The last member of the House of Representatives to be elected POTUS?

#26
#26
lawgator1 said:
James Garfield. 130 years ago.

Not good news for Bachmann, Paul, or Ryan.
Click to expand...

IMO, neither Paul nor Bachmann will be the nominee. If Paul gets good traction... he'll be attacked by Dems and GOP establishment without mercy. He will have to somehow convince people he's "electable" and not a "nut" while also getting around the media to deliver his message to the people. It would take 3 or 4 times the money for him to win (and that would be no guarantee). Problem is... those who donate in exchange for favor won't give their money to a guy who has no intentions of giving them favor.

I wish he could win... I would vote for him. But he has alot working against him.

Ryan to me is an interesting candidate. He's obviously attractive to conservatives but hasn't totally bucked the establishment even when they took shots at him. Unlike anyone else... he can actually run on a plan. He can acknowledge that his plan isn't perfect but then counter attack that no one else has had the guts to even put something out there. His electability comes down to whether the liberal demagogues could drown his voice out as he tried to explain his proposed changes to programs for the elderly.

His offerings were really pretty benign... but libs made it sound like grandma's food and medicine would be cut off the day after the legislation was passed. Propaganda does not have to be true... it just has to be repeated often and with the appearance of conviction.
 
#29
#29
or guys like this:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,
Click to expand...
 
#30
#30
lawgator1 said:
But he has gone way overboard in the anti-government Tea Party rhetoric, imo. And in the opinion of guys like Karl Rove, too.
Click to expand...
LOL@U. Out of one side of your mouth you blame W for everything wrong in the world then out of the other cite Rove who created W.

He's simply too far right. My guess is Obama folks would love to see him win it.
Click to expand...

Guarantee you that they wouldn't. Why do you think the Obama camp has started lobbing softballs at Romney?

Perry has some weak spots that can be attacked but he has some tremendous strengths and accomplishments. His record lends itself to a compare and contrast with Obama's that is almost a guaranteed win. Records don't always determine an election... but you put the two of them side by side as executives... Perry is a giant compared to Obama.

Perry has to be the anti-Bush as far as politics are concerned. If I were in his shoes I would either publicly or privately consult with Dick Morris. I think Morris would tell him NOT to run away from the TP but rather hammer home the major thrust of the TP... fiscal discipline and smaller gov't.

IF the GOP does not defend the TP... they'll lose and lose big. They may not like it but if the left is able to define the TP as extremists then they can present the the GOP with the unwinnable options of abandoning their base or trying to convince the "middle" after they've believed lies about the TP... and they ARE lies... but truth seldom constrains the left when demagoguing or demonizing.

I think even you sense that the GOP's fate is linked to the image of the TP. The establishment left in the media and Dem party definitely do. That's why a movement they tried to treat as irrelevant for months... is now supposedly the biggest boogeyman there is.
 
#31
#31
KiffinKiller said:
Secession puts him on the same level as members of the Parti Québécois of Canada.
Click to expand...

Secession puts him on the same level of everyone who believes that the freedoms, rights, and ideals embodied in the USC are worth dividing over.

My question is why liberals would oppose a division of the country... could it be that they KNOW their ideas won't work without conservatives to finance them?
 
#32
#32
sjt18 said:
Secession puts him on the same level of everyone who believes that the freedoms, rights, and ideals embodied in the USC are worth dividing over.

My question is why liberals would oppose a division of the country... could it be that they KNOW their ideas won't work without conservatives to finance them?
Click to expand...



You mean to ask whether states with heavily black populations get by without the taxes paid by predominantly white states? Right?
 
#33
#33
sjt18 said:
Secession puts him on the same level of everyone who believes that the freedoms, rights, and ideals embodied in the USC are worth dividing over.

My question is why liberals would oppose a division of the country... could it be that they KNOW their ideas won't work without conservatives to finance them?
Click to expand...

so are you pro=secession? This is an alternative to the "liberals move to europe" argument.
 
#35
#35
KiffinKiller said:
so are you pro=secession? This is an alternative to the "liberals move to europe" argument.
Click to expand...

I am pro-freedom and pro-individual rights. If the choice is union or freedom then I am indeed "pro-secession".

Actually yes... two resolutions to a single problem of statists wanting to subordinate the rights and liberties of their neighbors to their visions of what society "should be".
 
#36
#36
sjt18 said:
I am pro-freedom and pro-individual rights. If the choice is union or freedom then I am indeed "pro-secession".

Actually yes... two resolutions to a single problem of statists wanting to subordinate the rights and liberties of their neighbors to their visions of what society "should be".
Click to expand...

It's easy to say you're pro freedom and pro-ind. rights - but does that translate to your views at the lowest level? I've noticed most of the current politicians who label themselves thus are doing so falsely.
 
#37
#37
My question is why in the hell is the Union inherently good? Why is 50 states better than 20? Socialism kind of works in Sweden. It's about the size of Georgia. You'd think liberals would like the idea of secession.
 
#38
#38
nbakerld said:
My question is why in the hell is the Union inherently good? Why is 50 states better than 20? Socialism kind of works in Sweden. It's about the size of Georgia. You'd think liberals would like the idea of secession.
Click to expand...

Sweden is bigger than California.
 
#40
#40
KiffinKiller said:
It's easy to say you're pro freedom and pro-ind. rights - but does that translate to your views at the lowest level? I've noticed most of the current politicians who label themselves thus are doing so falsely.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "lowest levels"? Not sure what you are getting at.
 
#41
#41
nbakerld said:
My question is why in the hell is the Union inherently good? Why is 50 states better than 20? Socialism kind of works in Sweden. It's about the size of Georgia. You'd think liberals would like the idea of secession.
Click to expand...

I would certainly think that. Maybe they don't think it would be fun without someone to try to impose their ideas on.
 
#42
#42
There's plenty of folks who will vote for anyone but Obama, just as there are plenty of folks who will vote only for Obama. It's a small sliver of folks in about 4-5 states that will make the difference in the 2012. IMO, it's ridiculous that the rest of us let this small # of swing voters dictate the "mandate" of the governing class. The states need to assert themselves and start standing up to the feds.
 
#43
#43
lawgator1 said:
James Garfield. 130 years ago.

Not good news for Bachmann, Paul, or Ryan.
Click to expand...

Anyone who thinks Bachmann or Palin has even the slightest chance of becoming President is disconnected from reality. Every presidential canidate would have to withdraw and Obama would have to resign before that happened, and even then we would find someone else. Neither of those two are capable of running their local PTA, let alone the United States of America. Anyone that GS promotes for the job should automatically be counted out.
 
#44
#44
the sweeden argument yet again...sweden is corrupt beyond belief....drugs and weapons are a specislity for the ruling elite
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#45
#45
altidore17 said:
Anyone who thinks Bachmann or Palin has even the slightest chance of becoming President is disconnected from reality. Every presidential canidate would have to withdraw and Obama would have to resign before that happened, and even then we would find someone else. Neither of those two are capable of running their local PTA, let alone the United States of America. Anyone that GS promotes for the job should automatically be counted out.
Click to expand...

What did Barry ever run before being President? And he has proven he can't run this country either so while I don't see either of them making it I would take them over this moron any day.
 
#46
#46
volfanjustin said:
What did Barry ever run before being President? And he has proven he can't run this country either so while I don't see either of them making it I would take them over this moron any day.
Click to expand...

the fact that you would settle for the same thing only opposite party says a lot.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top