US Prez Election 2012 Thread - Opinions and Discussions

[Warren Dew]

Some Paul supporters still think they can force a brokered convention by getting Paul supporters elected as Romney delegates and then to vote for Paul. Each State has it's own rules on selecting delegates, some are voted on and some are hand picked by the candidate. It's questionable if bound delegates can freely vote, and there does appear to be evidence in National GOP rules and Federal law that supports that view. Paul supporters did manage to steal the majority of delegates in Mitten's home State of Massachusetts after all. Expect some fireworks in Tampa for the convention, I have a feeling this will go down like no other.

I actually thought you were still among those Paul supporters.

Personally, I'm hoping for a rapprochement between Romney and Paul. The more I find out about the attitudes of today's young voters, the better Ron Paul looks as a VP candidate.

[Warren Dew]

Meanwhile, Obama says "the private sector is doing fine". Obviously we shouldn't expect him to do any further work on improving the economy, if he thinks it's fine.

[Tyrannical]

Some Paul supporters still think they can force a brokered convention by getting Paul supporters elected as Romney delegates and then to vote for Paul. Each State has it's own rules on selecting delegates, some are voted on and some are hand picked by the candidate. It's questionable if bound delegates can freely vote, and there does appear to be evidence in National GOP rules and Federal law that supports that view. Paul supporters did manage to steal the majority of delegates in Mitten's home State of Massachusetts after all. Expect some fireworks in Tampa for the convention, I have a feeling this will go down like no other.

I actually thought you were still among those Paul supporters.

Personally, I'm hoping for a rapprochement between Romney and Paul. The more I find out about the attitudes of today's young voters, the better Ron Paul looks as a VP candidate.

I was tempted to go to Tampa as a delegate and cause a bit of chaos If it were in Orlando rather than Tampa I'd probably be there.

Paul and Romney, as well as their wives do get along quite well. Though they disagree on a lot of policy, they both come from large involved moral families. Paul has his political convictions, Romney not so much. If Romney was willing to compromise, and this sure wouldn't be the first time, either Paul could be a viable VP.

But Ron Paul is more than just the Presidential election, he is also working hard to see like minded people take over their State GOP. When all is said and done,Paul will not only have five or six State delegations, but will also control the GOP in those States.

[Tero]

Presidents are good at getting us overspent. None of them seem to be any good at getting us out. I think they just do not have the power. They do have an effect on the economy with the government as employer.

Vote for Romney, it will not do a damn thing for jobs. But you can keep some of the money from the evil gubment.

[Tero]

Romney will save you from eeevil Gubment!
http://teroreport.blogspot.com/2012/06/ ... lican.html

[amused]

Republican candidates are pretty blunt about saying they represent the 1%.

Unless you're in the 1%, voting Republican is idiotic.

[Warren Dew]

If Romney was willing to compromise, and this sure wouldn't be the first time, either Paul could be a viable VP.

Do you think the Paulistas would be as enthusiastic for Rand as for Ron?

But Ron Paul is more than just the Presidential election, he is also working hard to see like minded people take over their State GOP. When all is said and done,Paul will not only have five or six State delegations, but will also control the GOP in those States.

I recognize that, too. All part of the libertarian takeover of the Republican party. I hope it's successful.

[Tyrannical]

If Romney was willing to compromise, and this sure wouldn't be the first time, either Paul could be a viable VP.

Do you think the Paulistas would be as enthusiastic for Rand as for Ron?

It's hard to say, but there does seem to be a certain level of distrust with Rand since he is seen to be more open to compromise unlike his father. Romney is a whole different story, especially as some of the state conventions have been a little rowdy. But if Romney can show he supports Paul's views, Paul will probably be able to convince most of his followers.
I don't claim to understand all of them, I'm not really a libertarian as much as I'm a paleoconservative. Pat Buchanan will always be my first choice, but their views are mostly compatible, at least enough that they have endorsed each other in the past.

[maiforpeace]

Republican candidates are pretty blunt about saying they represent the 1%.

Unless you're in the 1%, voting Republican is idiotic.

Yes, well all those idiots believe the lie of the American dream and think they will soon be a part of the 1%.

[Ian]

Republican candidates are pretty blunt about saying they represent the 1%.

Unless you're in the 1%, voting Republican is idiotic.

Yes, well all those idiots believe the lie of the American dream and think they will soon be a part of the 1%.

There's nothing wrong with dreaming. There always has been and always will be a top 1%. I'd like to be part of it.

But it the disparity doesn't have to be this far out of whack. I wasn't always; the US has been sliding down the Gini index for thirty-odd years now. This is something which can be corrected by government policy, or the Republicans can keep coddling the wealthiest few until a genuine revolution takes place - an election that'll usher in someone who'll make Obama look like Milton Friedman. I honestly think the latter is more likely.

[Warren Dew]

It's hard to say, but there does seem to be a certain level of distrust with Rand since he is seen to be more open to compromise unlike his father. Romney is a whole different story, especially as some of the state conventions have been a little rowdy. But if Romney can show he supports Paul's views, Paul will probably be able to convince most of his followers.

Some of Paul's views Romney is never going to support - closing all overseas bases, for example. That's why I'm thinking of a place on the ticket instead.

[Warren Dew]

But it the disparity doesn't have to be this far out of whack. I wasn't always; the US has been sliding down the Gini index for thirty-odd years now. This is something which can be corrected by government policy, or the Republicans can keep coddling the wealthiest few until a genuine revolution takes place - an election that'll usher in someone who'll make Obama look like Milton Friedman. I honestly think the latter is more likely.

Obama's more of a problem than Romney here.

People talk about the "top 1%", but in fact, the part of the top 1% that's not in the top 0.1% has not been doing that well. The concentration of wealth is virtually all in the very top of the pyramids - the billionaires are the problem, not the millionaires. And the problem there is that the billionaires don't pay taxes, because most of their income is never legally realized in a way that makes it taxable. Buffett's real income tax rate is 0.06%:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 58988.html

Obama's proposed policies would squeeze the part of the 1% that is not in fact doing better - people with high earned incomes, not billionaires with high unearned incomes. Buffett's real tax rate of 0.06% would stay a fraction of 1%. That's why many billionaires love Obama - he's willing to take the heat off of them without making them pay significant taxes.

Romney won't solve the problem completely, but his broadening of the tax base offers at least a chance of taxing a few of Buffett's billions, something that Obama is unwilling to do.

In the end, though, you may be right that a real revolution will be required. And no election constitutes a real revolution.

[Drewish]

Republican candidates are pretty blunt about saying they represent the 1%.

Unless you're in the 1%, voting Republican is idiotic.

are u being serious?

[amused]

Republican candidates are pretty blunt about saying they represent the 1%.

Unless you're in the 1%, voting Republican is idiotic.

are u being serious?

[Drewish]

Republican candidates are pretty blunt about saying they represent the 1%.

Unless you're in the 1%, voting Republican is idiotic.

are u being serious?

I was just a bit shocked that such a BS political narrative like the 1% vs the 99% would be used seriously. I mean really, it's about promoting the notion that the majority of Republicans are unkowingly voting against their self interest and that if you are anyone other than the mega wealthy, that the policies of the Democratic Party are clearly in your best interest. This is a narrative for those with absolutely no understanding of the perspective of those that disagree with them. I guess I just assumed to you had to be using it ironically rather than so blatantly exposing your own ignorance.