| Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
| Willard Mitt https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=75&t=74655 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Scooter [ Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Willard Mitt |
Call the POTUS and get it over with for chrissakes. |
|
| Author: | Big Chicagoan [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
immessedup17 wrote: He is too busy bitching out his party because they forced him to Paul Ryan to the ticket in order to increase "Conservative Cred." You know...because they totally had to make sure the super right voters didn't vote Obama. Paul Ryan was a good VP candidate. Romney should be praising his campaign for making it as close as it is. If he wants to complain about anything, it should be the ridiculous Republican Party platform which basically makes it impossible to win minority or women votes. |
|
| Author: | Big Chicagoan [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
immessedup17 wrote: Big Chicagoan wrote: Paul Ryan was a good VP candidate. Romney should be praising his campaign for making it as close as it is. If he wants to complain about anything, it should be the ridiculous Republican Party platform which basically makes it impossible to win minority or women votes. You realize that Paul Ryan is exactly the type of Republican that can't get women or minority votes...right? You realize that Paul Ryan is basically the top person to have on your ticket if you have to make the economy the big issue. |
|
| Author: | Scooter [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
The losing candidate should mix in a phone call real soon. What a prick. Glad I did not vote for a spoiled rich child. But if you did that is why I love living in the USA. Freedom of choice. |
|
| Author: | Don Tiny [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Gentlemen, please rest your sphincters .... Romney losing means an early push for Christie winning in 2016. |
|
| Author: | Drop In [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Christie wouldn't have accepted a VP nomination. Prior to the storm, he's been focused on 2016. When Ryan was announced as the guy, I knew the party was tossing 2012. Don't sleep on Rubio. It's time for the Republican party to modify many a stance. I'm not suggesting Christie should be standing on a keg, with Jon Stewart on his shoulders, while abortions are being conducted in the lawn at a house party. But Obama, by the numbers should have been defeated this year. I'm going all Hub, but I obviously support our President. However, the lack of everything that exists with the Republican party was just voted on. |
|
| Author: | Scooter [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
This election was the worst I remember. The winner is the lesser of the two evils. The candidates focused more on tearing down the other guy than on their own visions of how to improve this country. Obama has done a B- job but would Romney do better? |
|
| Author: | Scorehead [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
immessedup17 wrote: Big Chicagoan wrote: Paul Ryan was a good VP candidate. Romney should be praising his campaign for making it as close as it is. If he wants to complain about anything, it should be the ridiculous Republican Party platform which basically makes it impossible to win minority or women votes. You realize that Paul Ryan is exactly the type of Republican that can't get women or minority votes...right? Social issues are the most important issues to those demographics...and Paul Ryan is extremely far right on those issues. Mitt Romney was more moderate (until the Republican platform became "be the opposite of Obama"). Chris Christie was the answer. Ryan was a terrible VP choice. Christie wasn't the answer either. The obvious VP choice was Rubio. The Republican convention was held in Florida, & Rubio would have brought Florida home for Romney. Ryan couldn't even win Wisconsin or his own county in Janesville. Ryan brought nothing to the ticket. |
|
| Author: | Drop In [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Rubio wouldn't have accepted a VP nod. The party knew better. |
|
| Author: | Scorehead [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Drop In wrote: Rubio wouldn't have accepted a VP nod. The party knew better. Who turns down VP? Why would he turn it down? |
|
| Author: | Drop In [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Scorehead wrote: Drop In wrote: Rubio wouldn't have accepted a VP nod. The party knew better. Who turns down VP? Why would he turn it down? To become President in 2016, not the losing VP in 2012. |
|
| Author: | Scorehead [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Its never too early for a prediction... Marco Rubio will be the POTUS in 2016. |
|
| Author: | Drop In [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Scorehead wrote: Its never too early for a prediction... Marco Rubio will be the POTUS in 2016. So you agree with my point. |
|
| Author: | Scorehead [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Drop In wrote: Scorehead wrote: Its never too early for a prediction... Marco Rubio will be the POTUS in 2016. So you agree with my point. I still think Marco would have accepted the VP spot. One thing is for sure...the 2016 Presidential race will be very interesting...will Hillary run? Will it be Hilary -vs- Marco? I would love to see a Republican ticket of Marco & Condi, which would certainly be a different direction for the Republican party. Marco & Condi are both right wing conservatives, but as minorities, it would certainly bring an interesting dynamic to the election. |
|
| Author: | ZephMarshack [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Drop In wrote: I'm not suggesting Christie should be standing on a keg, with Jon Stewart on his shoulders, while abortions are being conducted in the lawn at a house party. I am. But only if the abortions are late-term. |
|
| Author: | W_Z [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Scooter wrote: This election was the worst I remember. no it wasn't. 2000, 2004, 1988 come to mind immediately. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Willard Mitt |
Like I told you at least two years ago, the only people who run against an incumbant are wild cards and retreads. The smart politican with options does not take on a fight he is more likely to lose from day 1...and he certainly doesn't attach himself as a VP to a fight he is more likely to lose from day 1. This was, essentially, Bush v. Kerry and I think smart Republicans knew that for a while |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|