It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Romney in 2016?
- Thread starter jwoodie
- Start date
Zona
A guy in ariZONA
Best thread ever.
OH and by the way...PLEASE RUN THAT LOSER AGAIN.
OH and by the way...PLEASE RUN THAT LOSER AGAIN.
You're right ... more would vote for Obama.It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
TheOldSchool
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #5
I think Romney would have saved America by now! His ideas were fresh and perfectly reasonable!
His style is impetuous! His defense is impregnable! He's just ferocious! He wants your heart!!!! He wants to eat your children!!!
Romeny 2016 baby!!!! Let's roll mothafuckaaaaz
His style is impetuous! His defense is impregnable! He's just ferocious! He wants your heart!!!! He wants to eat your children!!!
Romeny 2016 baby!!!! Let's roll mothafuckaaaaz
The ironic thing is the GOP Rank and File never wanted Romney just like they never wanted McCain.
It was just "their turn".
It was just "their turn".
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
A lot of people changed their minds in 2012. Obama took his illegal overseas campaign contributions and paid for a rigged election.
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
A lot of people changed their minds in 2012. Obama took his illegal overseas campaign contributions and paid for a rigged election.
Oh, yeah, that's it.
Has nothing to do with the fact the GOP nominated the worst possible candidate.
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
A lot of people changed their minds in 2012. Obama took his illegal overseas campaign contributions and paid for a rigged election.
LOL. You silly asses got your asses kicked because your ideas were all 19th century. Now you want to double down on those ideas. Very, very smart
I also want to debunk Gasbag's silly notion that "A lot of people changed their minds."
Obama did get a little shy of 66 million votes in 2012, 3.5 million less than he got in 2008.
Romney got a million more than John McCain did.
But the fact is, a lot of folks who lived in states that were not swing states stayed home in 2012. Understandable, their votes didn't really count.
Voting participation was actually UP in the Swing states.
Here's a very useful chart for those who understand numbers.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...1oWE1jOFZRbnhJZkZpVFNKeVE&toomany=true#gid=19
Of the 12 Swing States, the vote total was up in 9 of them. (and I thought that two of the ones where it was down, MI and PA, it was a stretch ever calling them "Swing States".) Obama won 11 out of 12 of them.
It was down in states like IL and TX, becuase those states were uncontested.
Obama did get a little shy of 66 million votes in 2012, 3.5 million less than he got in 2008.
Romney got a million more than John McCain did.
But the fact is, a lot of folks who lived in states that were not swing states stayed home in 2012. Understandable, their votes didn't really count.
Voting participation was actually UP in the Swing states.
Here's a very useful chart for those who understand numbers.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...1oWE1jOFZRbnhJZkZpVFNKeVE&toomany=true#gid=19
Of the 12 Swing States, the vote total was up in 9 of them. (and I thought that two of the ones where it was down, MI and PA, it was a stretch ever calling them "Swing States".) Obama won 11 out of 12 of them.
It was down in states like IL and TX, becuase those states were uncontested.
- Thread starter
- #11
Did any of you read the entire OP, or are four sentences beyond your attention span? Obama's approval rating has dropped 10 points since the election, so the assertion that he would do as well or better in an election today than he did in November is asinine.
As far as prognostication about the 2016 election, it seems like none of the erstwhile GOP candidates will do any better at uniting the party than Romney did in 2012. Remember, he was running against an incumbent who used all of the powers of the Presidency to ensure reelection (not to mention Sandy).
Assuming Hillary will be nominated in 2016, who else would be better able to remind people of the foreign policy fiasco under her watch as Secretary of State?
All this being said, the next President will likely have to deal with the explosion of the debt/interest bomb we have been constructing. Only an ideological megalomaniac who wants to complete the transformation of America should interested in that job. On that basis, I'm not sure Romney qualifies.
As far as prognostication about the 2016 election, it seems like none of the erstwhile GOP candidates will do any better at uniting the party than Romney did in 2012. Remember, he was running against an incumbent who used all of the powers of the Presidency to ensure reelection (not to mention Sandy).
Assuming Hillary will be nominated in 2016, who else would be better able to remind people of the foreign policy fiasco under her watch as Secretary of State?
All this being said, the next President will likely have to deal with the explosion of the debt/interest bomb we have been constructing. Only an ideological megalomaniac who wants to complete the transformation of America should interested in that job. On that basis, I'm not sure Romney qualifies.
Did any of you read the entire OP, or are four sentences beyond your attention span? Obama's approval rating has dropped 10 points since the election, so the assertion that he would do as well or better in an election today than he did in November is asinine.
As far as prognostication about the 2016 election, it seems like none of the erstwhile GOP candidates will do any better at uniting the party than Romney did in 2012. Remember, he was running against an incumbent who used all of the powers of the Presidency to ensure reelection (not to mention Sandy).
Assuming Hillary will be nominated in 2016, who else would be better able to remind people of the foreign policy fiasco under her watch as Secretary of State?
All this being said, the next President will likely have to deal with the explosion of the debt/interest bomb we have been constructing. Only an ideological megalomaniac who wants to complete the transformation of America should interested in that job. On that basis, I'm not sure Romney qualifies.
No he has no chance.
They would be better off picking someone new.
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
No... just no... we don't need any Romney, or Perry, or Santorum, or Gingrich, etc, we don't need ANY RERUNS. We need NEW BLOOD... like CRUZ, or WEST, or the good Dr. CARSON.
TheOldSchool
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #14
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
No... just no... we don't need any Romney, or Perry, or Santorum, or Gingrich, etc, we don't need ANY RERUNS. We need NEW BLOOD... like CRUZ, or WEST, or the good Dr. CARSON.
What about that black guy from Louisiana? I thought he was the new leader of the tea party now after all that fuss
KevinWestern
Hello
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
Romney (in my opinion) was a rather boring, uncharismatic candidate and a bold representation of the "establishment" in Washington. A great number Americans are fed up with "establishment" and want to see some real change. He's not your guy to do this.
I think Obama was quite beatable in 2012; all it needed was a decently strong candidate.
.
Last edited:
- Moderator
- #16
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
Why would you want him?
Romney was a great candidate and Obama ran a shitty campaign and still won a rigged election. Simple as that. These libtard blowhards don't want to acknowledge the reality cos they're scoundrels who support corruption. NUFF SAID.
Trajan
conscientia mille testes
Romney in 2016?
stop, please no, seriously
stop, please no, seriously 
If Romney is the candidate it locks up the election for whomever they select to carry the progressive banner. He had his chance unfortunately he was a candidate that didn't have a message nor could answer how he would reverse the current course of the US economy.
It is too bad that we can't have a redo of the 2012 election. I think a lot of people would change their minds about who they would prefer for President. Do you think he might have a chance in 2016? He is in excellent health and only six months older than Hillary...
Obama would likely win by 10 million votes this time (if we had a re-do). That would be totally awesome; he may be the one non-TEA party GOP nominee that Hillary could beat.
Bring it on!
Similar threads
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 678
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 90
- Replies
- 81
- Views
- 818
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 9
- Views
- 53
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8158
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 474
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-