Official GOP Convention thread

[Billy Costigan]

Don't know bout p90x but he certainly works out.

 

[PKT_VOL]

The key difference is thinking versus knowing. If I thought a third party vote could make a difference I would gladly offer it up, but the numbers just don't support it happening this election. Ross Perot had the best opportunity to make an impact, and unfortunately he was the wrong candidate at the right time... imo. Hopefully a Libertarian or other moderate 3P candidate gets that opportunity again in the not too distant future.

If your really in Atlanta like it says you are, then your single vote statically does not matter. I am also a voter of Atlanta. Romney is going to win Georgia either way. Why not vote the way you want to?

 

[PKT_VOL]

and therein lies the rub- they need support to be included in the conversation but many won't support someone not in the lead.

Yep. Vicious circle, isn't it?

 

[Billy Costigan]

All the liberals are jealous of what a good speech he made and it's so obvious on Facebook.

 

[dhendri]

Agreed. Was shocked the GOP would push for such a divisive measure when the idea of the convention should be getting everyone to rally together. I suppose they just figured requiring allegiance would be easier than earning it.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Humbly - what I think the Libertarian cause is missing is that they've already shaped the agenda. Look at the message tonight - no social agenda; no abortion mention; limited foreign intervention; big focus on individual freedom, on self reliance, on limited government, etc. You may not believe these guys will follow through but at least they are singing your song (if only a verse or two).

If you are waiting for someone to only say exactly what you want you will be waiting a long, long time.

This is the key sentence. If I actually believed what they said, I could vote for Romney even though I am not on board with them socially given the horrible shape of our economy and deficit spending.

The fact that I go on their records and not what they say keeps me from taking them seriously, let alone voting for them.

 

[dhendri]

Absolutely shocked FOX has higher ratings for the RNC than other stations. Who saw that coming?

 

[volinbham]

This is the key sentence. If I actually believed what they said, I could vote for Romney even though I am not on board with them socially given the horrible shape of our economy and deficit spending.

The fact that I go on their records and not what they say keeps me from taking them seriously, let alone voting for them.

Do GJ's and RP's record stand up to the 100% purity test?

Didn't RP take earmarks for his constituency? Did GJ take Fed monies that he said he'd not be in support of?

Not trying to change your mind but just wondering what you have to go on with RP and GJ other than their words about what they would do.

 

[volinbham]

Don't know bout p90x but he certainly works out.

oh yes he's looking tight.

 

[Billy Costigan]

oh yes he's looking tight.

Agreed but his arms are not all that impressive. Still will prob vote for him though.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Do GJ's and RP's record stand up to the 100% purity test?

Didn't RP take earmarks for his constituency? Did GJ take Fed monies that he said he'd not be in support of?

Not trying to change your mind but just wondering what you have to go on with RP and GJ other than their words about what they would do.

Valid points. I would say that Ron Paul has had the most consistent voting of any long-term congressman between his rhetoric and his actual voting. Of course that isn't going to be perfect. I don't expect anybody to be perfect. Your right about him excepting earmarks for his constituency. I am not a fan. Other Libertarians would say the was doing the best thing for his constituency.

To me it is a matter of trust. As with any candidate. Do I trust you? Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, yes.

Mitt Romney? That is not even a serious question. He has flip-flopped on pretty much everything.

Paul Ryan? I have grips with him. To be honest though, the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back, was that he supported and voted for a completely unfunded Medicare part D.

 

[PKT_VOL]

BC=OE imo

 

[volinbham]

Agreed but his arms are not all that impressive. Still will prob vote for him though.

but those abs - oh my; the abs of a VP fo sho.

 

[Billy Costigan]

but those abs - oh my; the abs of a VP fo sho.

ok now you're starting to get a little gheyish. :gone:

 

[MG1968]

Absolutely shocked FOX has higher ratings for the RNC than other stations. Who saw that coming?

FNC will get higher ratings for the DNC convention as well. You won't see FNC completely ignore people of color giving speeches like MSNBC did.

 

[myrobbins7]

Do GJ's and RP's record stand up to the 100% purity test?

Didn't RP take earmarks for his constituency? Did GJ take Fed monies that he said he'd not be in support of?

Not trying to change your mind but just wondering what you have to go on with RP and GJ other than their words about what they would do.

I would take RP and GJ voting record over Mitt R. and Ryan's voting record all day everyday, but these days it seems nobody wants to look at voting records, they just want feel good speeches. We will pay a price for that one day.

 

[lawgator1]

FNC will get higher ratings for the DNC convention as well. You won't see FNC completely ignore people of color giving speeches like MSNBC did.

Agree on both points.

Fox will have more viewership because a) their chicks are generally hot and b) GOPers hate the DNC so much they like to watch the negative coverage on it. They enjoy being driven into their frenzy. It's a sick high, rooting so hard for someone to fail. But that is how bad it has gotten.

And I think Fox will emphasize the minority speakers because that is the narrative they have promoted and exploited for years now: the Dems are largely black and want to take your money and use government to redistribute it to themselves.

Fox is the last public refuge for the white male, afraid of the changes in our demographics and the fact that minority status is around the corner, both in terms if numbers and, in time, political power.

 

[MG1968]

Agree on both points.

Fox will have more viewership because a) their chicks are generally hot and b) GOPers hate the DNC so much they like to watch the negative coverage on it. They enjoy being driven into their frenzy. It's a sick high, rooting so hard for someone to fail. But that is how bad it has gotten.

And I think Fox will emphasize the minority speakers because that is the narrative they have promoted and exploited for years now: the Dems are largely black and want to take your money and use government to redistribute it to themselves.

Fox is the last public refuge for the white male, afraid of the changes in our demographics and the fact that minority status is around the corner, both in terms if numbers and, in time, political power.

and there you go again, seeing racism where none exists

 

[lawgator1]

and there you go again, seeing racism where none exists

Lulz.

Please.

 

[MG1968]

Lulz.

Please.

I forgot, the charge of racism is your own personal version of Godwin's Law. You know how ridiculous it is to compare anybody to Hitler and the Nazis, so you resort to the next best/worst thing, calling anybody to the right of you a "racist".

 

[bamawriter]

Agree on both points.

Fox will have more viewership because a) their chicks are generally hot and b) GOPers hate the DNC so much they like to watch the negative coverage on it. They enjoy being driven into their frenzy. It's a sick high, rooting so hard for someone to fail. But that is how bad it has gotten.

And I think Fox will emphasize the minority speakers because that is the narrative they have promoted and exploited for years now: the Dems are largely black and want to take your money and use government to redistribute it to themselves.

Fox is the last public refuge for the white male, afraid of the changes in our demographics and the fact that minority status is around the corner, both in terms if numbers and, in time, political power.

So, was it "racist" for MSNBC to cut away from every speaker of color at the RNC?

 

[BeecherVol]

Agree on both points.

Fox will have more viewership because a) their chicks are generally hot and b) GOPers hate the DNC so much they like to watch the negative coverage on it. They enjoy being driven into their frenzy. It's a sick high, rooting so hard for someone to fail. But that is how bad it has gotten.

Explaining how someone has failed and will continue fail is not the same as rooting for it. But if it makes you feel better by all means go ahead. Everybody else can see around it.

And I think Fox will emphasize the minority speakers because that is the narrative they have promoted and exploited for years now: the Dems are largely black and want to take your money and use government to redistribute it to themselves.

Why give the enemy (the black community) the stage? Shouldn't they be back in chains by now?

Fox is the last public refuge for the white male, afraid of the changes in our demographics and the fact that minority status is around the corner, both in terms if numbers and, in time, political power.

Yeah, Im sure thats what is driving the racism that you and Al Sharpton have found. Maybe someone else will jump on board at some point so ya'll don't get lonely

 

[utvolpj]

Fox is the last public refuge for the white male, afraid of the changes in our demographics and the fact that minority status is around the corner, both in terms if numbers and, in time, political power.

once that happens will we qualify for affirmative action? I also wonder if anyone has figured out the tax ramifications once white males are considered a minority hire

 

[n_huffhines]

Cool tribute. "Lobbyists don't even visit his office" - Rand Paul

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mARH32VvBRM&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

 

[theFallGuy]

I wonder if the paper will run these types of headlines after Obama's speech at the DNC?