love that conservatives are still angry about the Crowley situation, which was totally legit. Obama did say it was an act of terror immediately. And then, like a good moderator, she made it clear that there were some things up for debate and some things that weren't. The truth is the truth. If Obama were to say, "No you don't understand, the world is flat." Well, it's the moderator's job to focus the debate on what matters, so it's perfectly acceptable to say, "wait, no, that's not true...these are the facts, now let's talk about the issues up for debate in our non-flat world."
If Mitt was more interested in the substance of the issue rather than the bs semantic argument "oh gosh, the president didn't call it a terrorist attack." Who the heck cares? What does that have to do with anything? It harkens back to this weird conservative belief that Obama doesn't love this country enough or he's just not truly American enough. "You see - he didn't call this terror; he doesn't get it like the rest of us do." As if the word is more important than the facts that happened on the ground. So the tactic backfired. Rightly so.
 
The more I hear him speak, the more I'm thinking of putting my support with Donald Trump--if nothing else, he says what's on his mind and couldn't care less what that haters say about it. Unlike everyone else (with a few exceptions), Trump cannot be bought out or silenced. The only thing that makes me wary is his lack of diplomacy and his thoughts about "bombing the oil fields of Iraq". I look forward to the debates and seeing how the other nominees fare under the Donald's non filtered thoughts and "controversial" ideas.
 
The more I hear him speak, the more I'm thinking of putting my support with Donald Trump--if nothing else, he says what's on his mind and couldn't care less what that haters say about it. Unlike everyone else (with a few exceptions), Trump cannot be bought out or silenced. The only thing that makes me wary is his lack of diplomacy and his thoughts about "bombing the oil fields of Iraq". I look forward to the debates and seeing how the other nominees fare under the Donald's non filtered thoughts and "controversial" ideas.



Yeah cause racism is a "controversial" idea.

Trump is a loser. And no one in this day and age can be silenced given how many platforms people can use to spout off their nonsense. There is nothing special about Trump or anything remotely endearing about him.
 
Racism...ha ha. He was talking about ILLEGAL Mexicans coming across the border. Those jumping the fences aren't brain surgeons, scientists or anyone else of value. It's the equivalent of Castro opening his prisons and shipping the dregs to the US when that ass clown Carter allowed him to do so. Put that card back in the deck.
 
Racism...ha ha. He was talking about ILLEGAL Mexicans coming across the border. Those jumping the fences aren't brain surgeons, scientists or anyone else of value. It's the equivalent of Castro opening his prisons and shipping the dregs to the US when that ass clown Carter allowed him to do so. Put that card back in the deck.

Ah, I see. It's okay to call them rapists and criminals because they're illegal immigrants :whatever:
 
Last edited:
Nope. Just the ones who are rapists and criminals...like the guy in SF who shot and killed that 32 year old woman--deported five times, a violent criminal. That's the POS Trump was referring to, not the landscapers and car washers.
 
He said that the people crossing the border are the lowest kind of mexicans, who bring crime and disease. Do you have any idea how overly generalized and nonsensical that is? I don't think Trump is racist, but he sure is blowing the dog whistle pretty loud.
 
Nope. Just the ones who are rapists and criminals...like the guy in SF who shot and killed that 32 year old woman--deported five times, a violent criminal. That's the POS Trump was referring to, not the landscapers and car washers.

Comments like:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best," the Republican presidential candidate said in June. "They're sending people that have lots of problems ... they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

"#JebBush has to like Mexican Illegals because of his wife."

Are racist.

Some are good people right? And he's only assuming that.

If you can't see how his comments are problematic, then I feel sorry for you.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,073
Messages
21,893,261
Members
45,691
Latest member
Peloquin
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"