Bachmann wins Iowa Straw Poll!, page 12

Pages: << 9 10 11 12 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 15 times

reply posted on 15-8-2011 @ 09:08 PM by ren1999

Here is my prediction.

Ron Paul will be pushed out and ignored by the corporate elite.

Perry will be the Presidential candidate.
Bachmann will be the Vice Presidential candidate.

All of you remember my prediction. Because it will happen.

reply posted on 15-8-2011 @ 09:38 PM by highpriestess

Originally posted by ren1999
Here is my prediction.

Ron Paul will be pushed out and ignored by the corporate elite.

Perry will be the Presidential candidate.
Bachmann will be the Vice Presidential candidate.

All of you remember my prediction. Because it will happen.

Paul could only be edged out as running for the Republican candidate. he can still run Independent regardless, this was secured when he announced he would not seek his House seat in the next election.

Now, I will say that i think you are right about Perry ending up the Republican candidate, and I could be wrong on this little prediction, but i don't think he would have Bachmann as a VP. As seen by Palin, running with a woman is never a good idea in this day and age - as much as i HATE to admit it, we still live in a male dominated society, and it is just too easy to make women look bad in a political race. Just the corndog picture alone, as funny as it is, is damaging on a subliminal level - look how easily she became a joke (not just any kind of joke either, but a beavis and butthead type joke for the entertainment of MEN), just eating freakin' dinner.

Plus, i think Perry is way too "good ole boy" to let "some broad" run with him.

BUT - i guess only time will tell, we will see....

edit on 15-8-2011 by highpriestess because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-8-2011 @ 08:33 AM by ren1999

Yeah. She suckin' on that large corn dog was hilarious!

Perhaps she won't be VP. We'll see.

reply posted on 16-8-2011 @ 09:40 AM by mishigas

reply to post by Gorman91

Pawlenty quit, and most of his supporters wont join bachmann because she's nucking futs. Ergo they might join Paul.

And then again they might join Herman Cain or Rick Santorum.

reply posted on 16-8-2011 @ 09:45 AM by mishigas

Bachmann will not accept VP. She's in it for the win.

reply posted on 16-8-2011 @ 10:35 AM by Gorman91

reply to post by mishigas

Both are underground and not very known.

Ron Paul came in second. Traditionally, in a 3 way fight, you pick your strongest that's not your enemy when your guy drops.

reply posted on 17-8-2011 @ 01:27 PM by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by e11888
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

Paul is actually for cutting the REAL problem. The Wars. Could you imagine what could be done if we werent spending trillions a year on war?

Oh, I absolutely could imagine it. And you know what, I wish I could live in this little bubble where I only ever see the tiny fraction of a politician's platform that I like. It would make voting a heck of a lot easier. Unfortunately I prefer to be informed before I go to the polls.

If ending the wars were all Ron Paul were talking about doing, then he might be a worthy candidate for me. Sadly, that's not the case.

See this is another problem with American voters. There are people that will only vote for one party. If someone came along that could fix all the problems and he/she was a republican democrats still wouldnt vote for them. Its this tribal crap that people feel that their "team" is more important than the welfare of the country. "Im not voting for so and so because hes a democrat" and then insert bullcrap reasons why all democrats are bad. You people need to understand that THE COUNTRY is more important than your juvenile tribal war 'i vote for my own team' mentality.

The reason I'm not going to vote for a Republican isn't because of "tribal politics." I'm not going to vote for a Republican because absolutely none of them stand on a platform that I wish to support.

See, this is another problem in our system - fellows like yourself who assume that partisanship is somehow "bad." I suppose uninformed partisanship is, but well, ignorance is always bad no matter the form it takes. But the truth is, if you know a party's platform, then you already know a lot about the candidates. After all, politicians join the party that they feel the most ideological ties to. The problem you present is creating the illusion of this large number of "swing voters." This distorts our political system greatly and stifles any actual progress in any direction, as each candidate tries to cater towards the mediocre. The truth is, you and the rest of the "undecideds," "swing voters," and "independents" have already made up your minds like the rest of us, you just want to be a hipster. The small minority who really are swing voters are generally morons who would vote for a cabbage if it's the last candidate they see before walking into a booth.

You will never admit to it but you know damn well Im telling the truth. We can sit here and argue about public school funding or whatever other issue you deem important but the fact is the majority of our spending is done through needless war. There is no other person running for president that wants to bring every single one of our troops home day one. Those are facts. Like it or not. And its enough for every single one of you, democrat or republican, to vote for Ron Paul.
edit on 14-8-2011 by e11888 because: (no reason given)

And as I've said - repeatedly, the the paultopians apparently can't hear it - that's his strongest position.

However, I'd like our guys to have something to come home to. And my solid belief is that if Ron Paul becomes the guy in charge, our troops would be better off becoming citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

reply posted on 17-8-2011 @ 11:48 PM by 27jd

Bachmann, and Perry are dead in the water against Obama. They have so many skeletons in their closets, and soundbites that they'll be trashed out of the gate. They're already being accused of being dominionists (promoting Sharia law, for Christians)..

With Tim Pawlenty out of the presidential race, it is now fairly clear that the GOP candidate will either be Mitt Romney or someone who makes George W. Bush look like Tom Paine. Of the three most plausible candidates for the Republican nomination, two are deeply associated with a theocratic strain of Christian fundamentalism known as Dominionism. If you want to understand Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, understanding Dominionism isn’t optional.

Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an influence on religious-right education and political organizing. But because it seems so outré, getting ordinary people to take it seriously can be difficult. Most writers, myself included, who explore it have been called paranoid. In a contemptuous 2006 First Things review of several books, including Kevin Phillips’ American Theocracy, and my own Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, conservative columnist Ross Douthat wrote, “the fear of theocracy has become a defining panic of the Bush era.”

www.thedailybeast.com...