Republican Nominees

ahlycotc wrote:

SBSP wrote:Maybe he means faith as in loyalty?

That doesn't make sense.

Shh.

Lus Suarez wrote:Faith is important, how else would you get elected?

Just came out as something to do with religion.

NZG wrote:

Lus Suarez wrote:Faith is important, how else would you get elected?

Just came out as something to do with religion.

That was his point. He is saying religion is important in American politics.

ahlycotc wrote:

NZG wrote:

Just came out as something to do with religion.

That was his point. He is saying religion is important in American politics.

Unfortunately.

ahlycotc wrote:

NZG wrote:

Just came out as something to do with religion.

That was his point. He is saying religion is important in American politics.

yeah, i read his post wrong.

ilJuventino wrote:

ahlycotc wrote:

That was his point. He is saying religion is important in American politics.

Unfortunately.

Sto di accordo.

recorded the end of the debate earlier and watched it now...entertaining

Look forward to the next.

ahlycotc wrote:Jon Huntsman has stepped out of the race and will instead endorse Mitt Romney.

Which means absolutely nothing, luckily. Can't be serious about any of these candidates, they are all so very bad.

Jon Huntsman seemed like a smart man, but i guess didn't put in the funds to get noticed enough, which i suppose is reasonable by him that it wasn't his year. He'll be back in 2016 or 2020, whatever works out.

Colbert could have been interesting, he probably couldn't take the nomination but could shed some light on how ridiculous this whole thing is. One thing that does make me sick is how much money they are spending on talking about how much money needs to be saved and cut from spending, i get it's a big country and they need to start early but they could easily solve poverty in an African nation or two with the money being put towards promotion and campaigning .

For the sake of the world and USA, it has to be a failed republican year, not that Obama didn't spend like crazy as well, but the things that are set in motion need to work out else they will hurt the economy even more if they are halted and the money put towards the projects are lost.

I think Colbert threatening to run has scarred Huntsmen out of the race.

Muhkoo wrote:Which means absolutely nothing, luckily. Can't be serious about any of these candidates, they are all so very bad.

No.

Muhkoo wrote:Jon Huntsman seemed like a smart man, but i guess didn't put in the funds to get noticed enough, which i suppose is reasonable by him that it wasn't his year. He'll be back in 2016 or 2020, whatever works out.

Muhkoo wrote:Colbert could have been interesting, he probably couldn't take the nomination but could shed some light on how ridiculous this whole thing is. One thing that does make me sick is how much money they are spending on talking about how much money needs to be saved and cut from spending, i get it's a big country and they need to start early but they could easily solve poverty in an African nation or two with the money being put towards promotion and campaigning .

doesn't make sense

also you want the campaign donations to go to Africa? What about the campaign?

Muhkoo wrote:For the sake of the world and USA, it has to be a failed republican year, not that Obama didn't spend like crazy as well, but the things that are set in motion need to work out else they will hurt the economy even more if they are halted and the money put towards the projects are lost.

So you want more of the same? What if it doesn't work out as it's not working out now?

halted projects will not hurt the economy, and if the right changes are made it will be much better in the future.

---

have you heard Ron Paul speak? What do you disagree with him over?

1) Rick Perry pulls out. Let's see who he supports for the nomination. Sources are saying he will support Newt Gingrich.
2) Debate tonight
3) After an official count, Santorum is announced the winner of the Iowa caucus, not Romney. He won by 34 votes.
4) Polls show Romney leading in South Carolina and Gingrich in a close 2nd.

sweet its on TV

I'm glad I just started watching the debates, I can't imagine what sort of speaking time Paul would have got in the beginning; the less people, the better.

Now with Perry dropping out it's should be even better

El_indian wrote:sweet its on TV

I'm glad I just started watching the debates, I can't imagine what sort of speaking time Paul would have got in the beginning; the less people, the better.

Now with Perry dropping out it's should be even better

Paul was virtually ignored in the 2008 debates.

El_indian wrote:sweet its on TV

I'm glad I just started watching the debates, I can't imagine what sort of speaking time Paul would have got in the beginning; the less people, the better.

Now with Perry dropping out it's should be even better

He got even less time back then. At least now, the media mentions him a bit more, but it's still not enough. Even if it was just three candidates left, Ron Paul would still get less time than the others. The would just let the others talk more and give them more questions.

Today is CNN so hopefully the questions won't be phrased as personal attacks and he will be more involved.....hopefully

straight into Newt

Capitalism does not equate to freedom.

You know... Santorum is not so bad on the economy.

Damn it, I thought it started at 9pm. Just starting to watch.

ahlycotc wrote:Damn it, I thought it started at 9pm. Just starting to watch.

me too. Link?

Fuck this Federal v State issue.

Lu❣s Suarez wrote:

ahlycotc wrote:Damn it, I thought it started at 9pm. Just starting to watch.

me too. Link?

Go to CNN.com

ahlycotc wrote:Fuck this Federal v State issue.

what's your opinion?

I just don't like the idea of radical reduce of regulation, and radical decrease in taxes...

Some people need to be taxed.

Some people need to be taxed, some people that are not taxed enough.

Some people need to be taxed less.

Romney is pissing me the fuck off.

He keeps making attacks against the Democrats, how they are the party of government control.

"We are right."

What the fuck is wrong with him?

It's a bit hypocritical when you see government officials talking about how corrupt and inefficient government is. You are part of the problem.

ahlycotc wrote:It's a bit hypocritical when you see government officials talking about how corrupt and inefficient government is. You are part of the problem.

he thinks he's got the republican party vote done

moving onto Obama already.

ahlycotc wrote:It's a bit hypocritical when you see government officials talking about how corrupt and inefficient government is. You are part of the problem.

Yeah, really.

Frankly I am liking Santorum and Paul so much more in this debate.

The mood was all good until Santorum starting attacking Romney.

ahlycotc wrote:The mood was all good until Santorum starting attacking Romney.

Actually the mood was all good until Romney started attacking the Democrats as if they were fascists.