Thread: Isn't Looking Good For Romney

Originally Posted by Peter Dow

Something big like Romney asking Condoleezza Rice to run on his ticket for VP and something really big like Condi changing her mind about wanting to run for office.

The June polls show Romney catching Obama, narrowing Obama's lead, as compared to the April polls I quote below.

Romney Rice 2012

Condi - "ideal running mate for Mitt Romney"



Romney Rice 2012. Condi - "ideal running mate for Mitt Romney" (YouTube)

June 26, 2012. Condoleezza Rice is interviewed for CBS's "This Morning" by Erica Hill and Charlie Rose days after giving a well-received speech at Mitt Romney's weekend donors' meeting in Utah.

The CBS video is embedded in a background suggesting a possible "Romney - Rice 2012" Republican ticket for the United States Presidential elections and in support of that idea, the results of April 2012 polls indicating the percentage of U.S. voters with a favorable opinion of

Condoleezza Rice - 66%
Barack Obama - 54%
Mitt Romney - 40%

This is a link to the CBS report of the interview

Condi - "the right person for the #2 place on the ticket"



Romney Rice 2012. Condi - "the right person for the #2 place on the ticket" (YouTube)

June 26, 2012. Condoleezza Rice is interviewed by Greta Van Susteren for 'ON THE RECORD' on the Fox News Channel.




Condi is the right person for the number two place on the ticket.


What do I think? I think Romney - Rice would beat Obama - Biden.

The best tactical counter attack to Romney picking Rice would be for the Democrats to respond with Obama - Clinton, dropping Joe for Hillary.

Well Opray Winfrey is very popular as well and might do very well for a Democrat VP but I don't think she is interested in running for office.

Any ticket wth two blacks on it would be destroyed. There will be as many people voting against oboobma because of his race as voted for him because of it last time. People have learned you cannot send a boy to do a man's job.

Originally Posted by stretch351c

These polls don't reflect the result of the USSC decision on Obamacare yet either. The Dems losses in 2010 were a direct result of the passage of the law. Now that the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of those who support it. this election could make 2010 look like a small time setback.

My sense of the "Mood" of the country is that 2012 is even more Any-One-But-Obama/Liberals than 2010, and look at how 2010 turned out;

Surprize! Surprize! Surprize!...

There was allot more "Racist" TEA Party "Bubbas" out there than the Polls showed.

Hey Liberal Press, Can you say ineffective "Push-Polls"..... that's raaaight! I knew you could....

Originally Posted by big daryle

Any ticket wth two blacks on it would be destroyed. There will be as many people voting against oboobma because of his race as voted for him because of it last time. People have learned you cannot send a boy to do a man's job.

The presidency is not a "Man's" Job, it is a very important and demanding job.

I don't care about her paint-job or her plumbing, I'd vote for a Condi-Romney ticket in a heart beat.

(Yes, I mean Condi for President, Romney as VP, but the other way around works too)

Originally Posted by big daryle

Any ticket wth two blacks on it would be destroyed.

Obama, a president seeking re-election, cannot destroy his own ticket by being "black". He's no "blacker" running for re-election than he was running the first time.

Only if Obama had performed so poorly in his first term so as to cause his unpopularity could he destroy his own ticket. Obama is leading the polls against Romney now so forget any idea that Obama on his own ticket can destroy it.

I am not suggesting that Obama go out and pick some random "black" for his VP but that picking Oprah Winfrey would be a very strong move to recover from the hit Obama-Biden will take if Romney picks Rice.

People won't be put off voting for an Obama-Winfrey ticket by Oprah's colour any more than they would be put off watching her TV show by her colour.

Both Oprah Winfrey and Hillary Clinton are well-known and popular American women. Unlike the relatively unknown Sarah Palin whose sole claim to American fame outside Alaska was McCain picking her for his 2008 ticket, both Oprah's and Hillary's popularity with Americans is long established and won't change any during the campaign.

Palin was defined by the 2008 campaign. Clinton and Winfrey are already defined in Americans' minds and 2012 won't change Americans' perceptions of those two.

So either Obama - Clinton or Obama - Winfrey are very strong tickets and could even beat Romney - Rice on popularity if not on competence so I would still be supporting Condi because the world really needs Condi in office again.

But the Democrats don't need to run their best ticket unless they need to - why embarrass Joe Biden if Obama - Biden can beat a Romney - Other-boring-guy ticket?

Lets keep this simple how many voters fall between 0 to 400% of the Federal poverty line, in short earning up to $43,000 for a single person and $86,000 for a family of four (more or less on the income). They directly benefit from Obamacare and in many states are a large proportion of the population if they can get to these people they gain and the tax penalty is not a big deal who do you think they might lean voting for?

And in the case of those in the upper end the premiums are tax deductible expenses so the higher costs are muted by that. For the ones in the bottom half insurance is cheaper and if under 100% of the poverty line or less really cheap.

As for paying for that why should such voters care or if higher income people pay more taxes and such if they get subsidized health care.

They have five months to go voters forget easily and may learn more about the law and I pointed out for many it is a major benefit and these people can vote.

Originally Posted by tkolter

Lets keep this simple how many voters fall between 0 to 400% of the Federal poverty line, in short earning up to $43,000 for a single person and $86,000 for a family of four (more or less on the income). They directly benefit from Obamacare and in many states are a large proportion of the population if they can get to these people they gain and the tax penalty is not a big deal who do you think they might lean voting for?

And in the case of those in the upper end the premiums are tax deductible expenses so the higher costs are muted by that. For the ones in the bottom half insurance is cheaper and if under 100% of the poverty line or less really cheap.

As for paying for that why should such voters care or if higher income people pay more taxes and such if they get subsidized health care.

They have five months to go voters forget easily and may learn more about the law and I pointed out for many it is a major benefit and these people can vote.

The ObamaCare bill isn't about providing health care.

It is a Health INSURANCE bill with a huge portion of the legislation dedicated to a federal government take-over of the Higher Education Financing options available to our citizenry, and then applying Radical Racial Preferences to those options.

No amount of subsidized health insurance will make up for the Bills completely un-constitutional Institutionalized Racism.

The ObamaCare bill and those who created need to go, the sooner the better.

You want this tool bag instead? -

Originally Posted by Kurmugeon

The ObamaCare bill isn't about providing health care.

It is a Health INSURANCE bill with a huge portion of the legislation dedicated to a federal government take-over of the Higher Education Financing options available to our citizenry, and then applying Radical Racial Preferences to those options.

No amount of subsidized health insurance will make up for the Bills completely un-constitutional Institutionalized Racism.

The ObamaCare bill and those who created need to go, the sooner the better.

Seriously what racism the income range includes all races and many income levels the very poor to the middle class what would have been blue collar America in the 50's. And is about health care delivery that is insurance and that shorting up the economics for the delivery side with much of the bill dedicated to cost savings and funding.

When I see this its an attack on lower income people and the working people who need help getting medical insurance coverage by the Republicans when much of the laws concepts come out of the conservatives ideas, in fact its Romney's medical system its based on.

You think I care about anything but getting medical care covered cheap in my case and others who will benefit likely don't care we all vote in OUR best interests now and no one else will care about those of low income why the hell should I care if the other people pay more taxes to do this?

You know if Obama gets in or the Senate holds its current number of Democrats or adds more seats its over, this matter will be decided once and for all. Again all they have to do is make this about health care for those in a broad income range and make sure its going to be beneficial and its a going to get votes.

Originally Posted by stretch351c

These polls don't reflect the result of the USSC decision on Obamacare yet either. The Dems losses in 2010 were a direct result of the passage of the law. Now that the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of those who support it. this election could make 2010 look like a small time setback.

You don't get it, do you?

The law, before it started being implemented was not popular with a lot of people. Over the last two years, MANY people have started to enjoy the early benefits of that law, and every month that goes by, new benefits are being experienced by MANY.

Already, the "in favor or repeal" is barely more than against repeal.

And, if you ask the specific questions about the benefits that are already in place, or those coming up soon, the MAJORITY of people want to keep those benefits.

The "horror stories" that the Right propaganda machine spread prior and just after the passing of the law have not happened, and on the contrary, people are enjoying several of the early benefits brought by the law, including MANY seniors who really enjoy paying less for their medications and seeing the "donut hole" shrink!

I think as time goes by, the number of people disagreeing with the affordable health care bill is shrinking. . .I believe that the time to repeal it has gone by. . .and for Romney (of all people, since he was the precursor of such a law in Massachusetts) to run on "repealing Obamacare" is a ridiculous and false statement that will go no where. . .but will satisfy ONLY the people who would never vote for Obama anyway. . .so it is just preaching to the choir. . .but not bringing in more Republicans (and certainly not more Democrats or Independents) to the polls to vote for Romney!

Originally Posted by tkolter

Seriously what racism the income range includes all races and many income levels the very poor to the middle class what would have been blue collar America in the 50's. And is about health care delivery that is insurance and that shorting up the economics for the delivery side with much of the bill dedicated to cost savings and funding.

When I see this its an attack on lower income people and the working people who need help getting medical insurance coverage by the Republicans when much of the laws concepts come out of the conservatives ideas, in fact its Romney's medical system its based on.

...

The ObamaCare bill contains 25+ separate provisions for Racial Preferences, particularly as affecting how Higher Education Instituions get funding, and restricting funding to any that do not meet Racial Preference Objectives (TBD) to be later determined by appointed, not elected (TBD) officals.

Go...

Read...

The...

BILL!