You've completely loost me.

12/11/2011 10:47:46 PM

Quote :

"In his 2nd election when he lost, it was 50 / 41 / 6, for Regan, Carter, and the independent. Obama won in 2008 with 52.9% / 45.7%"

Quote :

"Is it too much to ask a college-educated person to know the difference "

I suppose not.

12/12/2011 9:16:52 AM

Watch link for huntsman-gingrich debate:

4pm Dec 12

http://www.jon2012.com/livestream

12/12/2011 10:46:41 AM

Quote :

"Who'd the recession end for? Bankers and bureaucrats?"

If there's a bright(?) side, Washington DC and the bureaucratic machinery is about to be scourged in the upcoming budgets. States and local governments are already bleeding.

12/12/2011 3:44:15 PM

^^ anybody watch it? i was gonna check it out, but didn't realize it was at 4pm. debating whether to try to find it online

12/12/2011 8:24:27 PM

does this link go to the right place?

http://www.c-span.org/Events/Huntsman-Gingrich-Debate-Natl-Security-Issues/10737426215/

1 hr 20 min

It's supposed to be a bore.

12/12/2011 8:50:42 PM

cool, there was no video posted yet there earlier

12/12/2011 8:53:43 PM

no, i started watching it from the start. navigate around on c-span, you should be able to get it.

12/12/2011 8:55:14 PM

it's the right link. i was just saying i looked at that link earlier when i was googling, and they hadn't yet posted the video

12/12/2011 9:02:59 PM

oh ok.

I'm finding it to be some good background sound for spreadsheet work

This is really really a turn for the better IMO. It's something sane from the GOP.

Foreign policy they're very realistic, although pro- the current course.
Not so sure about their domestic policies
oh yeah, they agree on almost everything

12/12/2011 9:43:57 PM

Quote :

"Who'd the recession end for? Bankers and bureaucrats?"

It ended for the United States, according to the private entity charged with determining these matters, the National Bureau of Economic Research; about a year and a quarter ago, its Business Cycle Dating Committee determined that the recession had ended about a year and a quarter earlier, even though the economy wasn't rocketing in its recovery and unemployment was still rather high (employment is a lagging indicator relative to economic output, the primary determinant of recessions): http://www.nber.org/cycles/sept2010.html

12/12/2011 9:47:21 PM

just finished watching it. it was good, i enjoyed watching it. regardless of party or candidate, i wish much more of political discourse in this country was in this style. very substantive

12/13/2011 12:04:06 AM

Don't bother lewisj. Some people think "Recession" is strictly a colloquial term that means "The economy isn't good"

12/13/2011 3:17:25 PM

My opinion is solidifying that Huntsman and Paul are the only 2 candidates in the lineup that are any good.

All of the others are pond scum. Every last one.

1/9/2012 11:41:59 PM

Here's another thing:

Huntsman is being somewhat anti-anti-gay. He's not playing the game of pandering to the far right. I think he's going to loose because of it, and it's just one more reason this cancer of radical conservatism needs to be done away with.

1/10/2012 3:15:33 PM

in sc he loses to colbert, 4% to 5%.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71283.html

1/10/2012 3:29:24 PM

That reaffirms what we already know about the conservatives in SC.

[Edited on January 10, 2012 at 3:35 PM. Reason : .]

1/10/2012 3:34:53 PM

^^^Anybody who supports the NDAA simply needs to shut up about Live Free or Die.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnBK3gM7ygM&feature=youtu.be

1/10/2012 3:37:31 PM

^

[Edited on January 10, 2012 at 4:24 PM. Reason : before you say it, i get the lose thing]

1/10/2012 4:22:58 PM

So can Huntsman survive a third place finish?

1/10/2012 7:36:17 PM

Prolly not.

I think Huntsman will finish 2nd in NH with about 20% of the vote.

1/10/2012 7:46:33 PM

CNN is calling it Romney, Paul, Huntsman

1/10/2012 8:27:47 PM

BBC:

Romney 35%
Paul 25%
Huntsman 17%
Gingrich 10%
Santorum 10%
Perry 1%

1/10/2012 9:01:14 PM

Perry just needs to give up

1/10/2012 9:09:11 PM

If he stays in tho, he can help Romney in SC by splitting the everybody else vote.

1/10/2012 9:10:36 PM

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/huntsman-to-drop-out-of-gop-race/

Okay, all of you Jon Huntsman supporters, it's time to make a choice: Do you want to support a candidate who has had and will have to apologize for his record during this Presidential Election, or do you want someone who has been a life-long conservative and protector of liberty? Ron Paul is the answer to the disease that is Obama Politics in Washington, not another Establishment Republican.

1/15/2012 10:03:24 PM

Gary Johnson for president.

1/15/2012 10:06:35 PM

^^ I will prob vote for him in the primary, now that Huntsman is out. I prob wouldn't vote for him in the general even if he somehow got the nomination (which, of course, will never ever happen).

^ prob vote Gary Johnson in the general if he gets the (L) nomination and is on the ballot in FL. Otherwise, I'll just sit home again.

1/15/2012 10:22:10 PM

Quote :

"Obama Politics in Washington"

1/15/2012 10:45:03 PM

I am curious if Huntsman will be getting a spot in the Romney (supposing he wins) administration. Perhaps going back to China or even the VP spot?

1/15/2012 10:46:57 PM

VP? You have gotta be fucking high. You think there's even the faintest chance of a bi-Mormon GOP Presidential ticket?

[Edited on January 15, 2012 at 11:00 PM. Reason : ]

1/15/2012 11:00:08 PM

^^Sec of state is the highest he could go under a Romney administration, if even that.

1/15/2012 11:08:27 PM

^^ Haha..I think it would be hilarious.

1/15/2012 11:17:39 PM

1/16/2012 12:26:11 AM

Huntsman was the only person in the republican field I would have voted for. Now that he's out, I feel pretty confident in saying that I will not be voting for a Republican for President in 2012.

1/16/2012 2:46:26 AM

^ agree

1/16/2012 2:52:15 AM

thirded, as mentioned above

1/16/2012 2:56:14 AM

I don't understand how someone who likes Huntsman would not like Romney roughly equally.

How, exactly, would their Presidencies differ?

I'm not aware of any meaningful ideological difference, but even if there were, why would you think they would govern differently?

I certainly understand not liking Romney. And, I can understand some draw to Huntsman on a personal level. But to me they seem like exactly the same political creature. What gives with Huntsman-love and Romney-hate?

[Edited on January 16, 2012 at 4:02 AM. Reason : a]

1/16/2012 4:00:40 AM

Quote :

"VP? You have gotta be fucking high. You think there's even the faintest chance of a bi-Mormon GOP Presidential ticket?"

c'mon we all know how nice and friendly and all-American the Mormons are, Parker & Stone showed us how

I could imagine Romney trying to use the perceptions of moderation toward himself and Huntsman to mount an effective charge against Obama, and as long as the electorate remains ignorant of the reality he has a fair shot at winning with that combination.

Then again, if Ron Paul drops out, joins the Libertarian race, wins the nomination, and makes Gary Johnson his running-mate, I could imagine them working like Perot did back in the '90s, possibly even giving Obama the win without a popular majority.

1/16/2012 4:07:16 AM

Let's see what one of those comparison sites has to say: http://2012.candidate-comparison.org/?compare=Huntsman&vs=Romney

Huntsman is more conservative on abortion, even going so far as to support a Pro-Life Amendment to ban abortion across the nation (but he did refuse to sign a pledge to appoint only pro-life Cabinet members and stop Federal funding of abortions); Romney, meanwhile, would prefer the pre-Roe standard of state-level legislation, although he personally opposes abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or threats to the mother's life, and he was previously pro-choice.
(For the record, the only notable way in which Obama is even slightly pro-life is his non-opposition to state-level restrictions on intact dilation and extraction, a.k.a. "partial-birth abortion," late in the term; he has, however, signed executive orders noting that his administration will follow the spirit of the Hyde Amendment in outlawing Federal funding of abortion, even though he has opposed the amendment itself.)

Romney is more hawkish on Afghanistan, wanting to slowly withdraw commitments at the direction of the top brass, while Huntsman wants to pull the troops out immediately; Huntsman has criticized Obama for not showing enough leadership in his attempt to close down Guantánamo, while Romney has criticized Obama for trying to close it down in the first place.
(Obama is somewhere between the two, accelerating the withdrawal from Afghanistan.)

Huntsman has a more drastic plan for reducing taxes and reorganizing government, including a greater willingness to cut the military budget and support for a balanced-budget amendment; Romney has a slightly more realistic approach, including recognition that there is no reasonable way to eliminate the deficit by the end of 2016.
(Obama has expressed support for some government cuts but insists on various tax increases to near Clinton-era levels, better than either Romney or Huntsman in reducing the deficit but still not a realistic plan to tackle the debt.)

Huntsman is staunchly pro-gun, while Romney has in the past supported some gun-control legislation, including the Brady Act.
(Obama has generally been in favor of gun control at all levels of government, but he has followed the spirit of the Second Amendment, as the Supreme Court has recently and correctly re-interpreted it; he would like to re-instate the Assault Weapons Ban, and he has changed the position of the United States on the U.N. treaty on small arms trade from strong opposition to support for the consensus, but IIRC the only effective action he has taken has been an expansion of gun rights, allowing loaded firearms into national parks in accordance with state regulations.)

Huntsman considers the legalization of marijuana a state issue (and opposed its legalization as Governor of Utah), while Romney opposes it entirely.
(Obama also opposes the legalization of marijuana, but at least at first let up on state-level efforts to legalize it.)

Huntsman supports same-sex civil unions but not same-sex marriage; Romney supports a Federal Marriage Amendment but also state-level ENDA, and he did not attempt to thwart the intent of the court-ordered legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts during his term as Governor.
(Obama supported same-sex marriage as an Illinois State Senator but now personally opposes it on a national level, believing it to be primarily a state matter, and as part of that he opposes DOMA; he supports civil unions with all of the rights of marriage and also a trans-inclusive ENDA, although he hasn't yet endorsed SNDA but does believe that teaching about same-sex couples in schools is okay and sexual orientation is not a choice. He considered the addition of sexual orientation and gender identity to Federal hate-crime law and the repeal of DADT to be highlights of his administration.)

I could go on, but there are some differences between them and also the guy they'd run against in the general; Huntsman has done a better job of giving off the "moderate" vibe (out of proportion to any actual moderation) and is generally more libertarian than Romney.

1/16/2012 5:06:16 AM

That's some gnat-straining right there.

1/16/2012 5:29:03 AM

Some of you people need to get over yourselves and go research what Ron Paul stands for.

1/16/2012 8:04:18 AM

^^ there are the differences posted above, and others. A lot of it, though, isn't what they think so much as how they think.

^ I think most everyone on this forum know what he stands for.

I like what he stands for; I find him specifically to be likeable, but a wingnut.

1/16/2012 9:39:27 AM

Quote :

"GrumpyGOP All American 16013 Posts user info edit post Huntsman was the only person in the republican field I would have voted for. Now that he's out, I feel pretty confident in saying that I will not be voting for a Republican for President in 2012. 1/16/2012 2:46:26 AM InsultMaster Veteran 100 Posts user info edit post ^ agree 1/16/2012 2:52:15 AM theDuke866 Skipper 45906 Posts user info edit post thirded, as mentioned above"

welcome to obama's 2nd term!

1/16/2012 9:58:28 AM

Don't blame us for being discerning and reasonable. Blame the GOP and its primary voters for actively shunning any candidate worth a shit. Furthermore, the GOP has clearly made a calculation that there are more votes to be gained by courting the alliances of douchebags out in the wings (minus the libertarian wing)--they have decided that they can do without the pragmatists and independents, so you'll have to forgive me if my attitude is "fuck 'em", when that's been their attitude towards me for many years.

1/16/2012 10:07:46 AM

not blaming you. everyone is entitled to their own opinion and vote.

I'd rather see Romney in office than Obama though, even if he isn't the ideal candidate.

1/16/2012 10:37:28 AM

I would also prefer Romney, but I resolved a while back to not vote anymore for people that I don't like. If they aren't at least positive on a -10 to +10 scale, then I won't vote for them.

...particularly in this case, where I find Obama to be competent, just not cut from the same ideological cloth as I am--and furthermore, already 1 term in, so that if he were to be reelected, at least there would be another shot at a GOP candidate that I really agree with in 2016, rather than 2020 at the earliest.

1/16/2012 10:54:04 AM

^is the damage obama could do with 4 more years worth it?

1/16/2012 3:31:19 PM

these people saying "they would have voted for huntsman as the only repub, but now i'll be forced to vote democrat derp" is the same as saying: "i would have voted for john edwards, but barack obama got the nomination and therefore i am forced to vote republican"

1/16/2012 3:51:33 PM

I think in an Obama (D), Romney (R), Johnson (L) race, that Ls do the best they ever have on a national level. And if the 2016 situation Duke describes happens, hopefully the Rs would see that as a hint that they need to co-opt some of the more reasonable parts of the L platform.

1/16/2012 3:52:36 PM