It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2008 Conservative Presidential Candidates

page: 49
15
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 03:06 AM
link   
McCain-Romney has to be looked at as a tag team. Romney can hammer Obama on economic issues, which can take some of the shine off Obama's halo becuase hope doesn't pay the bills. That leaves McCain to tackle Hillary, which he can do if he is willing to be more hawkish than she is/was.

This is really the only strategy they have. It's a gamble that hinges on the mood of the American people. If McCain-Romney can rasie enough doubts in the minds of the voters, they might (might) be convinced that both McCain and Romney have learned lessons that Hillary and Obama have not.

That's a lot of what you see from these guys right now. "I'm sorry. I get the idea now. Please elect me."




posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 


IMO if Hillary chose Obama as her VP pick she or her team would ensure that Obama would take a crash 101 course on the Clinton economic plan . Hillary could also go for one of the lesser players and avoid the problem all together . If Obama was to pull off an upset then it would be a differnt story.

It remains to be seen if it the form book will be thrown out the window if it isnt then McCain - Romney better have some more cards up there sleeves . Huckabee could slot in as the VP pick in order to bring the Christian right to the polls.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I have got to Say, that i lik McCain and Romney LOADS more then i like Rudy...

I am so suprised that he didnt stay til Feb 5th...

The Feild narrows to 4...



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 03:56 AM
link   


Forty-one percent of Florida voters who described themselves as moderates said they voted for McCain, compared to 22 percent for Giuliani.

Romney was looking to more conservative voters for the lion's share of his support.

Among the 1,505 poll respondents, 37 percent of those who called themselves conservative went for Romney. But McCain was only 10 points back at 27 percent. McCain was hoping to stay close enough to Romney among evangelicals and other conservatives to use his bigger lead among moderates for a win.

Moderates only made up 28 percent of the poll respondents, but McCain held an 18-point advantage over Romney among them.


I thought that the support from moderates that McCain received was worth noting before I hit the hay. Of course this also demonstrates how the candidate who appeals to the wider voter base isnt popular amongst his own party core supporter base. This does not bode well for the Republican party.

Source



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 

J/O posted: McCain-Romney has to be looked at as a tag team. Romney can hammer Obama on economic issues, which can take some of the shine off Obama's halo because hope doesn't pay the bills. That leaves McCain to tackle Hillary, which he can do if he is willing to be more hawkish than she is/was.


In 1988 when Bush41 chose the vamp-ish Dan Quayle to be his VP, I would have assigned the older and distinguished looking Lloyd Bentsen to be like ugly-on-a-monkey to follow Quayle around the US, contrasting his own experience and level headed speaking with the shrill and Bush43-like shallow thinking of Danny-boy. But alas, I was not consulted.

Yes, some strategy is needed. The one J/O proposes makes as much sense as any other. At this point in time however, with Romney NOT short on money and McCain with but $3 m. in the bank, I’m thinking the top slot will go Mormon! Leaving John to be the "Elder" statesman and war hero the GOP and right wings so much love as VP nominees. See Note 1.


xpert11 says: IMO if Hillary chose Obama as her VP pick she or her team would ensure that Obama would take a crash 101 course on the Clinton economic plan. Hillary could also go for one of the lesser players and avoid the problem all together. If Obama was to pull off an upset then it would be a different story.


Although president’s are blamed when the economy does badly, it is my opinion that our $13 T. economy is far too large. too complex for any person to really get a handle on it. It is mostly one bull****er bull****ing another bull****er. Or economics as they like to call it. The best we can do is jerk around the overnight interest rate where 100 points equals 1%. Hey, it gives a lot of otherwise unemployable people very good paying jobs! See Note 2.


Note 1.
I know it is UN-American in some circles to raise this issue, but I don’t mind. There were about 650 US airmen held in the Hanoi Hilton as we called it. All but 5 or 10 came out alive. The Vietnamese said those men were injured beyond their capacity to save their lives. I personally believe the Vietnamese.

But it is the raw numbers that intrigues me. Now like it or not, from any nation’s point of view, American airmen dropping bombs that kill men, women and children, are war criminals. See Post Script. Studies showed “iron” bombs to have been 10% accurate in WW2. That is, 10% of the bombs hit the intended target. The AF tried to keep that secret but the Navy leaked it. Another study done post-Vietnam showed accuracy was improved to about 20%. Now, if you have ever seen - who has not? - pictures of the trail of bombs dropped from B52s flying out of Guam, you know if you think about it the bombs were AREA bombs and not precise targeted bombs.

I have said all that to say this: Of all the surviving US airmen held in Hanoi - over 95% - I have never seen a sign of physical abuse and of those who have been in the public eye, I have never seen a sign of mental abuse. So who’s a hero? The 18 year old mud-caked Marine private laying in a flooded rice paddy all day, or a 30 year old AF-USN type sleeping on clean sheets in an 8 X 10 cell with 2 bowls of rice and a dried fish daily?

Note 2.
Banks are required to “balance” accounts every night at midnight. If they are “short” they must borrow from the Federal Reserve System enough money to make it even. Because this is done daily, at midnight, the process is called “overnight.” The Fed charges banks for that money. That's the rate Bernanke gives to the press with accompanying hoopla. A large bank might have millions borrowed from the Fed, re-borrowing each night as needed. Or as at a bar, “running a tab.”

Obviously, as the overnight rate goes down, banks have more money - well, cheaper money - available to loan. And the converse being true, as the rate goes up, money becomes scarce. Compared to the size of our economy, this is much like peeing on a forest fire. Which leads me to believe it is one more rich man’s scam worked on the poor. ONLY the rich can play the overnight game. As also in bribery and hiring illegals. Which may explain why so few are ever prosecuted as compared to say, convenient store robbers. Hmm?

Post Script to Note 1.
B52s from Guam could carry 80,000 pounds of bombs. The usual load was 500 pound HE - high explosive - bombs. 160 bombs. Usually ground bursting. Flying at 30,000 feet, and cruising around 300 knots - about 350 mph - the bombs would be dropped two bombs every 3 seconds. 160 bombs to drop in 4 minutes. At the B52s speed - 500 feet per second - this meant one bomb would hit the ground every 100 yards! And the trail of bombs would run for 9 miles! 9 B52s flying 3 abreast in 3 flights could blanket an area 1000 feet wide and about 30 miles long! Or, 3,000 feet wide for nearly 10 miles. It was reported that many North Vietnamese soldiers went berserk during such bombings.

[edit on 1/30/2008 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
As I write this, John Edwards has dropped out of the Presidential race. Rudy Giuliani is expected to follow in just a matter of hours. I have to agree with Don when he says that Mike Huckabee will drop out after February 5th.

This leaves us with a de fact McCain-Romney ticket.

I'll stand on what I said before. The American people want to hear honest talk just now, and nobody is better placed to do that than John McCain. He has made noteable turn around since the disasterous Kennedy-McCain immigration bill. He has time and time again said, "I hear you" after he has modified his position.

that's how it will be from now on. Politicians will change their positions during a campaign to more accurately reflect what the voters want. They dars are gone when a candidate would hold the same position for a lifetime.

So, back to the question. How does McCain-Romney beat Clinton-Obama?



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 



Well they need to use the Republican fear of the name Clinton to bring the Republican party core supporter base to the base. At the moment I think that the Christian right will stay at home on election day. Expand the play book and ask the following question .

Find away to oppose tax rebates so they can be Mr fix it rather then have the wall beneath them once they take office.

What is the difference between having Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton and a monarchy ?

Focus on the Electoral College and aim to win the popular vote or at least keep it to a close margin. While this thread has been my US political education I'm still not an astute thinking like Don and Justin .


[edit on 30-1-2008 by xpert11]



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 

While this thread has been my US political education I'm still not an astute thinking like Don and Justin.


You are TOO modest, Mr X11



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Anyone with a pulse who saw tonight's CNN Republican debate will tell you that the GOP is too divided to make use of any rational strategy. McCain lit in to Romney tonight like he was off his meds or something. His attempt to drill in to the former government on SEMANTICs was lame and fruitless. Whoever advised McCain to do that needs to be fired. Twice.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:46 AM
link   
Assuming that McCain takes first place.
IF managed properly McCain could take the role of the elderly statesmen leaving the partisan slog to his VP pick. It not not like anti Clinton sentiment is hard to drum up. We have seen that moderates support McCain he may have to chose between capturing the middle ground and bringing the Christian right to the polls .

Here is the thing I have never heard of a party winning office if there core supporter base doesn't vote for them or if they don't capture the middle class or middle ground. In terms of the VP pick Romney stands a better chance of gaining the middle ground and Huckabee would bring the Christian right to the polls. This clearly shows the division that Justin is talking about.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Well just food for thought if anyone is crazy enough to keep another Republican in office after the train wreck thats pulling out now needs to be locked up and put under watch. The whole political 2 party system you guys have bought with your soul have turned this country inside out. And this goes for the Democratic wack jobs as well. Wake up guys and stop taking the ..."Red" &"Blue"..pills....



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by tsloan
 

Well just food for thought if anyone is crazy enough to keep another Republican in office after the train wreck that’s pulling out now needs to be locked up and put under watch. The whole political 2 party system you guys have bought with your soul have turned this country inside out. And this goes for the Democratic wack jobs as well. Wake up guys and stop taking the ..."Red" &"Blue"..pills . .


What are you smoking Mr tsloan? Read your American history. The US has never been anything but divided, if you exclude George Washington’s first election in 1789 and the “Era of Good Feelings” presidency of James Monroe. In both the 1816 and 1824 elections Monroe ran nearly uncontested. Monroe was (arguably) the last president to have fought in the Revolutionary War and was the last of the Founding Fathers to serve in that high office.

The pro and anti slavery argument caused the Civil War. 1861-1865. I have offered that war as a prime example of how to win a war and lose the peace. That struggle is still on-going. Which is why I repeatedly assert Obama CANNOT win in America in 2008. If he sits well as VP until 2016 - ie, knows his place - he would have a real chance then having allayed latent but potent white fears. That is the only way a black person can reasonably aspire to the top office in the land.

Q.
What do you think motivates the popular and fast growing urge to live in gated communities that really became a movement in the 1980s? How many black people do you see driving up to those (white) enclaves? Every gated community represents EXCLUSION and not INCLUSION. For my part, I hate’em. They are anti-American and should be outlawed and shut down. I'd like to see them given over to the homeless.

My free advice for the zealously religious: Is. 58:66ff. . . to let the oppressed go free . . Is it not [right] to divide your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into [your] house; when you see the naked, to cover him . . Jer. 22:3. Do justice and deliver the one who has been robbed . . [and] do not mistreat or do violence to the stranger, the orphan, or the widow . . Luke 12:33. "Sell your possessions and give [it] to charity . . "

[edit on 1/31/2008 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   
As you may have noted by now, the backlash against McCain has begun. Seems that a lot of pundits don't like his performance in last night's debate. That's more proof that that divide that Xpert11 was talking about.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


Q. What do you think motivates the popular and fast growing urge to live in gated communities that really became a movement in the 1980s? How many black people do you see driving up to those (white) enclaves? Every gated community represents EXCLUSION and not INCLUSION. For my part, I hate’em. They are anti-American and should be outlawed and shut down. I'd like to see them given over to the homeless.

Don,

$$$$$$$$$$ motivates everyone.....Republican and Democrat both of these parties have long left any voice of the people and have moved on to the smell of for sale by profit in big business. My gated community is just that...EXCLUSION...And I love it! But what has that to do with the fact if you keep putting a Republican and Democrat in office you are forever going to get the same 2 results..i.e.(def.insain). I don't vote (red) or (blue) cause I want to see true change. Not some B.S. that has been slung around for as long as I have been alive. The real reason African American moved to the "white" enclaves as you put it which I think is kinda racist if you think of it as "WHITE" instead of just plain "OVERPRICED DIRT" is cause they want what anyone who is dumb enough like me to get ripped off by this housing market is a damn home. Thats the real reason. They want a home. And they want one outside the city...Whats wrong with that?



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
And yes African American money spends the same as my cracker ole cash spends..So the fact the rich live in gated communtities don't mean to keep African Americans out....Thats retarded.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tsloan
 


If you look back thou this thread you will find discussions concerning the merits of a more representative political system and how it could apply to to the US. Otherwise listen to my podcast .

TKainZero I guess we should have acknowledged Rudy dropping out a bit more on this thread. At face value lesson the lesson is that during a long distance you have save some fuel in the tank for the end of the race. A more pointed view is that the minor battles in places like Iowa are a vital tool when it comes to building momentum. Candidates need to win some of the minor battles without expending to many resources .

Sorry that I didn't acknowledge your post earlier.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 

If you look back thou this thread you will find discussions concerning the merits of a more representative political system and how it could apply to the US.


I’m disgruntled by the fact Bush43 was rejected at the November, 2006 election but will continue in office - regardless - until January 20, 2009. That basically puts the US out of foreign affairs unless the issue can be resolved in the time remaining on Bush43s term. That means the US is “drifting” in the winds of chance around the world. Not a wise situation for the Wanna-be Numero Uno of the World.


TKainZero I guess we should have acknowledged Rudy dropping out a bit more on this thread. At face value lesson the lesson is that during a long distance you have save some fuel in the tank for the end of the race. A more pointed view is that the minor battles in places like Iowa are a vital tool when it comes to building momentum. Candidates need to win some of the minor battles without expending to many resources.


Dropping OUT. When did Rudy drop IN? Whoever calculated that strategy did him a great disservice. Political amateurs which leads me to believe it was his CURRENT wife. A hip chick but no savvy.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


Don by your logic Clinton mandate ran out in 1994 does the same logic not apply ?

There is no denying that Rudy was badly advised. I thought that his strategy stood at least a reasonable chance of success . Shows what I know . It pains me to say this but given that Rudy wasn't able to tell that he was getting bad advice it is probably just as well that he didn't get any further.

If I recall correctly Justin has been saying all a long that Rudy was being badly advised .

Super Tuesday falls on a Wednesday for me Super Wednesday just doesn't have the same ring to it does it ?



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 

Don by your logic Clinton mandate ran out in 1994 does the same logic not apply?


X11, you have caught me! Yes, by my logic, there would have been a special election for the presidency within 90 days.


There is no denying that Rudy was badly advised. I thought that his strategy stood at least a reasonable chance of success. Shows what I know.


Well, you have good company, Rudy himself for example.


It pains me to say this but given that Rudy wasn't able to tell that he was getting bad advice it is probably just as well that he didn't get any further. If I recall correctly Justin has been saying all a long that Rudy was being badly advised.


Yes he did say that. Several times. I wonder if those fellows (Rudy’s advisers) are now working for Mitt Romney?


Super Tuesday falls on a Wednesday for me Super Wednesday just doesn't have the same ring to it does it?


Familiarity! We humans tend to like what is familiar, but to be suspicious of that which is not.

There will be a publicity hiatus from Feb 5 until the late August Dem Convention in Denver. The Mile High City! I do hope the rarified air does not make the Dems do something silly.



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by tsloan
 

I don't vote (red) or (blue) cause I want to see true change. Not some B.S. that has been slung around for as long as I have been alive.


Ron Paul is your man. Trouble is, he polls about 3% of Republicans and less than 1% of Dems. Which ought to tell you how the majority regards his opinions. Eccentric is a kind word to label Ron Paul. Or quixotic. Aside: Ron Paul is tilting at windmills. 'Tilting at windmills' derives from Cervantes' novel 'Don Quixote' published in 1604 under the title “The Ingenious Knight of La Mancha.” The novel recounts the exploits of a would-be knight 'Don Quixote' and his loyal servant Sancho Panza. In The New York Times, April 1870: "They [Western Republicans] have not thus far had sufficient of an organization behind them to make their opposition to the Committee's bill anything more than tilting at windmills." End. See
www.phrases.org.uk...

About half the public does not vote. Perhaps many of them share your frustration. Maybe many think it does not matter who is in office as far as their lives are effected. Maybe both are right to some extent.


The real reason African Americans moved to the "white" enclaves as you put it which I think is kinda racist if you think of it as "WHITE" instead of just plain "OVERPRICED DIRT" is cause they want what anyone who is dumb enough like me to get ripped off by this housing market is a damn home. That’s the real reason. They want a home.


Uh, you misread me, Mr T. I have never said blacks moved INTO gated communities. As a matter of fact, the object of gated communities is to keep blacks OUT. Sure, in rare instances you will find a rich black in an otherwise all white gated community, but that is so rare I’d guess I could count them on one hand.


And yes African American money spends the same as my cracker ole cash spends .. So the fact the rich live in gated communities don't mean to keep African Americans out .... That’s retarded.


I dunno Mr Tsloan. The numbers do not lie. Life should not be a game of “let’s pretend.” And whoever said “ignorance is bliss?” Or “What you don’t know won’t hurt you?” Witty words but not words of wisdom.

[edit on 2/2/2008 by donwhite]







 
15
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join