Options

The next American Century- Republican primary over

usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
edited July 2012 in A Moving Train
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 19428.html

GETTYSBURG, Pa.—Rick Santorum abruptly suspended his White House campaign Tuesday, clearing the way for front-runner Mitt Romney to claim the Republican presidential nomination.

The former Pennsylvania senator made the announcement at a news conference Tuesday afternoon. Mr. Santorum significantly lagged Mr. Romney in the nominating contest and faced an increasingly hard challenge in winning the GOP primary in his home state of Pennsylvania, which votes later this month.

Enlarge Image

CloseAssociated Press

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum
.The announcement came a day after Mr. Santorum's 3-year-old daughter Bella was released from the hospital after contracting pneumonia. Bella Santorum has a rare, chromosomal disorder that can make such illnesses life-threatening.

Mr. Santorum was the last viable challenger to Mr. Romney, and his decision to exit the race marks the unofficial end of the Republicans' months-long, highly combative primary. Mr. Romney has yet to gather the 1,144 convention delegates needed to win the nomination, but it is unlikely that the remaining challengers, Newt Gingrich and Rep. Ron Paul, can prevent him from doing so.

Despite the long odds facing his campaign, Mr. Santorum had promised to stay in the race until Pennsylvania's April 24th primary, but polls show his support in the state sagging, and Mr. Romney promised to outspend him significantly on television ads in the state.

Until his exit from the field, Mr. Santorum had claimed the mantle as the top conservative alternative to Mr. Romney.

josh+budich+o+poster.jpg

:lol:

time to fight for the America we love.
How many trillion dollar deficits before Obama (220 years)= zero
how many trillion dollar deficits with Obama---4 trillion.

not Woot
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13456711

Comments

  • Options
    inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    If we're honest, we're screwed either way. I know for sure Obama will do nothing to help the economy. I'm fairly certain Romney won't as well.

    Sometimes I wonder why I even care. It doesn't really matter which puppet we have in there. At the end of the day, they're still puppets. One has a teleprompter, the other has a good hair. That's pretty much it.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • Options
    usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    the real good hair couldn't make it. Perry. He rocks.
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    this coming from the only person who made an individual thread praising every single republican candidate that ever led in any poll...

    :lol:
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    what the heck is happening to this place...inlet13 throwing in the towel and a over all low rating for the golden boy Obama...you guy's are messing up my mojo :lol: ...make it stop make it stop !!! :lol::lol::lol:


    Godfather.
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    Godfather. wrote:
    what the heck is happening to this place...inlet13 throwing in the towel and a over all low rating for the golden boy Obama...you guy's are messing up my mojo :lol: ...make it stop make it stop !!! :lol::lol::lol:


    Godfather.
    this is what happens when presidential campaigns continue on for 18 months...
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    Jason PJason P Posts: 19,124
    Godfather. wrote:
    what the heck is happening to this place...inlet13 throwing in the towel and a over all low rating for the golden boy Obama...you guy's are messing up my mojo :lol: ...make it stop make it stop !!! :lol::lol::lol:


    Godfather.
    this is what happens when presidential campaigns continue on for 18 months...
    I checked the math and Obama started his 62 months ago. ;)
  • Options
    mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    the republican primary isn't over until the delegates are counted at the convention or only one person is running. Considering this thing has gone on for damn near a year, what happens two months from now is anyone's guess...

    I think he still has to win a fair amount of the delegates from here on out to get the nomination locked up prior to the convention...Now that the mainstream media is going to be reporting it is Romney, that may lessen the amount of people showing up at the polls...and we all know Ron Paul was going to have the same amount show up no matter what, so that may mean a higher percentage for him than he would have normally gotten. With Gingrich still in just to stick it to Romney, he will probably siphon a few too...this thing still isn't over...and unfortunately if it remains close we won't get an accurate picture until the ballots are cast at the convention.

    Remember...Santorum's delegates are not legally bound to support whoever he endorses, although the MSM will report as so...I believe most are now free to vote their conscience assuming he stays out of the race...I think it will still be an interesting convention. Although there is certainly a greater chance that Romney has enough actual delegates to win before the convention. I just cannot give up hope that easily :lol:
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • Options
    Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Godfather. wrote:
    what the heck is happening to this place...inlet13 throwing in the towel and a over all low rating for the golden boy Obama...you guy's are messing up my mojo :lol: ...make it stop make it stop !!! :lol::lol::lol:


    Godfather.
    this is what happens when presidential campaigns continue on for 18 months...

    ahhh welll..think of the bright side after the election for a new president is over the train will have a new ax to grinde with who ever wins :lol: maybe not right at first but after a fare amount of time passes we can trash the next guy too :lol:


    Godfather.
  • Options
    Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,660
    This thing has been over since the day it started. It was never going to be anyone but Romney. And the next guy is going to be the same as the current guy. Write it down.
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    why did he not endorse romney??
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    peacefrompaulpeacefrompaul Posts: 25,293
    why did he not endorse romney??

    I know, right? He has before.
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    why did he not endorse romney??

    I know, right? He has before.
    but he didn't during his "suspension" speech....

    i wonder why?

    also, romney is talking about a new american century, but we are 12% through this one and the next century begins in 88 years.... :?
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    why did he not endorse romney??

    I know, right? He has before.
    but he didn't during his "suspension" speech....

    i wonder why?

    also, romney is talking about a new american century, but we are 12% through this one and the next century begins in 88 years.... :?


    not calendar year silly...remember time starts with a new administration
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    mikepegg44 wrote:

    not calendar year silly...remember time starts with a new administration
    so we are talking from 2013 to 2113? what kind of shit is that?

    :lol:
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    mikepegg44 wrote:

    not calendar year silly...remember time starts with a new administration
    so we are talking from 2013 to 2113? what kind of shit is that?

    :lol:


    I was thinking 0-100...we will need a new measure of time after the mayan apocalypse anyway...
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • Options
    peacefrompaulpeacefrompaul Posts: 25,293
    It's not over until it's over.
  • Options
    usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Just got this email last night. I understand the numbers start when BHO takes office but its always fun to see how numbers can drive a point home.

    President Obama is right.

    He has spent the last few weeks talking about a "war on women" that is taking place across America. We agree there's been a war on women.

    More women have struggled to find work under President Obama's watch than at any time in recorded history. We hear far too little about it, but women have been among the hardest hit by the Obama economy.

    Women account for 92% of all job losses since Barack Obama took office. Yes, you read that right. Don't be fooled -- this is the real war on women. Check out these stunning facts about women and the Obama economy in the image below. (see link)

    American women deserve better -- much better.

    Thanks.

    Katie Packer Gage
    Deputy Campaign Manager


    http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-v ... ker%20Gage
  • Options
    josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 28,473
    You dillusional if you don't believe that the war on women was started by your GOP ....
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • Options
    jimc3jimc3 Posts: 230
    please, there is no "war on women" from either side. White House was wrong to start this, Romney camp was wrong to try to flip it back on them. every non-evil human values women.

    what happened to the whole post-Gabby Giffords "let's tone down the violent rhetoric"? a WAR on women? seriously?

    this is all just talking points babble to win the invented battle of the day in the never-ending 24hr cable news cycle.

    hopefully soon everyone will start to talk about real issues.
  • Options
    usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    "We need a president who will stand up for the rights of hunters, sportsmen and those who seek to protect their home and family," Romney said. "President Obama has not; I will."
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    jimc3 wrote:
    please, there is no "war on women" from either side. White House was wrong to start this, Romney camp was wrong to try to flip it back on them. every non-evil human values women.

    what happened to the whole post-Gabby Giffords "let's tone down the violent rhetoric"? a WAR on women? seriously?

    this is all just talking points babble to win the invented battle of the day in the never-ending 24hr cable news cycle.

    hopefully soon everyone will start to talk about real issues.
    threatening to roll back the rights that women have enjoyed for the last several decades IS a war on women's rights. if you will not call it a war, what would you call it? an assault? to republicans does that mean the "women's right's experiment" has ended in failure???

    these proposed laws are real. they are not made up. if they were made up they would not be being fucking enacted in arizona and mississippi and tennessee.
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    "We need a president who will stand up for the rights of hunters, sportsmen and those who seek to protect their home and family," Romney said. "President Obama has not; I will."
    how has obama not stood up for the rights of hunters, sportsmen and those who seek to protect their home and family"????? how has he threatened any of that?

    i am asking you to provide us with 4 specific examples of this. since romney could not do it, can you?

    either romney has information that the rest of us don't have, or he is fucking lying to a group of people who are so stupid that they believe him without question, or they are too lazy to look into it themselves. either way, he is pandering and distorting the truth.. in this case the most logical explanation is probably the right one, and that is he is fucking outright LYING.....
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 22,293
    "We need a President who will stand up for the rights of hunters, sportsmen, and those seeking to protect their homes and their families. President Obama has not; I will," he said.

    "If we are going to safeguard our Second Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes," Romney added. "And I will protect the Second Amendment rights of the American people."

    Democrats shot back at Romney before his speech was even delivered.

    “The president's record makes clear the he supports and respects the second amendment, and we'll fight back against any attempts to mislead voters. Mitt Romney is going to have difficulty explaining why he quadrupled fees on gun owners in Massachusetts then lied about being a lifelong hunter in an act of shameless pandering," Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said in a statement this morning. "That varmint won't hunt.”

    Romney's history with second amendment and gun-ownership issues is a colorful one, from saying "I don't line up with the NRA," during his 1994 senate campaign, to being forced to backtrack on his skill as a hunter in 2008, ultimately admitting he only shot "small varmints." This campaign cycle, Romney has laughed about his lack of skill as a hunter, including with comedian Jeff Foxworthy in Alabama, whom he joked could help him figure out which end of the rifle to point.

    The Republican frontrunner's speech also came, though, at one of the biggest recent flashpoints for gun rights in recent memory. The Trayvon Martin shooting in Florida has sparked nationwide coverage of "stand your ground" laws -- the self-defense law under which George Zimmerman, the man charged with second degree murder in Martin's death, is mounting his criminal defense.

    Romney didn't address those laws in his speech, though his campaign said in a briefing with reporters on Friday morning that the former Massachusetts governor would defer to states to determine their own laws on that matter.

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 ... peech?lite

    interesting. he only said "gun" once, and did not even address the trayvon martin case and stand your ground laws...he can not take a firm position on that, so he is obviously pandering and whoring himself out. just look at his inconsistent past on gun rights... :roll:

    he talked about freedom in general, pandering to the simpletons in the audience...
    There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Options
    whygohomewhygohome Posts: 2,305
    "We need a President who will stand up for the rights of hunters, sportsmen, and those seeking to protect their homes and their families. President Obama has not; I will," he said.

    "If we are going to safeguard our Second Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes," Romney added. "And I will protect the Second Amendment rights of the American people."

    Democrats shot back at Romney before his speech was even delivered.

    “The president's record makes clear the he supports and respects the second amendment, and we'll fight back against any attempts to mislead voters. Mitt Romney is going to have difficulty explaining why he quadrupled fees on gun owners in Massachusetts then lied about being a lifelong hunter in an act of shameless pandering," Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said in a statement this morning. "That varmint won't hunt.”

    Romney's history with second amendment and gun-ownership issues is a colorful one, from saying "I don't line up with the NRA," during his 1994 senate campaign, to being forced to backtrack on his skill as a hunter in 2008, ultimately admitting he only shot "small varmints." This campaign cycle, Romney has laughed about his lack of skill as a hunter, including with comedian Jeff Foxworthy in Alabama, whom he joked could help him figure out which end of the rifle to point.

    The Republican frontrunner's speech also came, though, at one of the biggest recent flashpoints for gun rights in recent memory. The Trayvon Martin shooting in Florida has sparked nationwide coverage of "stand your ground" laws -- the self-defense law under which George Zimmerman, the man charged with second degree murder in Martin's death, is mounting his criminal defense.

    Romney didn't address those laws in his speech, though his campaign said in a briefing with reporters on Friday morning that the former Massachusetts governor would defer to states to determine their own laws on that matter.

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 ... peech?lite

    interesting. he only said "gun" once, and did not even address the trayvon martin case and stand your ground laws...he can not take a firm position on that, so he is obviously pandering and whoring himself out. just look at his inconsistent past on gun rights... :roll:

    he talked about freedom in general, pandering to the simpletons in the audience...

    You're on a roll, gimmie. Keep asking for specifics. I'm still waiting on a list of burdensome regulations that the Obama administration has imposed on small businesses and corporations.
    http://www.remappingdebate.org/article/ ... e?page=0,2 (a new site I am giving some attention to)
    (http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2010/10/1 ... ng_debate/)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac ... _blog.html
  • Options
    usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    NRA members who watched the speech seemed not to care about Romney's record on guns, nor did they complain that he might not have been their first choice in the Republican race.

    Romney checked the most important box: He is not Barack Obama.

    https://m.mittromney.com/sites/default/ ... 1334257467
  • Options
    whygohomewhygohome Posts: 2,305
    NRA members who watched the speech seemed not to care about Romney's record on guns, nor did they complain that he might not have been their first choice in the Republican race.

    Romney checked the most important box: He is not Barack Obama.

    https://m.mittromney.com/sites/default/ ... 1334257467

    Kids with guns
    Kids with guns
    Taking over
    But it won't be long
    They're mesmerized
    Skeletons
    Kids with guns
    Kids with guns
    Easy does it, easy does it, they got something to say no to

    Drinking out (is she real, is she)
    Pacifier (is she real, is she)
    Vitamin souls (is she real, is she)
    The street desire (is she real, is she)
    Doesn't make sense to (is she real, is she)
    But it won't be long (is she real, is she)
    Kids with guns
    Kids with guns
    Easy does it, easy does it, they got something to say no to

    And they're turning us into monsters
    Turning us into fire
    Turning us into monsters
    It's all desire
    It's all desire
    It's all desire

    Drinking out
    Pacifier
    Sinking soul
    There you are
    Doesn't make side to
    But it won't be long
    Cause kids with guns
    Kids with guns
    Easy does it, easy does it, they got something to say no to

    And they're turning us into monsters
    Turning us into fire
    Turning us into monsters
    It's all desire
    It's all desire
    It's all desire
  • Options
    usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012," are her exact words. And what would be a better option, in Ginsburg's opinion? The constitution of South Africa which provides no mention of a Right to Keep and Bear Arms in its lengthy bill of rights. You have a right to affordable housing, according to Ginsburg, but not the right to defend yourself inside your affordable home.

    Imagine if one of the five justices who sided with the Second Amendment in the Heller or McDonald cases were to retire in the next four years. The likelihood of that happening is good, and we know that Barack Obama would replace him or her with a nominee who believes, just like Justice Ginsburg, that you and I don't actually have the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

    This is what's at stake in this year's elections. Will we have a president who believes that our Constitution is nothing more than an old piece of paper that should be discarded or ignored when he sees fit? Not if the NRA has anything to say about it. We've been fighting for our Second Amendment rights since 1871, but never has there been a more critical time for our firearm freedoms. The danger is real, the stakes are immense, and the task won't be easy. Together, however, I know NRA members will go "All In" this election season to deny Obama the opportunity to nominate any more anti-gun judges to the nation's high court.
  • Options
    usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    AND

    "The Obama administration's assault on our economic freedom is the principal reason why the recovery has been so tepid -- why it couldn't meet their projections, let alone our expectations," Romney said.
  • Options
    CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    AND

    "The Obama administration's assault on our economic freedom is the principal reason why the recovery has been so tepid -- why it couldn't meet their projections, let alone our expectations," Romney said.

    viewtopic.php?f=13&t=181028&p=4186651&hilit=mitt+romney+mean+dog#p4186651
  • Options
    whygohomewhygohome Posts: 2,305
    "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012," are her exact words. And what would be a better option, in Ginsburg's opinion? The constitution of South Africa which provides no mention of a Right to Keep and Bear Arms in its lengthy bill of rights. You have a right to affordable housing, according to Ginsburg, but not the right to defend yourself inside your affordable home.

    Imagine if one of the five justices who sided with the Second Amendment in the Heller or McDonald cases were to retire in the next four years. The likelihood of that happening is good, and we know that Barack Obama would replace him or her with a nominee who believes, just like Justice Ginsburg, that you and I don't actually have the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

    This is what's at stake in this year's elections. Will we have a president who believes that our Constitution is nothing more than an old piece of paper that should be discarded or ignored when he sees fit? Not if the NRA has anything to say about it. We've been fighting for our Second Amendment rights since 1871, but never has there been a more critical time for our firearm freedoms. The danger is real, the stakes are immense, and the task won't be easy. Together, however, I know NRA members will go "All In" this election season to deny Obama the opportunity to nominate any more anti-gun judges to the nation's high court.

    Seriously, dude: Go live in a cabin in Idaho. This bullshit has run its course.
This discussion has been closed.