Mitt Romney

[ToadBrother]

Yea..I saw that. MSNBC's other cavalcade of clowns are starting to focus more on Ms. Bachmann instead of Sarah Palin. Bachmann was born in Iowa, and has a real chance to develop some primary momentum amongst an otherwise weak field. Here in Minnesota, you either love her or hate her, but you can't ignore her!

What do you think the actual chances of most of these people ever making it the distance? At the moment, Romney's the only one that isn't a complete lunatic or a nobody, and even he's allowing himself to be bullied by the populist factions.

I've heard some commentators say that the reason the Republicans are not fielding many serious candidates is because they figure, even as weak as Obama may seem, it's more than likely that he'll win again in 2012, so there's not much point in the more serious candidates even putting their hat in the ring. Wait until 2018, when there's a high likelihood no natural Democratic successor and, to some extent, the Tea Party has burned itself out and a moderate candidate has more of a chance of going all the way.

[Shady]

What do you think the actual chances of most of these people ever making it the distance? At the moment, Romney's the only one that isn't a complete lunatic or a nobody, and even he's allowing himself to be bullied by the populist factions.

I've heard some commentators say that the reason the Republicans are not fielding many serious candidates is because they figure, even as weak as Obama may seem, it's more than likely that he'll win again in 2012, so there's not much point in the more serious candidates even putting their hat in the ring. Wait until 2018, when there's a high likelihood no natural Democratic successor and, to some extent, the Tea Party has burned itself out and a moderate candidate has more of a chance of going all the way.

Complete nonsense. Obama's easily beatable. And if you watched any of the debate, you'd know that Bachmann is a very serious candidate. Take your liberal talking points somewhere else.

[ToadBrother]

Complete nonsense. Obama's easily beatable. And if you watched any of the debate, you'd know that Bachmann is a very serious candidate. Take your liberal talking points somewhere else.

Translation: I'd vote for Hitler if he was on the GOP ticket, so please don't unplug my ears.

If you think Bachmann can get elected in Middle America, you need to get your head checked out for brain swelling.

[Shady]

Translation: I'd vote for Hitler if he was on the GOP ticket, so please don't unplug my ears.

If you think Bachmann can get elected in Middle America, you need to get your head checked out for brain swelling.

Sweet, a Hitler reference!!!

[ToadBrother]

Sweet, a Hitler reference!!!

Not quite as bizarre as your notion that Bacchman could ever win the GOP nomination, let alone actually go against Obama.

[Shady]

Not quite as bizarre as your notion that Bacchman could ever win the GOP nomination, let alone actually go against Obama.

Nope, it absolutely is more bizarre. Because Bachman could win the GOP nomination. Anyways, how about you wingnuts leave the Hitler references alone from now on? You're acting like a crazy person.

[bush_cheney2004]

What do you think the actual chances of most of these people ever making it the distance? At the moment, Romney's the only one that isn't a complete lunatic or a nobody, and even he's allowing himself to be bullied by the populist factions.

Hey, that's what Hillary thought about Barack Obama too. Anything is possible, though not probable. As it stands today, Michelle Bachmann will garner more media bandwidth than the others, holds a federal office already, and has a strong following amongst the TeaParty faithful. Bachmann is a far more serious adversary than Palin, and Palin was on the 2008 ticket!

I've heard some commentators say that the reason the Republicans are not fielding many serious candidates is because they figure, even as weak as Obama may seem, it's more than likely that he'll win again in 2012, so there's not much point in the more serious candidates even putting their hat in the ring. Wait until 2018, when there's a high likelihood no natural Democratic successor and, to some extent, the Tea Party has burned itself out and a moderate candidate has more of a chance of going all the way.

Incumbancy is a huge advantage for any sitting president, but it is never a lock when the political and economic landscape is littered with problems. LBJ flat out refused to run, and Carter got his ass handed to him. Obama is not as vulnerable, but he ain't no Ronald Reagan.

Edited June 15, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[ToadBrother]

Incumbancy is a huge advantage for any sitting president, but it is never a lock when the political and economic landscape is littered with problems. LBJ flat out refused to run, and Carter got his ass handed to him. Obama is not as vulnerable, but he ain't no Ronald Reagan.

No, but he does not have a populist uprising forcing him towards harder almost fringe-like positions. I'm imagining that Obama is hoping a Palin or a Bachmann gets the ticket, because it is against these kinds of candidates that his "no drama" style of campaigning works best. If not a nut, then at least someone like Romney, forced to take a hard right stance (he's basically been bullied into that on health care already).

I don't think Obama is invulnerable, and clearly if the economy does not at least stay level, and if it does tank (and there's at least a sporting chance we're going to see a second dip), he could indeed go the way Carter did. But Carter had a damned strong Republican candidate going against him. So far the field seems pretty dry of the kind of candidate who can reach across the aisle to undecideds and even Democrats like Reagan did. They seem to be able to mainly come up with polarizing figures, which was precisely what Reagan was not, and that's why I think Obama is in a good position, and why the Republicans will need to let the Tea Party flame out before the bulk of reasonable moderate candidates even bother testing the waters.

Let's put it this way, if you're someone like Mike Huckabee and you're watching Mitt Romney getting a new one torn not by the Democrats but by Tea Party Republicans, I imagine you would be thinking "Nah, 2012 doesn't seem like a lucky number to me."

[bush_cheney2004]

...Let's put it this way, if you're someone like Mike Huckabee and you're watching Mitt Romney getting a new one torn not by the Democrats but by Tea Party Republicans, I imagine you would be thinking "Nah, 2012 doesn't seem like a lucky number to me."

That's all well and good, but should be viewed in the context of what happened during the 2010 mid-terms. The battle lines have been drawn, and Obama has actually lost some of his base because he has been nothing more than Bush Lite. He still has the advantage, but will need to hope for more than a weak Republican ticket. The TeaParty actually serves a useful (sacrificial anode) purpose, something for which the Democrats have no equivalent.

[GostHacked]

Do you see anyone being better?

Economically, Obama has been the worst President ever. Doubling the spending of government, long after Bush had overspent. Being unable to lower unemployment and increase economic activity - not that government can do that anyway. There is only two ways they can keep unemployment high and economic activity low, by standing in the way or "helping". Obama, being the caring sharing type, is helping as hard as he can.

Yes, he is the guy that everyone loves to poo poo .. Ron Paul.

[ToadBrother]

Yes, he is the guy that everyone loves to poo poo .. Ron Paul.

And with good reason. Ron Paul is the most thoughtful, intelligent, honest, forthright lunatic in America.

[ToadBrother]

That's all well and good, but should be viewed in the context of what happened during the 2010 mid-terms. The battle lines have been drawn, and Obama has actually lost some of his base because he has been nothing more than Bush Lite. He still has the advantage, but will need to hope for more than a weak Republican ticket. The TeaParty actually serves a useful (sacrificial anode) purpose, something for which the Democrats have no equivalent.

I still see the Tea Party as much more of a risk to the Republicans than the Democrats.

[GostHacked]

And with good reason. Ron Paul is the most thoughtful, intelligent, honest, forthright lunatic in America.

Well if you want real change, he is the man. If you want to continue the status quo, vote any of the other idiots in.

[Shady]

Yes, he is the guy that everyone loves to poo poo .. Ron Paul.

Ron Paul can be good and bad. It's too bad though that he's embraced George McGovern's foreign policy. I like a lot of his domestic policy ideas though.

[Shady]

I still see the Tea Party as much more of a risk to the Republicans than the Democrats.

Irrelevant. What's more of a risk is Obama on America. It can't take much more of him and his destructive policies.

[ToadBrother]

Well if you want real change, he is the man. If you want to continue the status quo, vote any of the other idiots in.

Well, yes, you can get real change that way, but it's akin to lighting fire to your house to redecorate your livingroom.

[GostHacked]

Ron Paul can be good and bad. It's too bad though that he's embraced George McGovern's foreign policy. I like a lot of his domestic policy ideas though.

He does point out that it is the foreign policy that is killing them. Operating all these bases worldwide cost money.

[ToadBrother]

He does point out that it is the foreign policy that is killing them. Operating all these bases worldwide cost money.

And a lack of secure oil supply would cost even more. Ron Paul lives in a fantasy world, like most Libertarians.

[GostHacked]

And a lack of secure oil supply would cost even more. Ron Paul lives in a fantasy world, like most Libertarians.

You don't need the oil if you are not supplying all those bases around the world. The war machine is not very efficient on oil at all. Those A1-Abrams don't get very good mileage. The Gulf of Mexico has lots of oil, as does the USA mainland. The Bakken oil fields have not even really been tapped yet.

Putting all the bases everywhere means you are trying to be an empire. Empires cost a lot of money to maintain.

[ToadBrother]

You don't need the oil if you are not supplying all those bases around the world. The war machine is not very efficient on oil at all. Those A1-Abrams don't get very good mileage. The Gulf of Mexico has lots of oil, as does the USA mainland. The Bakken oil fields have not even really been tapped yet.

Putting all the bases everywhere means you are trying to be an empire. Empires cost a lot of money to maintain.

Care to back that up with actual reserve counts?

[Shady]

Care to back that up with actual reserve counts?

I'll help.

Exxon makes major oil discovery in Gulf

Exxon Mobil said Wednesday it has discovered an estimated 700 million barrels of oil equivalent at a deepwater well off the Louisiana coast, a major find that a top House Republican argued should push the administration to speed up offshore permitting.

"This is one of the largest discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico in the last decade,” Exxon Mobil Exploration Company President Steve Greenlee said in a statement.

Link

[GostHacked]

Care to back that up with actual reserve counts?

Well energy companies already seem to be going for it now. Not sure of reserves .. but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_formation

and

http://www.enbridge.com/BakkenPipelineProjects/BakkenPipelineProjectCanada.aspx

[Shady]

Shale Boom in Texas

The Texas field, known as the Eagle Ford, is just one of about 20 new onshore oil fields that advocates say could collectively increase the nation’s oil output by 25 percent within a decade — without the dangers of drilling in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico or the delicate coastal areas off Alaska.

Link

[Pliny]

Yes, he is the guy that everyone loves to poo poo .. Ron Paul.

You like him, do you?

I do as well. In the current political arena I don't hold up much hope for his aspirations though.

[Pliny]

And with good reason. Ron Paul is the most thoughtful, intelligent, honest, forthright lunatic in America.

To be like Ron Paul you have to think a little outside the bong.