Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[GOP Primaries] WI, MD, DC 4/3. Sponsored by cheese, crab cakes, and murder, respectively.

195969798100

Posts

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Paul Ryan seems to be angling for a VP spot.

    Of course he is, but I'm not sure they'll touch him with his Fuck the Poor budget hanging over their heads.

    Perhaps we should have a VP poll? Who we think is most likely to get the VP nod.

    Because if so I:

    Nominate Marco Rubio.

    Because never underestimate the GOP stupidity when it comes to trying to court minorities. This is the same party that thought Sarah Palin would let them get Hillary Clinton's female supporters.


    Suggestion for a new thread.

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    I hate when they talk about "the economy" as if

    - it is a thing
    - it, as a thing, does other things

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    I still think it'll be a Paul.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • HacksawHacksaw J Duggan Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    Harry Dresden on
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Paul Ryan seems to be angling for a VP spot.
    He has more power as far as fiscal policy as chair of the Budget Committee.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Paul Ryan seems to be angling for a VP spot.

    Of course he is, but I'm not sure they'll touch him with his Fuck the Poor budget hanging over their heads.

    Perhaps we should have a VP poll? Who we think is most likely to get the VP nod.

    Because if so I:

    Nominate Marco Rubio.

    Because never underestimate the GOP stupidity when it comes to trying to court minorities. This is the same party that thought Sarah Palin would let them get Hillary Clinton's female supporters.


    Suggestion for a new thread.

    I'd still say Susana Martinez, but not that confidently.

    tea-1.jpg
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    I wouldn't say curbstomping, that's something decisive. This is more like:

    Lh96QHG.png
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    I hate when they talk about "the economy" as if

    - it is a thing
    - it, as a thing, does other things

    The economy got me this job after they de-regulated the industry and let the market work.

    If things are goin' fine here then all you gotta do is recreate it, just on a larger scale.

    simple

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    I wouldn't say curbstomping, that's something decisive. This is more like:


    ...now somebody has to remake that scene in which Michael (Romney) is trying to fire Creed (Santorum) and Creed talks him out of it.

    KalTorak on
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    I wouldn't say curbstomping, that's something decisive. This is more like:


    It's amazing how well that sums up Romney's performance as the 'inevitable nominee'.

    Also, yes, the new thread should have a VP poll.

  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    Huntsman is up to 7.3% of the vote in D.C. with 43% reporting.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    Huntsman is up to 7.3% of the vote in D.C. with 43% reporting.

    Bet he's kicking himself now.

    Lh96QHG.png
  • SammyFSammyF Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    I wouldn't say curbstomping, that's something decisive. This is more like:


    It's amazing how well that sums up Romney's performance as the 'inevitable nominee'.

    I thought Romney was more about shooting at squirrels or rabbits.

    Small varmints, if you will.

    SammyF on
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    I still think it'll be a Paul.

    I think it's a long shot for either one, since they'd want to appeal to the base that doesn't care for Romney. I know the GOP has better drone voters than the dems do but Romney is probably one of the few things that could potentially cause a sizable chunk to stay home. Making matters worse for Romney is that there are already cases where the primary has left a bad taste in the mouths of GOP voters and it really doesn't matter who is to blame for that. Take VA for example, it's not his fault that Santorum and Gingrich failed to get on the ballot but people where still pissed that their choices were him and Paul.

    As for Rubio, I would think being the VP for Romney would be a death blow to any 2016 presidential aspirations. Even if Obama wins by a slim margin, it just going to taint one's political career nationally. One of two things will happen after 2012 if Romney loses. The party is either forced back to the center, at which point if you were the 2012 VP choice, you're going to be viewed as too conservative, but this outcome doesn't seem likely. The likely outcome is the party is going to sprint further to the right, at which point you get viewed as the running mate of the guy who wasn't conservative enough and ergo you weren't conservative enough either.

    With the above in mind, I'm willing to bet they pick Santorum because then it'll be easier to discard him during the 2016 primary and it will make the anti-Romney base happier for this year. If they don't go with him, they might not be able to appease the anti-Romney base and in 2016 they'll be fighting against the "it's his turn tradition" because anyone outside the rabid fundie base can see that the guy is a terrible candidate that will be crucified in a general presidential election and lose by a landslide.

  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    Santorum is toxic outside of the GOP. He is even worse the Palin in that regard.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    Santorum is toxic outside of the GOP. He is even worse the Palin in that regard.

    Maybe, if this campaign has proven anything it is that propaganda works. A man as toxic as Santorum was in 2008 loses to Obama by (on average) less than 10%. If the media decides to roll over for him in the general as much as they have in the primary for dramatic purposes the stain and the smell of Santorum will go unnoticed.

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • HacksawHacksaw J Duggan Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Agreed.

  • SicariiSicarii The Roose is Loose Registered User regular
    Malkor wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    I hate when they talk about "the economy" as if

    - it is a thing
    - it, as a thing, does other things

    The economy got me this job after they de-regulated the industry and let the market work.

    If things are goin' fine here then all you gotta do is recreate it, just on a larger scale.

    simple

    Yes, this worked so well last time we tried it and wasn't responsible for the complete breakdown of our economic system. Soooo Simple.

    gotsig.jpg
  • sportzboytjwsportzboytjw squeeeeeezzeeee some more tax breaks outRegistered User regular
    Romney reminds me of Kerry. Wishywashy, unlikeable, seemed to be entitled.

    Walkerdog on MTGO
    TylerJ on League of Legends (it's free and fun!)
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Agreed.

    Don't forget, "outspending his opponents pretty massively." Isn't it like a factor of 5 just with his SuperPACs?

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Boring7 wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Agreed.

    Don't forget, "outspending his opponents pretty massively." Isn't it like a factor of 5 just with his SuperPACs?

    It sure is fun watching Romney burning through his war chest before even getting to the general election. :twisted:

  • lonelyahavalonelyahava One day, I will be able to say to myself "I am beautiful and I am perfect just the way I am"Registered User regular
    Boring7 wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Agreed.

    Don't forget, "outspending his opponents pretty massively." Isn't it like a factor of 5 just with his SuperPACs?

    It sure is fun watching Romney burning through his war chest before even getting to the general election. :twisted:

    you think his war chest has a bottom to get to?

    you're optimistic!

    My Little Corner of the World || I am ravelried! || My Steam!
    You have to fight through some bad days, to earn the best days of your life.
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    Romney reminds me of Kerry. Wishywashy, unlikeable, seemed to be entitled.

    But he wants to end entitlements!

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    Well, Sarah Palin said today that the GOP nominee should pick Allen West as VP.

    Yes, this douchebag:

    200px-Allen_West,_Official_Portrait,_112th_Congress.jpg

    steam_sig.png
  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    Under what logic? "He's fully black, so the ticket would be half-black, and the Dem ticket is only a quarter-black?"

  • Mild ConfusionMild Confusion Smash All Things Registered User regular
    Sad thing is: That's probably not too far from the truth.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Boring7 wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Agreed.

    Don't forget, "outspending his opponents pretty massively." Isn't it like a factor of 5 just with his SuperPACs?

    It sure is fun watching Romney burning through his war chest before even getting to the general election. :twisted:

    you think his war chest has a bottom to get to?

    you're optimistic!

    No, it won't have any significant effect on the general. What it does is piss Romney & his investors off for having to burn truckloads of cash they were sure was an easy win for him.

  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    Really, this is Palin-Moon-Logic. Who the hell knows what she thinks. For all we know she could think 2+2=Purple.

    steam_sig.png
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Really, this is Palin-Moon-Logic. Who the hell knows what she thinks. For all we know she could think 2+2=Purple.

    That is a terrible insult to the moon.

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Well, in 2008 pretty much every state was winner-take-all, and Super Tuesday had far more states vote. Hard to draw parallels when the process has changed so much.

    Salvation122 on
    sig.png
  • RchanenRchanen Registered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Really, this is Palin-Moon-Logic. Who the hell knows what she thinks. For all we know she could think 2+2=Purple.

    That is a terrible insult to the moon.

    The moon is nowhere near as dense as Sarah Palin. 3.346 g/cm3 is peanuts compared to Sarah

    Toldo wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    Skinny guys fight till their burger. Screw debates lets have Barack Obama and Willard Romney rumble in the mofoing jungle.
    Obama punches Romney.
    "Okay, now wait a minute. You've had your turn. Let me have a turn. Wait a minute," Romney says.
    Obama punches Romney.
  • RchanenRchanen Registered User regular
    Boring7 wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »

    Rubio's off the table. He's running for president in the next general election, not this one.

    What better way to lay the groundwork? If Romney loses he becomes the front runner by default and unlike every other loser in the race he has a senate seat to go back to.

    You don't have to be the VP to lay groundwork. Romney's doing just fine without that.

    Is he?

    He's curbstomping the other candidates IIRC. The nomination is his to lose, which is very unlikely.

    If I remember correctly, McCain secured the nom in half the time back in 2008. If anything, Romney's only having an "easy" time because the rest of the field is absolutely terrible and he's perceived as being the least bad option.

    Agreed.

    Don't forget, "outspending his opponents pretty massively." Isn't it like a factor of 5 just with his SuperPACs?

    It sure is fun watching Romney burning through his war chest before even getting to the general election. :twisted:

    you think his war chest has a bottom to get to?

    you're optimistic!

    No, it won't have any significant effect on the general. What it does is piss Romney & his investors off for having to burn truckloads of cash they were sure was an easy win for him.

    Technically, should every dollar spent in the primary be one less to spend in the general. I mean contributions are pretty much unlimited now, so any money burnt comes off the total.


    Or am I wrong?

    Toldo wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    Skinny guys fight till their burger. Screw debates lets have Barack Obama and Willard Romney rumble in the mofoing jungle.
    Obama punches Romney.
    "Okay, now wait a minute. You've had your turn. Let me have a turn. Wait a minute," Romney says.
    Obama punches Romney.
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    You're wrong.

    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • HacksawHacksaw J Duggan Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Or rather, in this post Citizens United world, you're wrong.

  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    No, it was wrong before. Primary campaigns and presidential campaigns have different pots.

    In fact back when you had contributor maximums this was a decent deal because it's not like you're going to ever tap out the rich with a measely few grand twice where you could in a brutal campaign run them dry in a PAC blowing millions to win some flyover state that won't matter at all in the presidential.

    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • RchanenRchanen Registered User regular
    No, it was wrong before. Primary campaigns and presidential campaigns have different pots.

    In fact back when you had contributor maximums this was a decent deal because it's not like you're going to ever tap out the rich with a measely few grand twice where you could in a brutal campaign run them dry in a PAC blowing millions to win some flyover state that won't matter at all in the presidential.

    So wouldn't that mean that all this spending is now bad for Romney? What am I missing?

    Toldo wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    Skinny guys fight till their burger. Screw debates lets have Barack Obama and Willard Romney rumble in the mofoing jungle.
    Obama punches Romney.
    "Okay, now wait a minute. You've had your turn. Let me have a turn. Wait a minute," Romney says.
    Obama punches Romney.
Sign In or Register to comment.