Republican 2012 Nomination Thread

[VictoryMC98]

Well, it is intended to be a catch-all for the GOP nomination, positive and negative. But no one is stopping him, kap, alpha and others from discussing what candidates they like.

 

I agree, but if you have a problem with a thread.. move on.. There are several threads that I don't like, you don't see me telling others how they should post in it...

[southsider2k5]

First graf, I seem to remember an awful lot of bickering in the 2008 threads for both parties. I despised Edwards, and didn't like Clinton either, and made that clear. Others felt the same about other candidates.

 

Rename it? Why - it has been true to title so far.

 

And the rules? The topic is in no way in violation of any of the rules, and neither are most of the posts in here. There are probably a few that do violate the rules, so, let's deal with them. Show me a post or some posts, and show me what rule(s) were broken.

 

Apparently I read the first post of the rules acknowledgement completely different than anyone else does, especially this supporting piece.

 

--Litter threads with every little news item on a specific subject that can be found - in this case, if you want a thread just to catalog the missteps of a specific candidate, then start a thread for that purpose.

[StrangeSox]

This is a thread created to discuss the GOP nomination. People are containing relevant posts to this thread and not littering threads with it. Seems perfectly in line with the rules.

 

And it's pretty funny that you're whining about it being a violation of the rules because of supposedly posting every little news item while also whining that people didn't post about Newt getting a newspaper endorsement.

[Reddy]

Please. Tell me if I trolled the Dems thread on a daily basis, I wouldn't get the same exact response.

 

And as to the bolded, THAT IS THE WHOLE PROBLEM. That is entirely what this thread is about, and why it was created.

this isn't the GOP thread, last time I check. It ain't stickied.

[NorthSideSox72]

Apparently I read the first post of the rules acknowledgement completely different than anyone else does, especially this supporting piece.

And that is exactly what we did - created a new thread for discussing the candidates!

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Wait, what? I am stating my view just as he is.. I on the other hand am talking about the thread, not complaining about it. I think you need to look up what trolling is, before you go and start throwing that term around... It seems allot of posters just throw it around here.. hoping one time it will stick.

 

And tell me.. in the last 4-5 debates, which seem to be 1 almost every week.. what new information about the GOP canidates did you learn, that you didn't already know?

Actually the last debate had a few really great exchanges about security issues.

 

[VictoryMC98]

Actually the last debate had a few really great exchanges about security issues.

 

Which were all mentioned back in one of the summer debates. I have watched almost every single one of them.

[Balta1701]

Ok, so it's bad news about a Republican Candidate and this proves my bias. Screw it, it's getting posted. Here's your story of the day.

Businessman Herman Cain said Monday an Atlanta TV station will air a report in which a womanwill come forward to say she had an extra-marital affair with Cain for "an extended period of time."

 

In a preview of the interview, the woman, Ginger White ,told Fox5 in Atlanta that the relationship was "pretty simple."

 

"It wasn't complicated. I was aware that he was married. And I was also aware I was involved in a very inappropriate situation, relationship," White told the TV station.

 

The full interview will air at 6 p.m. according to the website.

 

Cain told CNN Monday the accusations were false and are expected to be made by an unidentified woman in a report this evening.

 

Cain said he knew the woman and had considered her "a friend."

 

"The accusations I had a 13-year affair with her, no," Cain said.

 

He revealed few details about the woman or the report, saying only that he could not respond to allegations that had not yet been made.

 

Cain said he found out about the allegations when the television station contacted his lawyer, Lin Wood, for comment.

[NorthSideSox72]

Which were all mentioned back in one of the summer debates. I have watched almost every single one of them.

Not at all. For one thing, multiple new stances from multiple candidates came out. For another, some of the discussion and interplay between candidates was quite good, and presented some new perspectives.

 

[EvilMonkey]

I would prefer a 'debate' where they talked about only one topic and at length, throwing ideas back and forth instead of sound bites. Limit to 2, MAYBE 3 people at a time and have at it. Immigration/border control. GO! Give each person time to respond, and have questions asked by the other person(s) there, not some moderator who may or may not have an agenda.

[NorthSideSox72]

I would prefer a 'debate' where they talked about only one topic and at length, throwing ideas back and forth instead of sound bites. Limit to 2, MAYBE 3 people at a time and have at it. Immigration/border control. GO! Give each person time to respond, and have questions asked by the other person(s) there, not some moderator who may or may not have an agenda.

The most recent debate was pretty close to that. Some others were too clipped and jammed to have that. But I agree, the longer discussion on fewer topics at each debate are better.

 

Another problem is, if a candidate didn't get their word in on a question, they have this annoying habit if using their time on the next question to answer the first one. I think there should be a guy in an NFL referee uniform there, and when a candidate starts talking about some already-closed question, he blows the whistle, throws a flag in the air, and turns off that candidate's microphone.

 

Just kidding. Sort of.

 

[Rex Kickass]

The most recent debate was pretty close to that. Some others were too clipped and jammed to have that. But I agree, the longer discussion on fewer topics at each debate are better.

 

Another problem is, if a candidate didn't get their word in on a question, they have this annoying habit if using their time on the next question to answer the first one. I think there should be a guy in an NFL referee uniform there, and when a candidate starts talking about some already-closed question, he blows the whistle, throws a flag in the air, and turns off that candidate's microphone.

 

Just kidding. Sort of.

 

I remember when I lived in Germany and watched their election debates. In Germany, each party is guaranteed a specific number of ads and debate time. However, the state broadcasters split it out between the major and minor parties. In otherwords, the parties with a chance to get 5% and full representation in parliament get the major debate, the rest get the minor debate.

 

I loved the minor party debate. There were probably a dozen candidates on the stage and when the answers went on for too long, they got drowned out by a brass band until they stopped talking.

[NorthSideSox72]

In case anyone was curious, here is a review of Gingrich's Economic Plan. Dramatic, inventive and interesting in some places, unrealistic in other places, scary in yet others.

 

[EvilMonkey]

In case anyone was curious, here is a review of Gingrich's Economic Plan. Dramatic, inventive and interesting in some places, unrealistic in other places, scary in yet others.

I think a lot of that is the long campaign season and the need for every candidate to appear 'different' from all the other candidates. They come up with this s*** just to get press time. I would like to see one candidate say "yeah, that idea XXX has about YYY is pretty good. I actually agree with that."

[VictoryMC98]

9-9-9, soon to be dead, dead, dead. Hermain Cain thinking about dropping out. IMO, he should have a month ago.

[southsider2k5]

In case anyone was curious, here is a review of Gingrich's Economic Plan. Dramatic, inventive and interesting in some places, unrealistic in other places, scary in yet others.

 

He has me with killing Dodd Frank and SOX.

[VictoryMC98]

In case anyone was curious, here is a review of Gingrich's Economic Plan. Dramatic, inventive and interesting in some places, unrealistic in other places, scary in yet others.

 

It seems to me the same as every other GOP plan so far.

 

-End Wall Street regulations (because we haven't learned yet)

-End the EPA

-END Taxes Period

 

Can someone on the GOP not just repeat what Grover Norquist wants?

[NorthSideSox72]

It seems to me the same as every other GOP plan so far.

 

-End Wall Street regulations (because we haven't learned yet)

-End the EPA

-END Taxes Period

 

Can someone on the GOP not just repeat what Grover Norquist wants?

Actually, Gingrich didn't say any one of those three things.

 

Some candidates favor getting rid of Dodd-Frank, but not all of them. I'd prefer it be modified, and the rules be solidified.

 

A few candidates want to outright kill the EPA - Paul, Perry, Bachmann I think. Gingrich wants to re-tool it.

 

And end taxes period? LOL

 

[VictoryMC98]

Actually, Gingrich didn't say any one of those three things.

 

Some candidates favor getting rid of Dodd-Frank, but not all of them. I'd prefer it be modified, and the rules be solidified.

 

A few candidates want to outright kill the EPA - Paul, Perry, Bachmann I think. Gingrich wants to re-tool it.

 

And end taxes period? LOL

 

Maybe you aren't reading what I am reading.

 

Ole Newt, isn't going to just stop at modifying Dodd-Frank, he will start there, then keep going by ending it. GOP in General hates Regulations. As for me, I prefer we reinstate Glass-Stagal, it worked for over 50 years.. It wasn't broke, so why did Congress need to go messing with it? ( I know why, just a rhetorical question)

 

I can't see the new retooled EPA as a ESA doing anything. With all the new Tax cuts..ie debt, have to cut somewhere.. EPA is going to go away under Newt's plan

 

Sorry, end taxes on the rich and corporations. eliminateing Estate tax, (which only affects .3% of the country and is for anyone giving up more than 5million off to their children or whoever) and Captial Gains tax, (which is a joke @ 15% now) And then bring down the Corporate rate to 12.5%, laughable. Which creates more DEBT.

 

I don't see anywhere in his plan to eliminate the largest burden on the budget.. The DOD.. Where are the cuts that are needed?

 

And the only reason GOP want to reform Entitlements, is they don't want to pay back the IOUs they wrote to pay for Iraq and Afghnastian. (for the record, both parties dipped into the SS trust fund)

 

Right now we have Newt’s talking points.. Without reason or explanation to why, until then I will speculate on what he means, from his debate and past knowledge of him.. and every other GOP/DEM candidates. I have yet to see a single GOP canidate address the top 5 reasons that caused the Debt we have.

Edited November 29, 2011 by VictoryMC98

[lostfan]

We need lostfan to confirm or deny her claims.

you want lostfan to be unemployed, lol

[lostfan]

Actually, Gingrich didn't say any one of those three things.

 

Some candidates favor getting rid of Dodd-Frank, but not all of them. I'd prefer it be modified, and the rules be solidified.

 

A few candidates want to outright kill the EPA - Paul, Perry, Bachmann I think. Gingrich wants to re-tool it.

 

And end taxes period? LOL

"re-tool" is code for "kill"

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Gingrich thinks that the CBO is some sort of socialist plot from the devil. Why on Earth would you give him the benefit of the doubt over the EPA?

[NorthSideSox72]

"re-tool" is code for "kill"

Of course he wants to kill it - but he recognizes he can't practically do so. So unlike Perry, not only does Gingrich actually remember which agency, he also makes it a policy to try to put a big old leash on it. Make it do less.

 

Why does this make Newt different than, say, Perry? It says that Newt has a better grip on reality. I may not agree with either one on this particular issue, but Newt is a lot less scary because he isn't completely ignorant.

 

This is a subtle but important difference.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Gingrich thinks that the CBO is some sort of socialist plot from the devil. Why on Earth would you give him the benefit of the doubt over the EPA?

There is no benefit of the doubt - see my other response.

 

Also, Newt does have a habit of creating Biden moments when he speaks off the cuff. Or maybe Ron Paul moments.

 

[southsider2k5]

"re-tool" is code for "kill"

 

Some of those things need to die. SOX has been nothing but a drain on corporations and hasn't actually prevented anything. We still see a respective level of fraud. If management is willing to lie, another agency to lie to isn't going to make them stop and suddenly have a conscious.