Mitt Romney is going to get the GOP nomination.......and he is a cupcake

[Toro]

12% of the workforce is unionized. Are you saying that only 12% of the country is middle class. (And that's a very uber-RINO statement BTW.)

I mean, yeah, what a horrible concept, the people who actually DO the work getting the wages.

Don't they know only the parasites on Wall Street deserve to make real money. How dare they demand fair wages.

Of course, once upon a time, Republicans understood that fair wages and a middle class were important. Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, they all got this.

But somewhere along the line, teh GOP became the tool of the Corporatists, and screw them middle class wages.

Which is why the GOP has only won one popular vote out of five for the presidency since 1992.

Two biggest mistakes the GOP is making today

1) Chummying up to the MNC's that want to dismantle the middle class in this country.
2) Chummying up to the racists in the Minuteman movement.

As you blurt out, Obama's got the worst economy in 80 years. Yet 6 out of 9 polls have him beating Romney. Even factoring for Romney's flaws, this plain old should not be happening.

But then you have Romney's flaws. He's a Wall Street bloodsucker who made his fortune putting working Joes out of good paying jobs so he could buy another mansion.

Obama's smear machine is going to have him for lunch.

You didn't answer the question.

12% of the country is unionized. Are you saying only 12% of America is middle class?

 

[EriktheRed]

I used to worry that Mitt could run a strong campaign against Obama. The more I see of him the more obvious it is that he is stiff, awkward and uncomfortable around people. At times, he is downright creepy

He has little chance against Obama

yep, that is why he is the only Possible GOP candidate who has ever beaten Obama in a head to head Poll. Holding an 8 Point lead over him now.

Single Best shot to beat Obama out of the Current Choices by far.

Polls are fun

Mitt has only won a single election in his life while Obama has never lost

Mitt is in the big leagues now

I read somewhere Perry has never lost, either.

Until now, of course.

 

[rightwinger]

yep, that is why he is the only Possible GOP candidate who has ever beaten Obama in a head to head Poll. Holding an 8 Point lead over him now.

Single Best shot to beat Obama out of the Current Choices by far.

Polls are fun

Mitt has only won a single election in his life while Obama has never lost

Mitt is in the big leagues now

I read somewhere Perry has never lost, either.

Until now, of course.

Perry will still be Governor of Texas

Mitt will still be........um.......I don't know....what has Mitt done in the last five years?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I don't think the OWS are any more practical than the TPM. In fact, quite the opposite. I think the OWS is kind of the result of an entitlement society. The OWS complain about how they can't get a job after college. But that's because they won't take a job that is beneath them, even in this economy.

When I graduated college in 1985, I went active duty military. When I finally got out in 1992, the economy was in the shitter, so I took a job working in a warehouse. Eventually, I showed that I had a lot more capability than that, and moved up quickly to supervisory and purchasing work. In short, I proved myself through hard work. And I've had setbacks in the intervening 20 years. I'm still not where I'd like to be.

The problem I see with OWS is that they want the government to establish results without them doing the work. I think it's where that generation has gone soft. Adversity is not making them better, it's making them worse.

Well, naturally I don't see it that way, and I would like to point out something about the generational dynamic. If you graduated from college in 1985, that probably means you were born sometime in the 1960s, which makes you probably an early-wave Gen-Xer. If you graduated late, you could be a very late-cohort Boomer, but Xer is more likely. (Note that the demographic "baby boom" and the Boomer generation don't overlap perfectly; 1943-45 are considered Boom birth years and 1961-64 aren't.) Most people involved in Occupy, as you observe, are the next generation after yours, the Millennials. Generation X is what we call a "reactive" generation, very individualistic. Their mission in life, coming of age right after a period of cultural upheaval and re-set of collective values, was to test those values in real life and refine them, all of which is better done small-scale than large-scale.

Now the thing about the Millennials is that they're a "Civic" generation. They're collective mission in life is to fix what's wrong with our civic order, with our economy and politics. And so it's not good enough for any one of them to beat the odds as you did and make it. They're here to fix the broken system so that it isn't so damned hard to make it. It really shouldn't be, you know. That may give go-getters a maximum of personal satisfaction in having achieved something despite the stacked deck, but it's still not the right way to organize our society.

As long as the rules are set up the way they are now, it's always going to be the case that most people can't make it. It's competitive: a person who does make it, makes it not because he tried hard enough to meet some objective test, but because he tried harder (or had more talents, etc. going for him) than the competition did. The smartest and best of the Millies, like the smartest and best of any generation, know that they, personally, can make it. But that's not good enough. They know that things can be set up so that most people make it, because it's been done before, and we're richer now than we were then, and so that's what they want to see happen. You'll never understand where they (or Occupy) are coming from if you look at it from a me standpoint, or assume that's what they're doing, because they're not. You have to understand it from a we perspective.

Interesting.....relatively-generalized....but interesting.

Firstly, "Most people involved in Occupy...."??

Wouldn't that be an assumption, on your part? See: Old Guard Back In The Trencheshttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44880648/ns/us_news-life/#.Tv5Y4HpPhO-

Second: (...And, these are only observations...) I always saw the Gen-Xers as a response to the insincerity of the Reagan Years....the commercialization of Family Values. They weren't that large a group (relatively-speaking), which....in their eyes....would be a "handicap" (politically/culturally), but they always stuck-together. My Son was 13 in '82. I remember him asking me if I thought there'd be a WWIII (nuclear). The Reagan Admin kept pitching that scam, then, and was scaring the shit outta those kids. That always pissed-me-off. Then.....The Day After happened....as-well-as Threads (the really spooky one).....both, of which, justified what I'd told my Son.....that no one (in their right mind) believed there'd be a WWIII.

Thirdly: I'm thinkin' the Gen-Xers & Millies (as you call them), were spawn o' the Boomers; the Gen-Xers (from those-of-us who probably married too-early), and the Millies (from the Boomers who'd waited/gone the college-route).

The Boomers were three, distinct groups. My Aunt was born in '47 (much-more conservative, than me), I was born in '50 (18 in '68; great period), and those born in the later-'50s/early-'60s tended to be much-more materialistic; Yuppies. It was the Yups who'd bought-into the whole Family Values trip....and, every trend preceding!!

People can say what they want.....and, I've got my bias....but, I think we Hippies raised much-more balanced kids that the Yups. We Hippies were much-more honest, with our kids, than our WWII Gen parents ever were, to us!! The Yups were too-much like the WWII Gens; too-much bullshit (to cover for their past).

Generalizing our (Boomers') kids can be a risky proposition.....'cause their influences were soooooo varied.

 

[EriktheRed]

Polls are fun

Mitt has only won a single election in his life while Obama has never lost

Mitt is in the big leagues now

I read somewhere Perry has never lost, either.

Until now, of course.

Perry will still be Governor of Texas

Mitt will still be........um.......I don't know....what has Mitt done in the last five years?

He's been doing what he'll keep doing if he doesn't win: be a professional candidate.

 

[elvis]

Mitt is miles ahead of his nearest competitor in the GOP. But that is only because he seems mildly sane

Once he goes head to head against Obama, his personal shortcomings will be clearly evident to the voters

He reminds me of Mike Dukakis

Yeah cause Obama's such a superstar without any shortcomings... especially without his teleprompter.

 

[elvis]

To all my conservative pals on here...........if you wanna laugh your balls off on election night, make sure to stop in here for sure!!! I'll have some of you crying you'll be laughing so hard!!! Years from now when people ask about great, great days in your life.............you will quickly recall Election NIght 2012

Really? You know something no one else does?

 

[rightwinger]

Mitt is miles ahead of his nearest competitor in the GOP. But that is only because he seems mildly sane

Once he goes head to head against Obama, his personal shortcomings will be clearly evident to the voters

He reminds me of Mike Dukakis

Yeah cause Obama's such a superstar without any shortcomings... especially without his teleprompter.

Mitt could sure use a telepromter. He would still be a stiff out there but at least he would make sense.

Obama will eat up Mitt in a debate..........no telepromter required

 

[JakeStarkey]

I used to worry that Mitt could run a strong campaign against Obama. The more I see of him the more obvious it is that he is stiff, awkward and uncomfortable around people. At times, he is downright creepy

He has little chance against Obama

Be careful. You've seen what can come of misunderestimating a candidate.

Not at all.

Besides the fact Bush actually lost the popular vote in 2000, the fact is he has things that Romney lacks. He is warm to people, he knows how to work a room, he connects with voters. All things Romney really doesn't do.

For all the talk about Romney's "electability", the fact is that he has only won one election in his entire career, and that was against a non-entity named Kathleen O'Brien in 2002 in what was a good Republican year. And he only got 49% of the vote.

He lost to Ted Kennedy by 17 points in 1994.

He lost to John McCain and Mike Huckabee in 2008.

He didn't run for re-election in 2006 because the polls had him as the most unpopular governor in the country AND had his Democratic rivals beating him by double digits.

Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee lost to Romney, as all three split the right wing vote, and John slipped in.

No one is going to split the right wing vote after Iowa and NH and SC.

Romney will be the nominee.

 

[elvis]

Mitt is miles ahead of his nearest competitor in the GOP. But that is only because he seems mildly sane

Once he goes head to head against Obama, his personal shortcomings will be clearly evident to the voters

He reminds me of Mike Dukakis

Yeah cause Obama's such a superstar without any shortcomings... especially without his teleprompter.

Mitt could sure use a telepromter. He would still be a stiff out there but at least he would make sense.

Obama will eat up Mitt in a debate..........no telepromter required

Obama couldn't beat anyone in a debate. What's his plan? See how many different ways he can blame Bush for his own fuckups?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I see the current GOP as a mix of several ideologies, but I don't consider the so-called "economic conservatives" to be one of them. I see that as the corporate-dominated bought-out wing of the party, identical for most purposes to the bought-out wing of the Democrats. Both parties also incorporate certain ideologies into the mix. For the GOP, the religious right is one, right-leaning libertarians are another. The Tea Party emphasizes both those ideologies (insofar as that's possible) against the corporate-controlled wing. There's some overlap between what the corporatists want and what the libertarians want, but less than you might thing; the corporatists for example were tickled pink about the bank bailout, but that didn't sit well with anyone else. They also like their fossil-fuel subsidies and other corporate welfare, which libertarians oppose.

I think the corporatists are very good at manipulating both sides to get what they want. If you look at the bailout, the problem there was everyone was panicking and signed a big blank check. The purpose of the bailout was to infuse money into the monetary system to keep people employed. INstead the banks used it to cover their losses and let people get fired, anyway. And no one called them on it.

Ummmmm....a loan doesn't help you "cover your losses" because you have to pay it back.

 

[JimH52]

Polls are fun

Mitt has only won a single election in his life while Obama has never lost

Mitt is in the big leagues now

I read somewhere Perry has never lost, either.

Until now, of course.

Perry will still be Governor of Texas

Mitt will still be........um.......I don't know....what has Mitt done in the last five years?

I think he has been running a funeral home somewhere in New England...oh wait. No, he bought a funeral home, then restructured it and laid off his staff.

 

[Unkotare]

12% of the workforce is unionized. Are you saying that only 12% of the country is middle class. (And that's a very uber-RINO statement BTW.)

I mean, yeah, what a horrible concept, the people who actually DO the work getting the wages.

Don't they know only the parasites on Wall Street deserve to make real money. How dare they demand fair wages.

Of course, once upon a time, Republicans understood that fair wages and a middle class were important. Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, they all got this.

But somewhere along the line, teh GOP became the tool of the Corporatists, and screw them middle class wages.

Which is why the GOP has only won one popular vote out of five for the presidency since 1992.

Two biggest mistakes the GOP is making today

1) Chummying up to the MNC's that want to dismantle the middle class in this country.
2) Chummying up to the racists in the Minuteman movement.

As you blurt out, Obama's got the worst economy in 80 years. Yet 6 out of 9 polls have him beating Romney. Even factoring for Romney's flaws, this plain old should not be happening.

But then you have Romney's flaws. He's a Wall Street bloodsucker who made his fortune putting working Joes out of good paying jobs so he could buy another mansion.

Obama's smear machine is going to have him for lunch.

You fucking liberals are ridiculous.

 

[Synthaholic]

hitting the alcohol a few days early?

Mitt is uninspiring

He seems like a ventriloquist dummy up there

The man is an accomplished leader. Like his politics or him as a person, he does have a record of leadership.

And there is more to leadership than being a good speaker. Which he does quite fine.

And the defense of the RINO by the so-called 'conservatives' begins!

Just as I predicted.

Chuck Todd talked about a new Marist Poll this morning that showed 8 out of 10 Republicans say that Romney is 'acceptable'.

Tea Party: R.I.P.

 

[Synthaholic]

So this is what it will be.

Romney: Stiff, awkward speaker.
Obama: Worst economy in 80 years.

I'd take those chances.

You make it sound as if it got bad on his watch when the fact is that the economy has grown every month he's been in office.

 

[Synthaholic]

Ill says this, if Romney gets the the nomination, he will win in a landslide.

Yeah, well, you say a lot of stupid shit.

 

[elvis]

So this is what it will be.

Romney: Stiff, awkward speaker.
Obama: Worst economy in 80 years.

I'd take those chances.

You make it sound as if it got bad on his watch when the fact is that the economy has grown every month he's been in office.

I'm sure all the unemployed have enjoyed this jobless recovery.

 

[Synthaholic]

Seriously, does Romney look sane in this picture? Does his analogy sound sane?

Mitt Romney: President Obama Out Of Touch Like Marie Antoinette

That's hysterical. Obviously Mitt has no idea of what people see him as...out of touch with middle America.

which Politician is IN TOUCH with Middle America?.... is there one?.......

Certainly: Sherrod Brown and Dennis Kucinich, for starters.

 

[Synthaholic]

To all my conservative pals on here...........if you wanna laugh your balls off on election night, make sure to stop in here for sure!!! I'll have some of you crying you'll be laughing so hard!!! Years from now when people ask about great, great days in your life.............you will quickly recall Election NIght 2012

Oh, this one's a keeper!

Maybe not as good as this:

My prediction: Obama does not seek a second term

But definitely one to save and rub in your face later.

 

[Synthaholic]

Polls are fun

Mitt has only won a single election in his life while Obama has never lost

Mitt is in the big leagues now

I read somewhere Perry has never lost, either.

Until now, of course.

Perry will still be Governor of Texas

Mitt will still be........um.......I don't know....what has Mitt done in the last five years?

Improved his backhand?