j44

Do they even have to be here frequently? There was so much yesterday that wouldn't it have helped to just have someone check in on the site a couple times a day? Even once in the afternoon and once at night.

Yes, of course that is what I mean buddy!!

The best line was Eastwood deriding lawyers and saying that they shouldn't be president. Romney went to law school.

This. Apparently he was scheduled for 5 minutes. He went on for 12 (it felt waaay longer to me) AND he went off script. I can't imagine the Romney are calm and happy tonight. Not earth shattering but it all could have gone better.

So far, I'm with you. Note: the Eastwood thing was so off that the camp put out a statement saying it was a 'break' from the other speeches. Edit: I'll add that the Eastwood thing kinda took the momentum from the video they showed. I was in and out on Rubio but the parts I caught didn't impress me. Again, could be that I was expecting a lot from him. Romney's speech was ok. There were a few lines I read beforehand that I felt fell flat a little. Not great but not terrible either. Alex whatever the hell is last name is, the GOP strategist on CNN said it was 'good enough.' I think that says enough.

Nothing. But the contrast could hit well.

Apparently it is in Romney's speech. According to the 'leaked' parts there are several good lines in it, in my opinion.

Best line from tonight. "Obama promised to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family."

I was under the impression that they came out and said this recently. The link is from May?

http://m.washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romney-to-deliver-the-speech-of-his-life-at-gop-convention/2012/08/30/54ae2108-f2a8-11e1-892d-bc92fee603a7_story.html?wpisrc=al_comboNP_p

As time is passing I’m looking at Ann Romney’s speech and thinking less of it (maybe because Ryan’s was much better) and I didn’t think it was very good to begin with. I really, really do think that she (and the campaign) needed/needs to make him look….nicer. Not only did she not do that and not tell any great stories about him but she didn’t hit on the other point that she needed to drive home. If they weren’t going to go with the ‘he IS nice’ they needed to hit harder on him being a fixer. That ‘he will not fail’ line was good but that should have been the theme. She should have said it over and over again. And stressed that he was there for her during her illnesses while being a success with the games in Utah, governor etc etc. I really do think her speech was more important than Ryan’s in the sense that it could have had a greater impact. His was good (maybe even very good) despite the factual problems. But I can’t stress enough how strongly I feel that they need to make Mitt likeable. This race is close and if he can improve his image personality wise it could put him over the top. He doesn’t even have to be as likable as Obama is. He just has to be more likable than he is now. I think she was their best chance to do that. I could be wrong and he could come out tonight and come off as an actual person or give this mind blowing speech. We will see.

No problem, I re-read it and it does sound like that is what I meant. Although, I would be lying if I didn't admit that the tone of the 'engaging' plays a role in my too partisan comments. But I'll admit the tone is also a result of Shady's....approach.

How strongly do you feel about them? on a scale of 1-10 and compared to other issues.

Interesting.

did you decide against him because of Ryan's views on abortion and/or gay marriage or his economic solutions?

I didn't say he was too partisan because he engaged Shady.

Fair point.

Not all, but I am assuming a good chunk of their base are against it. Good point though with the Fed v states comment. I do think it is possible that it could help show some uncertain conservatives (uncertain about Romney I mean) that is he conservative. Even if they do think it should be a state issue. And it could turn off some moderates and independents but I don't think it will do that much.

I didn’t say that I was giving team Romney a pass on their lies. I simply implied that it was hypocritical to constantly point out one sides' lies. I'm obviously not doing that. You could be right, but I'm not getting into this nonsense. Team Obama has thrown out some big ones. Maybe Romney's team has lied a lot more. Maybe it is 10:1. You can fight over it all you want but I don't really care. I don't understand this constant bickering. I'm all for debate that moves things forward but the way you and Shady go on...I'm sorry but I don't get it. You aren't convincing anyone that isn't already on your side. So, to me, it is totally pointless. It is bad enough to go over every single issue in this manner but it is exponentially worse to do it over ever single sentence by the candidates, their parties and their surrogates. I’m not going to waste my time going back and forth with you like Shady does and tell you over and over that you are too partisan almost to the point of being irrational. I’ll leave that stuff up to Shady; it is pointless. If you want to go on and on about how you are right, Romney is pure evil and so forth feel free. Shady is here for you.

With regard to the rebels, I couldn't disagree with you (and agree with GH)more. However, Syria will not lead to WW3. Yes, there will be a proxy war between several competing countries but Syria is mostly important because of Iran and to a lesser extent Russia. In the grand scheme of things none of these countries will risk a massive war just to settle Syria. It isn't THAT important. Too often, people talk about a war and then jump to the 'it is going to cause another world war!'

I shouldn't be surprised that this was your answer. If you really can't see that both sides are lying pretty often you are more biased than I thought you were. I support Obama and if he has to destroy Romney's character to win I am ok with that. I wish he didn't have to do it but he does. Now, saying that Romney lies all the time and Obama lies 1% of the time is silly even for you. As far as me being the problem, I take comfort in you thinking that. Because the problem in the US isn't that two irrational sides of both parties are yelling at each other and pandering to the extreme partisans in their camps (read: you and shady) and not willing to sit down and solve the country's problems, right?

Didnt you claim (like on the previous page) that Romney's campaign was lying constantly but never admit to the lies from Obama's campaign?

This is why I never come to this section of the forum.

I don't think moderates/swing voters will care that much about the issue. They'll vote on jobs, the economy, etc. Getting your supporters out and volunteering and giving money is always a big issue. I'm sure Obama supporters last time around won't all come out this time. Sometimes it is just a matter of getting them out. They won't vote for the other guy if they do.