http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c3xJdFbJGw
Mitt is apparently more liberal than Ted Kennedy and Thinks Reagan was apparently bad for the economy. I don’t think that’s what he said wednesday night at the debate… Things that make you go Hmmm…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaUvmWHzqJ0&feature=related
I wonder who he’s lying to?
No matter how you voted today, do you usually think of yourself as a: (n=1,457) (Dem, Rep, Ind in that order)
Hunter –% 00% --%
Paul --% 02% 09%
Romney –% 33% 23%
Huckabee –% 15% 11%
McCain –% 33% 44%
Giuliani –% 16% 13%
Thompson --% 02% --%
Note, I reformatted that poll from the source in an attempt to make it easier to read on this forum because the table does not transcribe nicely.
One should notice that McCain is really drawing in the independent voters. Romney’s getting his fair share of them too, but it’s pretty clear that the majority of McCain’s support are from independents, not Republicans. (These are the exit polls from Florida, so yes, Independents DID get to vote in the Republican Primary, contrary to the opinions stated further up in this thread. And not only did they get to vote, but they were the deciding factor.)
44% of McCain’s votes were from admitted independents. That’s nearly HALF of all the votes he received. This is a pretty good indicator that McCain is at the least a moderate at worst a liberal in the eyes of the independents. This is not surprising, the media is unabashedly liberal and generally only supports liberals, and since just about every media publication out there has endorsed McCain for the Republican nomination (they’ll pull that endorsement when they can chose Hillary or Obama mind you) this supports my claim that McCain is NOT the conservative we need to run the country.
Furthermore, there is another more telling question:
On most political matters, do you consider yourself:(n=1,452)
(Liberal, Moderate, Conservative in that order)
Hunter –% --% 00%
Paul 03% 06% 02%
Romney 24% 21% 37%
Huckabee 11% 08% 17%
McCain 49% 43% 29%
Giuliani 13% 21% 13%
Thompson –% 01% 02%
50% liberal, 45% moderate supported McCain! Only 30%, a very small number in comparison, were people who considered themselves conservative and supported McCain!!!
Anyway, the reason I like this poll is because, unlike the ones we usually see on this site, this one gives us the question and the sample size!
Here’s the link.
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/30/florida-republican-exit-poll/
The two polls I referenced above are the last two on the list.
Mitt is a slick dick like santorum.
and he changes positions more than a slut. :mrgreen:
Mitt is a slick dick like santorum.
and he changes positions more than a slut. :mrgreen:
That’s pretty slanderous. You have any facts to back that up?
Because the only one I see changing positions is McCain. He’s signed amnesty bills (and thus supports the legalization of people who commit felonies entering this nation). He’s signed laws gagging campaigners from defending themselves from malicious attacks within 30 days of an election. (He called it Campaign Finance Reform.) He’s sided more times against the Republicans then with them. He gathered together a group of radicals to stop Republicans from appointing conservative justices to the bench, this was dubbed the Gang of 14.
The ONLY thing I know of that McCain has done conservative was to support the military. Considering it was his war service that got him elected to the senate, I can see why he’s swallow his pride on that one aspect of conservatism and freely admit that.
However, he’s campaigning like the second coming of Reagan and he just is not. Romney is not either. But at least Romney’s got executive experience and he raises a very valid point: How can we change Washington DC and the corruption there by sending the same corrupt politicians back but in different chairs?
I’m not saying Romney is the best choice in the world. I am the best choice for president in the world. But of the choices available to me, Romney is the best realistic choice. (Newt would be better, but he’s not running. Thompson would be better, but he’s not running. Hastert would be better, but he’s not running. Paul might even be better, but he’s going to be Libertarian and thus has no chance to beat Hillary or Obama.)
oh c’mon. you gotta know that romney changed his positions on his social stances. b/c it was politically expedient.
and i would never slander a promiscuous women again. i saw it on a political board for sherdog.com(MMA board) and laughed real hard.
the gang of fourteen was a group of people who saw how bad it would be for republicans if they used the “nuclear option” and passed their judges, but then lost control of congress, so then the democrats can do that all they want and republicans cant stop it. it would be disastrous.
and Newt would be great, but he cheated on his wife, so it just wont work. rats.
romney stuff. its not good, but i will add that the moderators were way pro kennedy and trying to beat romney around. thats what you get with an unchallenged “fair” liberal media.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
this ones pretty funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Elx3UWmyAY4&feature=related
there’s more but they are pretty rediculous
So? Bill Clinton made Hillary the most cheated on woman in public life. I fail to see how a promiscuous Newt could be worse then anyone else.
As for changing his positions on social issues, you are just giving me a declarative statement, not facts or links. I need votes. Real, hard, logged in the record votes. And then I need to hear Romney’s explanations on why he changed his stance. (I’ve heard some, and they’re good explanations for the ones I know of.)
And the Gang of 14 did irreparable harm to the Republicans, IMHO. It showed the Democrats they could lie cheat and steal their way into anything they wanted because Republicans didn’t have the testicular fortitude to stand up and demand that the majority in this nation be heard.
Uch, don’t justify cheating for any one by using Bill as an example.
i heard some of his changes as well, and his explanation was good.
McCain has had bad calls and stood by them or fliped on what he has said. for example the calling Mitt like Mrs B on the time table issue. it wasn’t the same kind of time table as the D’s want by a long shot and yet McCain says it is… ironicly he is taring into the guy for “siding with the Dems” when his record is full of it.
his flip is on the tax cuts. i stand by that untell i can be shown other wise.
the big flip i saw from Mitt was his stance on Abortion. he never sighned any Abortion laws because he said something along the lines of I had it come to my desk and it felt wrong, i prayed on it and then i knew it was wrong.
he had others that i saw, but that was the big one i remember and felt good about.
@Cmdr:
I am the best choice for president in the world.
Now you’re talking sister! Jenn for pres 2012! Can I be the ambassador to Switzerland? I think they play AAR there?
I’m not justifying cheating, I am saying it is a non-issue with the body republic.
And yea, Romney’s call for a time table was more along the lines of the generals should sit down, sketch out some potential exit dates, determine when the situation is right to make pull out advisable and then keep that information under very tight security so that the enemy would never know when it was.
In other words, he wanted plans in place for what to do when we had won absolutely and what winning absolutely would be.
The dems (not including Hillary who was smart enough never to get on THAT band wagon) have called for exit dates with publicized days and times and in the immediate future.
Romney’s could have been in the year 3010. He just said the military should make plans to leave, EVENTUALLY. The Dems said IMMEDIATELY. Big difference. One is calling for our defeat, the other is calling for us to win and then leave instead of becoming permanent like we are in Germany.
@JWW:
@Cmdr:
I am the best choice for president in the world.
Now you’re talking sister! Jenn for pres 2012! Can I be the ambassador to Switzerland? I think they play AAR there?
You wouldn’t prefer Sweden? I thought all men wanted to go to Sweden, meet the bikini-volleyball team, etc….
@Cmdr:
You wouldn’t prefer Sweden? I thought all men wanted to go to Sweden, meet the bikini-volleyball team, etc….
I actually thought about sweden but thought that nothing (bad) ever happens in switz. I could vacation in sweden!
Jen can’t run in 2012. they have an age limit you know :wink:
2016 maybe.
Jen can’t run in 2012. they have an age limit you know :wink:
2016 maybe.
Actually…
The process of electing a President was set up in the United States Constitution. The Constitution requires a candidate for the presidency to be:
* At least 35 years old
* A natural born citizen of the United States
* A resident of the United States for 14 years
In the primary for 2012 I’ll only be 34, but by the time November runs around I’ll have been 35 for over half a year. (April 2012 would be my 35th birthday.)
So I could run. WEG
Stand aside, Mr. Newt. Stand aside Reagan legacy! Let the girl through!
dat be close. i can see the argument against you now. “she is to youngh to run.”
Jen for president! :-D
Anyways Jen, Balung is right on this, Romney changes positions more often than my ex girlfriend even. I used to live in the northwest corner of CT, pretty damn close to Massachusetts, and no true conservative from MASS had anything good to say about Romney while he was Governor. He is a Republican version of John Kerry.
That being said, McCain is a closet liberal, and Huckabee is just a buffoon. We have to figure out who is not as bad as the others.
There’s true conservatives in Mass?
Wow. Live and learn.
Anyway, my statement stands. If McCain somehow wins this, and he’s got about a 50/50 shot right now, then I’ll vote for whomever the democrat is to send a message to the Republican party that I’m unhappy with who they chose.
Besides, after the “New Direction” with the new Congress in 2006 giving us the housing market crisis, the credit crisis, the stock market crisis and the worst congress in the history of the United States, I just CANNOT wait to see what the “change” is with the Democrats in the White House!
@Cmdr:
There’s true conservatives in Mass?
Yes there is! Alive and well. My old man LOVES newt and has told me that there isn’t a strong enough conservative running. He is the radical right in this state. Although I believe he is the only one out here!
It looks like Romney may be “gearing down” in preparation for a loss on Super Tuesday…
It isn’t over until Hillary sings. Ere, does she chant
Scale of dragon, tooth of wolf,
Witches’ mummy, maw and gulf
Of the ravined salt-sea shark,
Root of hemlock digged in’ the dark,
Liver of blaspheming Jew,
Gall of goat, and slips of yew
Silvered in the moon’s eclipse,
Nose of Turk and Tartar’s lips,
Finger of birth-strangled babe
Ditch-delivered by a drab,
Make the gruel thick and slab:
Add thereto a tiger’s chaudron,
For the ingredients of our cauldron.
Instead? I never CAN remember.
Anyway, I think McCain is set up for a cruel betrayal when the real conservatives go vote on Tuesday. Though, he might get an artificial boost to victory given the New Yorkers in Florida voted for his liberalness.
Hmm, I wonder what Ronald Reagan’s son would say about John McCain…oh wait, I don’t have to wonder, here’s his column!
http://www.caglepost.com/column/Michael+Reagan/5264/John+McCain+Hates+Me.html
You get the impression that he {John McCain} thinks everybody is beneath him. He seems to be saying, “I was a war hero, and you had damn well better treat me as your superior.”
Again, he runs on his war record. Great. But unless Presidents of the United States suddenly need experience in how to survive POW Camps in North Vietnam, I fail to see the correlation between President and man who surrendered to the enemy and was captured. Unless it’s that he wants to surrender, but that’s about the ONLY thing he’s consistently said he does NOT want to do.
He has contempt for conservatives who he thinks can be duped into thinking he’s one of them, despite such blatantly anti-conservative actions as his support for amnesty for illegal immigrants, his opposition to the Bush tax cuts…, and his campaign finance bill which skewed the political process and attacked free speech.
Wow, a lot of conservative legislation he’s backed. Been saying this myself for weeks now.
A prime example cited by columnist Robert Novak was McCain’s denial that he had privately suggested that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was too conservative, insisting that he recalled saying no such thing, adding that Alito was a “magnificent” choice.
“In fact,” wrote Novak, “multiple sources confirm that the senator made negative comments about Alito nine months ago.”
Too conservative!?!?! If you are running for the conservative nomination for president there is no TOO conservative. There is Conservative and Liberal. Black and white.
In John McCain’s eyes, conservatives are the Viet Cong of this generation and he treats us as such. It’s either his way or no way.
As I said, the man is a Blue Falcon and he’s about to get stabbed like Julius Caesar on Tuesday Feb 5 if Republicans and people who “consider themselves conservative” (according to pollsters) get out and vote.
The only people really voting McCain in all these states he’s been winning are people who consider themselves moderates or liberals. Those are the vast MINORITY of the Republican Party. (I reference the polls I linked earlier in this or the Ron Paul thread, forget which that shows that over 50% of McCain’s votes came from moderates and liberals while over 70% of Romney’s votes came from conservatives.)
If he wins the nomination, he will give Hillary or Obama the biggest land-slide victory since Reagan. Hell, Obama and Hillary can basically keep their war chests and not spend a single penny because McCain won’t even have a CHANCE at beating them. There would be too strong a grass roots movement in the Republican party to sabotage him.
Of course, it might be the BEST thing for a conservative independent. You know, political parties DO change in this country. It has not always been Republican vs Democrat. We had Tories and Whigs and others before. No reason a McCain nomination couldn’t lead to the first Libertarian President in the United States. Especially since we were pretty much ticked off with Congress for failing to support our leaders and throwing them under the bus every 5 minutes. Now, with the Dems in charge of Congress, we have NO respect for them. Given the latest polls, I don’t even think their own families support them as good Congressmen anymore.
I heard on Fox News earlier today that on the “conservative ranking” based on past actions that is done by some conservative group (I do not remember all of the details) that McCain scored an 83, which was quoted as being “Conservative Hall-of-Fame” for most Republicans. I think they said Reagan was only an 86, Bush 41 a 79, and Bush 43 a 72.
