perry and Romney clash

Post Reply New Topic

In the sept 8 debate Romney and perry usurped all the attention.

While perry was full of talking points rather than solutions, he was right that social security was unsustainable. Romney straw manned the argument by acting as if perry was against social security for millions of americans.

We are now seeing Romney In a different light. Where he has to fight in the gutters get off his high horse and deal with the fact that his moderate views don't sit well with the tea party.

Then again perry is just demogoging and eventually he may run out of steam.

Both of them are running toward the middle.

Romney is trying to distance himself from Romneycare, and Perry is trying to distance himself from the book he published 9 months ago that apparently, according to his PR people, does not reflect his current views.

Perry made himself look like a complete idiot. Paul going after him on his executive order mandating HPV vaccinations to 11 year old girls as condition for attending schools and his support of Hillarycare in 1993 was great. His only response was basically some laughable nonsense about Ron Paul not really loving Reagan. It's too bad Paul didn't twist that knife and bring up the fact Perry supported Carter and Mondale during those years. Not only that, he was the Texas campaign chairman for Al Gore in 1988! Maybe he can drop those little tidbits in the next debate. I don't even think a kool-aid drinker like Inuyasha could support such slimeball like Perry.(I may be underestimating that kool-aid tho)

Inuyasha will do what he is told he is a good soldier (i.e. he is completely reason proof)

Wow, even Jacoby thinks Inuyasha is too reflexively partisan.

Cute Jakoby, but I drink English Tea Time, and Darjaline (sp?), i don't drink the kool-aid.

I actually don't support Perry or Romney (unless it is either them or Obama).


I actually am supporting Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, or Michelle Bachmann. I will include Sarah Palin in support list if she decides to officially run.

Newt Gingrich, because he has the resume of actually balancing the Federal Budget for 4 years, actually got the other candidates to tone down the attacks on each other, and kinda united everyone behind him (except Paul and Huntsman (whom is Michael Moore's favorite)).

Of course, your a big fan of a fat polygamous adulterer.

Well name me one person that spearheaded the push to balance the budget in the 90s that wasn't a polygamous adulterer. Unfortunately, you can't because the only other person arguably responsible is Bill Clinton and he can't run again.

Al Gore was a conservative Democrat in 1988.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore_pr ... aign,_1988

Newt isn't any different than Romney or Perry. He was one of the main guys who spearheaded the whole individual mandate.

And Al Gore hasn't changed his views too significantly since 88. Neither has Rick Perry. Their isn't much difference between neoconservatives and centrist democrats. Big spending pro war, they're all the same.

First I have watched all the debates from Fox News, to CNN, to Fox News, to MSNBC; on live TV, I'm forming my opinions based on their performance in the debates.

Newt is different from Romney and Perry, because he actually balanced the Federal Budget. Would Romney and Perry potentially be capable of balancing the budget, who knows, possibly, but only Newt has the resume of actually doing it.


Newt, has screwed up on some things, no man or woman is perfect. That said Republicans dropped the individual mandate idea long before Obama was elected, because they had studied the idea and determined that it was unconstitutional, and dropped their support of that idea (looked good initially and further study showed it to be a bad idea).

Fact is Republicans shouldn't be looking for the perfect candidate, I'm sorry but even Ronald Reagan wasn't perfect, and short of God coming down from heaven to run for President, we won't find a perfect candidate.

In my judgement, Newt has had time to reflect on things, the reason he's entered this election fray is because he's scared for his grandkids' futures. He had pretty much left politics and was content on staying in the private sector.

Romney reminds me of a used car salesman, seriously.

Perry, I really don't think he should be President, but I would say he would be a lot better in the DoJ than our current Attorney General.

I think Herman Cain would make a fine President if he had a good VP that knows where all the bodies are buried. Gingrich/Cain or Cain/Gingrich would be a strong ticket either way.

Bachmann, I like her, but think she should stay in the house cause Boehner needs all the help he can get, or get into the Senate.

Huntsman, is just a no for me (Michael Moore's endorsement kinda killed his chances).

Ron Paul, is not a good idea for President or VP, but I would have him in the administration in some capacity (primarily to make certain individuals' lives in the Federal Reserve a living hell (appoint him to do the audit)).

Pawlenty may be a good VP pick, but don't think he is a good Presidential Candidate.

Again though, I still think Newt Gingrich is at the end of the day our best chance at beating Obama out of the people currently in the running. He may have some personal baggage, but overall he's the only candidate I think that could scare the hell out of Obama in a debate that is currently running.

Seeing Newt manage to get the moderators to lose their professionalism on National TV (LIVE) and get the other candidates to follow his lead and tone down their rhetoric towards each other (exception of Paul), kinda convinced me that of the people up there he's the best man for the job.

Currently the Tickets I'm looking at:

Gingrich/Cain

Cain/Gingrich

Gingrich/Palin

Palin/Gingrich


Furthermore, I know quite a few people on the Republican side are already wanting to pay good money to watch Newt debate the teleprompter in chief.

A Bigelow product?

I'm sorry, my friend, you drink crappy tea.

Of course my theory on english tea is that the english drink bitter tea because it helps them sneer better.

On top of that, 100% of english tea companies are convinced that Americans only drink iced tea, and sell their D-grade product in the USA.

And you can't even spell Darjeeling. You probably didn't know that it is the name of the only region of India that can grow chinese (Camilla senensis) tea bushes in commercial quantities. All the other regions grow Camilla assamica - which is native to India. That is also what is grown in Kenya and Sri Lanka.

On the other hand i commend you for drinking a quintessentially American beverage. The English learned the tea trade from Americans.

Gingrich can't win in a general election. He's unpleasant to look at and to listen to. The only Republican who can beat Obama is Romney. He's tall, in decent shape (not fat), has a full head of hair (and nice thick straight hair beats afro-hair any day), and not excessively nerdy or awkward. Obama's still a better speaker, but don't underestimate the power of Romney's hair. And no, this is not a joke. This is what really wins presidential elections, like it or not.

I support Romney and support anything he has to do against the others to win the nomination. With such a bad cast to choose from, I don't see why the choice isn't more clear and the nomination give to Mitt already

The fact the news media is pushing him actually makes me think that he probably isn't the best candidate. I would like to see a Gingrich vs. Romney debate, it wouldn't even be a contest, Gingrich would use Romney's face as a mop.

Real Americans drink coffee.


That's a really sad list. I'm backing Huntsman, although I know he has no chance in the primaries.