[JLOGIC]

I'm sure you guys will be happy to know that I did not buy Perry stock Mainly because I dislike him strongly (ok, mainly because the market was very shallow).

[JLOGIC]

In other news, the time may have come to buy Romney. I have thought the whole time that if ANY viable candidate emerged, they would beat Romney, cuz ZOMG HES A MORMON! That said, if the most viable alternative is Newt... I can't really see Romney losing at this point.

[awm]

 cherdano, on 2011-November-19, 08:47, said:

I think you are wrong, he is not one of them. Newt is one of the not that smart people that I would not want to see running the country.

Seriously, I understand that Newt got the reputation of being an intellectual politicians, and an ideas guy, twenty years ago. I have started following US politics more closely maybe 5-8 years ago. I haven't seen him say something that requires being smart or intellectual yet.

(The smart politician in the Republican field is Huntsman, from what I know.)

It's not that Newt takes positions that you might find particularly intelligent (or even intelligible, since he has switched positions on things from Libya to the Ryan budget to the individual mandate, sometimes over very short periods).

It's that unlike the rest of the Republican field, he actually knows something about policy. He's not likely to stumble over where Libya is (as Herman Cain did recently) or whether the HPV vaccine causes autism (as Michelle Bachmann did) or what the names are of the federal agencies he wants to eliminate (as Rick Perry did). He'll be able to hold his own in a debate against Barack Obama (even if some of his statements won't hold water when the fact-checkers get to them, or won't seem consistent with things he has said previously in public life).

On the other hand, his lack of ethics seems like a major negative. After all, he was drummed out of the speakership for ethics violations. He basically makes his money by scamming people into paying him for "Newt facetime." And his personal life doesn't just involve two divorces; they are two really ugly divorces of wives having serious health issues (and who he was already cheating on). Then again, it's not totally clear the Republican base cares about things like this (which is odd given their focus on "family values" and mistrust of politicians in general).

[kenberg]

Has it come to this? "Knows where Libya is" puts a candidate at the front of the pack?

Kathleen Parker had a sort of graveyard humor column about this today:

http://www.washingto...gwZN_story.html


This is all very depressing.

[hrothgar]

 cherdano, on 2011-November-19, 08:47, said:

The smart politician in the Republican field is Huntsman, from what I know.

FWIW, I think that Romney has a decent head on his shoulders as well.
Unfortunately, the guy has absolutely no political center, and from what I call tell, no shame.

The flip flops that he has performed are incredible.
And, sadly for Romney, he doesn't have the political skills to hide what he's doing.

I am still trying to figure out what I think will happen with the Republicans.
If I had to place and kind of bet, I'd say "Brokered Convention" at which point in time anything is possible.

I wouldn't be surprised to see someone like Huckabee or Christie getting drafted.

[Mbodell]

FWIW I think Romney is still the most likely next president. I'd put it at Romney 48%, Obama 40%, anyone else 12%.

[mike777]

intrade has it at about 51% Obama, 37% Romney, 12% anyone else.

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2011-November-10, 16:52, said:

perry is done, i hope... the only man running who understands the job and has the intellectual wherewithal to compete is newt...

Quote

"The Congressional Budget Office is a reactionary socialist institution which does not believe in economic growth, does not believe in innovation and does not believe in data that it has not internally generated."

Newt Gingrich

Quote

I think if you parse that phrase carefully, he got one out of three right...I do agree it is an institution. If you're playing baseball, that's a decent batting average.

Douglas Holtz-Eakins

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2011-November-10, 16:52, said:

perry is done, i hope... the only man running who understands the job and has the intellectual wherewithal to compete is newt.

Quote

I’ve tried for years to have a very simple model. Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they would have pride in the schools, they’d begin the process of rising.

Newt Gingrich

[luke warm]

"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." - barack obama

"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries." - barack obama

"I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right." - barack obama... just for the hell of it, put in some right other than "to bear arms" and reread it

and during one of his less politically correct moments, concerning his bowling "No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something."

i'll gladly match you quote for quote

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2011-November-22, 13:06, said:

"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." - barack obama

"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries." - barack obama

"I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right." - barack obama... just for the hell of it, put in some right other than "to bear arms" and reread it

and during one of his less politically correct moments, concerning his bowling "No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something."

i'll gladly match you quote for quote

I am happy to admit that President Obama has made the occasional gaffe.
(I'm shocked that you did't include his famous "57 states" quote. Isn't this the favorite trope of the right wing noise machine?)

Here's the thing... There is a major difference between fumbling some words and completely misguided policies.

Let's look at the examples you provided:

1. Obama used the world Intercontinental Railroad rather than transcontinental
2. Not sure what he was trying to say. I'd certainly agree that the Middle East has been *****ed up for centuries.
3. Hell of a lot of constitutional scholars would agree with Obama's position. (Historically, the right to bear arms hasn't been viewed as an individual right. However, lets pretend that it is... My understand is that the Surpreme Court accepts that State and Local governments can legally restrict individuals from purchaisng fully automatic weapons, hand grenades, large magazines, etc.)
4. Yeap, he acted like an asshole. (I'm surprised that this don't draw you more towards the president)

I am more than happy to contrast these with Newt's comment where the entire premise is idiotic.
There is a basic categorical difference here.

Please understand, I'm not surprised that this kind of stuff confuses you, nor that you'd confuse Newt's bombastic bluster with intelligence...
Newt goes out of his way to target low information, southern fried pieces of ***** like you.

In some ways, its good to see that he's doing well capturing his target audience.

[hrothgar]

delete

[luke warm]

 hrothgar, on 2011-November-22, 13:21, said:

There is a major difference between fumbling some words and completely misguided policies.

it's fun watching idiots like you (although there aren't many of them) try to defend obama... i'm surprised you were confused about the middle east quote, it was the kind of dumbass thing one would expect you to grasp immediately

obama has plenty of policy gaffes, apart from the "errors" he makes (when the teleprompter is on the blink)... NAFTA? Poland missile shield? stimulus waste (any count on the shovel ready jobs?)? proclaim solidarity with the feces-throwing, raping, OWS movement (although that might change now that they're saying prayers for the white house shooter)?

Quote

Hell of a lot of constitutional scholars would agree with Obama's position. (Historically, the right to bear arms hasn't been viewed as an individual right. However, lets pretend that it is... My understand is that the Surpreme [sic] Court accepts that State and Local governments can legally restrict individuals from purchaisng [sic] fully automatic weapons, hand grenades, large magazines, etc.)

hell of a lot wouldn't, also... as i suggested, throw in the right to peacefully assemble, or practice your religion, or any number of other rights and reread that ridiculous quote

[jonottawa]

Barry's been a disappointment. I won't vote for him again (but I was for Hillary anyway, didn't expect him to deliver. Still, things would be worse under President McCain and Vice-President Palin.)

Only Repugs I'd vote for are Paul and Huntsman. Romney's dishonest Obama ad precludes him from being president.

The important election was in 2000; a few of us knew it at the time. Now we're just fighting over who gets to be captain of the Titanic.

[jonottawa]

Watching the repug national security debate.

If you think perry's bad, apparently mitt doesn't even know his first name (it's willard btw.)

[jdeegan]

 mike777, on 2011-November-20, 17:02, said:

intrade has it at about 51% Obama, 37% Romney, 12% anyone else.

Intrade sounds about right, imo. Trouble is with the actual election almost a year away, it's really hard to guess who will win. Gingrich clobbered the Republican field in last night's foreign policy debate - even the commentators said as much. However, he can self-destruct at any time.
Imho, Obama can win easily if he campaigns with an aggressive but plausible sounding plan to reduce unemployment. He needs to pretend he is FDR and start advocating some extensive new programs. This recession is unlike past ones. Sluggish employment gains are, at least in part, caused by some fundamental structural shifts in the economy. How many home foreclosures, half empty shopping centers, and poor vehicle sales years do you have to see to get that?

[Mbodell]

I'm a little more pessimistic than intrade about Obama's chances because the election isn't going to be for another year. If it were held now, I'd like those odds. I expect the economy will be going in a worse direction (combination of fundamentals, europe, roll back of stimulus and political gridlock, continued pain at the state level) for the next year and that this will hurt Obama (rightly or wrongly).

[JLOGIC]

 Mbodell, on 2011-November-23, 15:50, said:

I'm a little more pessimistic than intrade about Obama's chances because the election isn't going to be for another year. If it were held now, I'd like those odds. I expect the economy will be going in a worse direction (combination of fundamentals, europe, roll back of stimulus and political gridlock, continued pain at the state level) for the next year and that this will hurt Obama (rightly or wrongly).

You can bet on the republican candidate to win fwiw. Republicans now 46.8 % (which is weird...I guess it's possible that someone runs as a third party and has ~2% to win or something? lol).

[Aberlour10]

Compared to how these all republican candidates are going to act in foreign issues seems GWB to be a choirboy. ;-)

[phil_20686]

Obama will win easily if the economy starts to recover nicely. If the economy tanks he will lose. If it goes on much as now there will be a close race.

There is an incredibly large penalty among swing voters for being in charge when the economy is tanking. Since the obama administration doesnt seem to have a lot in hand in terms of public opinion, he has nothing to spare.

Having said that, in a surprising turn of events the US economy might be rebounding. Latest numbers were way above estimates, and the consensus forecast for Q4 growth is now 3% annualised according to JP Morgan. Still, economic forecasting makes astrologers look good, so who knows what will happen.