Obama will get reelected and you can blame the GOP for it, ironically.

[Liberty]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

 

[Truthmatters]

You and your cohorts are the minority in this country.

Its why the republicans have had to cheat to win elections for decades.

There is plenty of blame in your corner

 

[konradv]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

Blame??? GOLD STAR, maybe

 

[JoeB131]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

Ron Paul can always run third party if he wants to.

But Obama will probably win because you have to have a really compelling reason to vote out an incumbant, and the GOP hasn't given one yet.

 

[Truthmatters]

Obama will win because the republicans can not cheat enough to win

 

[iamwhatiseem]

If people continue to drop out of the job market due to giving up on finding a job, and therefore the unemployment numbers artificially fall over the next 12 months...if the stock market somehow maintains such a HUUUGE bubble..then he will win.
He will get killed in the Presidential debates...but his followers will dismiss whatever happens regardless.

If the stockmarket bubble burst and thereby hurts us all, again, then his election is highly improbable.
So in Irony, his base will have to root for the banks and Wall Street in order for Obama to win.

 

[Truthmatters]

nope.

If you really think ANY of the Republican field can beat Obama in a dedbate you are completely deluded

 

[WatertheTree]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

Thats right. The GOP had better get in line with the living breathing walking and talking human beings instead of the money sucking zero principal profit worshiping fake fucks. Its Ron Paul, or its Obama.

No more compromise. Voting to keep someone out doesnt work. Its time to vote for the right reasons and if Obama is reelected then I welcome the coming collapse of the economy and social structure. It is better to watch Rome burn and rebuild it then to continue to be a slave to system of world domination ran by an Oligarchy who only cares about 'getting theirs'.

Last night the judge brought down the gavel, did you guys see this?
Judge Napolitano: What if they're lying to you about Ron Paul? - Fox Business - YouTube

 

[WatertheTree]

nope.

If you really think ANY of the Republican field can beat Obama in a dedbate you are completely deluded

Obama ran on hope and change. Change from the destruction of civil liberties and endless war. Change from a failed healthcare system. Change from zero upward mobility. Change from zero accountability.

WHAT HAS CHANGED?

You tell me, and untill you do I suggest you shut the fuck up. Fucking tool.

 

[Article 15]

He will get killed in the Presidential debates

 

[WatertheTree]

If people continue to drop out of the job market due to giving up on finding a job, and therefore the unemployment numbers artificially fall over the next 12 months...if the stock market somehow maintains such a HUUUGE bubble..then he will win.
He will get killed in the Presidential debates...but his followers will dismiss whatever happens regardless.

If the stockmarket bubble burst and thereby hurts us all, again, then his election is highly improbable.
So in Irony, his base will have to root for the banks and Wall Street in order for Obama to win.

Stock market bubble is going to continue to grow. We have assured it by printing 16 trillion dollars. The economy is not getting better, corporate power that controls all the money has just found more of it. Think about it. No trickle down, so where did the 16 trillion go?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Notwithstanding Huntsman - who is anathema to the Republican base - there is not one current candidate running for the nomination who is a credible candidate for POTUS.

Not only does each remaining candidate for the R's carry negative baggage, not one of them can offer anything more substantive then cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government and a rewrite of history.

Obama has offered targeted tax cuts, much as did President Clinton the last POTUS who was fiscally responsible. The current crop of candidates all plan to increase unemployment by shrinking government. That means reducing the labor force of government employees all of whom are consumers and most are mortgage holders who support local business in their communities. A sure fire way for a double dip if not a return to 1929 is a fire sale of working Americans.

The current crop is also anti Union and pro Wall Street yet blames Obama for wanting to redistributed the wealth. The wealth is held by the top 5% in America, that is not in dispute. Economically, the more capital in the hands of the greatest numbers results in greater spending, an expanding economy benefits all of us. The R's still support voodoo economics; the only thing that trickles down is economic misery.

 

[JoeB131]

If people continue to drop out of the job market due to giving up on finding a job, and therefore the unemployment numbers artificially fall over the next 12 months...if the stock market somehow maintains such a HUUUGE bubble..then he will win.

He will get killed in the Presidential debates...but his followers will dismiss whatever happens regardless.

If the stockmarket bubble burst and thereby hurts us all, again, then his election is highly improbable.
So in Irony, his base will have to root for the banks and Wall Street in order for Obama to win.

Ummm, sorry, seeing Romney in the GOP debates, where he comes off like some weird Mormon robot, without any human empathy.

"Would you like to hear about another Testament of Jesus Christ"



Romney didn't start gaining traction until the Debates ended, and he could rely on slash and burn attack ads from his PACs to do in the competitors.

 

[JoeB131]

Notwithstanding Huntsman - who is anathema to the Republican base - there is not one current candidate running for the nomination who is a credible candidate for POTUS.

Not only does each remaining candidate for the R's carry negative baggage, not one of them can offer anything more substantive then cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government and a rewrite of history.
.

Ignoring the rest because it's a bunch of OWS talking points, let's look at resumes.

Obama (before becoming President)- 4 years as a Senator.

Romney- 4 years as a governor

Perry - 12 years as a governor, 2 years as Lt. Governor.

Santorum- 4 years as a Congressman, 12 years as a Senator.

Gingrich- 20 years as a Congressman, 4 years as Speaker of the House.

Are you really going to get up here and tell me that NOW you guys care about qualifications?

As far as baggage- you mean, what the media will talk about. They'll tell you all day about how some Google Bomber made Santorum's name a dirty word, but man, don't you ever mention that cop-killing terrorist that Obama used to hang around with, or his minister who screams "God Damn America" in front of a room full of children.

 

[Oldstyle]

Notwithstanding Huntsman - who is anathema to the Republican base - there is not one current candidate running for the nomination who is a credible candidate for POTUS.

Not only does each remaining candidate for the R's carry negative baggage, not one of them can offer anything more substantive then cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government and a rewrite of history.

Obama has offered targeted tax cuts, much as did President Clinton the last POTUS who was fiscally responsible. The current crop of candidates all plan to increase unemployment by shrinking government. That means reducing the labor force of government employees all of whom are consumers and most are mortgage holders who support local business in their communities. A sure fire way for a double dip if not a return to 1929 is a fire sale of working Americans.

The current crop is also anti Union and pro Wall Street yet blames Obama for wanting to redistributed the wealth. The wealth is held by the top 5% in America, that is not in dispute. Economically, the more capital in the hands of the greatest numbers results in greater spending, an expanding economy benefits all of us. The R's still support voodoo economics; the only thing that trickles down is economic misery.

Clinton was "fiscally responsible" because A) he had billions in additional revenue coming into the Federal coffers from the Dot Com Boom (something that he had zero to do with creating) and B) because he had a Republican Congress led by Newt Gingritch which rejected larger Clinton budget proposals three times in the budget battle following the Republican takeover of the House. Please explain how Barack Obama's situation is in ANY way like Bill Clinton's! First of all Obama has no Dot Com Boom to generate revenue for him...he's having to deal with an ongoing economic slump. Secondly, Obama's budgets are so out of control he's afraid to even submit them. You can TRY and paint Obama as the second coming of Clinton, Wry but the only one naive enough to buy that is probably TM. Know what I'm saying?

 

[CMike]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

Ron Paul can always run third party if he wants to.

But Obama will probably win because you have to have a really compelling reason to vote out an incumbant, and the GOP hasn't given one yet.

Try his economic disaster.

The first 2 1/2 years he had a democrat congress and he could have done anything he wanted to and he did.

 

[Article 15]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

Ron Paul can always run third party if he wants to.

But Obama will probably win because you have to have a really compelling reason to vote out an incumbant, and the GOP hasn't given one yet.

Try his economic disaster.

The first 2 1/2 years he had a democrat congress and he could have done anything he wanted to and he did.

 

[JoeB131]

Yep, because us Ron Paul supporters are just going to write him in anyway and the GOP establishment would rather put another spend-whore liberal republican or warmonger against Obama. Grats Obama. That is all.

Ron Paul can always run third party if he wants to.

But Obama will probably win because you have to have a really compelling reason to vote out an incumbant, and the GOP hasn't given one yet.

Try his economic disaster.

The first 2 1/2 years he had a democrat congress and he could have done anything he wanted to and he did.

Problem with that argument is

1) The economy is finally starting to improve.

2) The GOP could be held to blame just as much as he can.

 

[Dragon]

Thats right. The GOP had better get in line with the living breathing walking and talking human beings instead of the money sucking zero principal profit worshiping fake fucks.

So had the Democrats, in all honesty.