THE IOWA caucus, Whos gonna eek out a win! EEK being the operative word!

[The Other Side]

BACHMAN finally gets out of the way!

Palin calls for her to back out of the race, as if PALIN has any credibility with elections.

Bachmans campaign released her final campaign slogan for the 2012 GOP election.
Ding Dong The Witch is Dead - YouTube

Peace.

 

[moreluck]

If Palin's words mean nothing....why do you report them?

 

[brett636]

It wasnt a matter of too many good choices for the GOP, its simply, a field of candidates that nobody really likes. The GOP is having to settle for the best of the worst of GOP candidates. NO matter how the right wing spins it, if romney wins the nom, he wont get all the GOP votes. People just dont like him.

If santorum wins, he will surely lose to OBAMA because NOBODY wants a political idealog with a religious overtone to run this country. Nobody wants religion shoved down our throats, or to reopent the abortion debate, or to hate on gays, or to go to war once again.

The country has learned its lessons on those issues already.

While Santorums close second place finish shows that ROMNEY isnt the candidate of choice for the right, it also shows that the TEA PARTY IS DEAD.

The Tea Party did not show up last night in IOWA and Bachman is living proof that the movement is DEAD.

The Tea Party is TOXIC in washington, and the numbers in IOWA prove it. The vote did not come out. Same as in 2008 and less than in 2010.

OBAMA will have no problem cruising past Santorum in the general , and he will also beat Romney, but not by much. The rest of the field is history.

Newt Blingrich will be next to exit followed by Huntsman.

Dont count out Ron Paul, he had a strong showing in IOWA and time will tell if he can win in SC or florida. The GOP picture is becoming alot clearer, and that picture says LOSER all over it.

Peace.

In January of 2004 the polls had George Bush defeating a generic democrat candidate 54 to 39, and while Bush did ultimately win that election it was much closer than that. In January of 2012 Obama is defeated by a generic republican candidate 42 to 43. Obama's only hope is a 3rd party run siphoning off votes from the GOP candidate or a rash of women/boys making frivilous claims of inappropriate behavior. Anyone in this field can defeat Obama, its just a matter of who makes it to the general to do it.

 

[bbsam]

In January of 2004 the polls had George Bush defeating a generic democrat candidate 54 to 39, and while Bush did ultimately win that election it was much closer than that. In January of 2012 Obama is defeated by a generic republican candidate 42 to 43. Obama's only hope is a 3rd party run siphoning off votes from the GOP candidate or a rash of women/boys making frivilous claims of inappropriate behavior. Anyone in this field can defeat Obama, its just a matter of who makes it to the general to do it.

But that 3rd party run aka Ron Paul is probably more likely than most would care to believe.

 

[brett636]

But that 3rd party run aka Ron Paul is probably more likely than most would care to believe.

You may be right on that, but I hope somewhere in that old kooks mind he realizes that he will not win as a 3rd party candidate and will only ensure an Obama victory if he does run 3rd party.

 

[bbsam]

You may be right on that, but I hope somewhere in that old kooks mind he realizes that he will not win as a 3rd party candidate and will only ensure an Obama victory if he does run 3rd party.

I think he is beyond caring about that. I think he sees the two-party system as seriously flawed and himself as the beginning of an era when other parties begin to wield serious influence. I for one wish him well.

 

[brett636]

I think he is beyond caring about that. I think he sees the two-party system as seriously flawed and himself as the beginning of an era when other parties begin to wield serious influence. I for one wish him well.

If he runs as a 3rd party candidate all he does is help solidify the current 2 party system by splitting the vote of one of the two major parties, mainly the republicans. Of course you wish him well because he helps ensure your preferred candidate wins, and you know the only reason he would run as a 3rd party is to screw over the republicans who didn't nominate him in their primary.

 

[moreluck]

A few months ago Ron Paul was asked if he would run as a 3rd party candidate. His answer was," NO." They asked him "Why?" and he said, "Because I don't want to."

 

[bbsam]

If he runs as a 3rd party candidate all he does is help solidify the current 2 party system by splitting the vote of one of the two major parties, mainly the republicans. Of course you wish him well because he helps ensure your preferred candidate wins, and you know the only reason he would run as a 3rd party is to screw over the republicans who didn't nominate him in their primary.

No. I wish him well because although I prefer Obama over any of the republicans, I'm tired of the "two sides of the same coin" politics that we have. If the republicans picked up 100 seats in the House and 25 in the Senate, I still doubt there would be huge changes because in the delicate dance to be re-elected, governing would continue down the middle. I think it's time for something different and I would be willing to see more parties involved to bring it about.

 

[brett636]

No. I wish him well because although I prefer Obama over any of the republicans, I'm tired of the "two sides of the same coin" politics that we have. If the republicans picked up 100 seats in the House and 25 in the Senate, I still doubt there would be huge changes because in the delicate dance to be re-elected, governing would continue down the middle. I think it's time for something different and I would be willing to see more parties involved to bring it about.

So you would be ok if the green party had an equally well known candidate running as well splitting the democrat vote?

 

[bbsam]

So you would be ok if the green party had an equally well known candidate running as well splitting the democrat vote?

I think Nader cost Gore the election before the Supreme Court intervened, so yeah, it happens.

 

[brett636]

I think Nader cost Gore the election before the Supreme Court intervened, so yeah, it happens.

The irony here is you claim support for 3rd party candidates based upon some desire to have more ideas in the ring, but then admit that the only reason you support this is so one of the two dominant parties can remain in power.

 

[bbsam]

The irony here is you claim support for 3rd party candidates based upon some desire to have more ideas in the ring, but then admit that the only reason you support this is so one of the two dominant parties can remain in power.

I think what I am saying is that the two major parties have had a lock on power for too long and I am willing to look at something else. The irony is that you with all your complaining think its all about one party that is the problem and the system is ok.

 

[brett636]

I think what I am saying is that the two major parties have had a lock on power for too long and I am willing to look at something else. The irony is that you with all your complaining think its all about one party that is the problem and the system is ok.

You already admitted you want Ron Paul to run as a 3rd party candidate to help ensure an Obama victory. How is that any different?

 

[bbsam]

You already admitted you want Ron Paul to run as a 3rd party candidate to help ensure an Obama victory. How is that any different?

My desire for Ron Paul to run has more to do with seeing a needed change in the system. That Paul would take an incredible amount of the votes from Romney suggests that I am correct. I think he could easily pull 15%. Short term I like that Obama wins, but long term I think that voters need more choices whoever it draws from. Besides, I think Obama's gonna win outright anyway whether there is one or two opponents.

 

[moreluck]

There's a write-in plan for Hillary. That would be a nice split vote.

 

[The Other Side]

In January of 2004 the polls had George Bush defeating a generic democrat candidate 54 to 39, and while Bush did ultimately win that election it was much closer than that. In January of 2012 Obama is defeated by a generic republican candidate 42 to 43. Obama's only hope is a 3rd party run siphoning off votes from the GOP candidate or a rash of women/boys making frivilous claims of inappropriate behavior. Anyone in this field can defeat Obama, its just a matter of who makes it to the general to do it.

Im not sure if you understand how polls are calculated Brett, but your example of a generic GOP opponent beating obama 43 to 42 is within the 3% margin of error, and that does not suggest a GOP victory in the least, but instead, suggests a closer contest than in 2008 and NOBODY believes OBAMA will blowout the republicans this time around, but instead will win with a party line majority.

I give you credit for having hope above reality.

Peace.

 

[MrFedEx]

There's a write-in plan for Hillary. That would be a nice split vote.

You wish. Ain't going to happen. Last night's big winner was BHO because it showed the country (again) what a total bunch of fools the GOP is running. Oh, minus 1, since Bachmann went home to pray Marcus straight. Good luck with that.

 

[BrownMeetPurple]

So I've been following this closely and day after day, all I hear coming out of these politicians' mouths is BULL****. How can an average Joe really fall for such BS? Ron Paul is the only one with a clear cut plan and consistent views and actions, no BS.

 

[BrownMeetPurple]

So I've been following this closely and day after day, all I hear coming out of these politicians' mouths is BULL****. How can an average Joe really fall for such BS? Ron Paul is the only one with a clear cut plan and consistent views and actions, no BS.

[video=youtube;rvzeowlqmBI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvzeowlqmBI[/video]