• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Romney Picks Paul Ryan as VP

ArlingtonDeac said:
Most people find Obama's backstory fairly impressive, and the man himself even more so. You hate him. I get that. But stop acting like the president was a do-nothing prior to winning the office.
Click to expand...

What backstory? You have to be kidding me. We know less about this guy than Keyser Soze...
 
He wrote two books about himself and his personal philosophy. He's been in the news every day for 5 years. If you don't know his backstory, that's on you.
 
PhDeac said:
He wrote two books about himself and his personal philosophy. He's been in the news every day for 5 years. If you don't know his backstory, that's on you.
Click to expand...

I liked the part about the imaginary, composite girlfried the best. Kidding, I never read his fiction. Believe what you want to believe.
 
PhDeac said:
He wrote two books about himself and his personal philosophy. He's been in the news every day for 5 years. If you don't know his backstory, that's on you.
Click to expand...

Which is really weird. I mean, who has two books like this without having done anything?
But I'll give him credit--it, along with a few other things, made him into the figurehead of the cult of personality.
 
DirkTheDeac said:
I liked the part about the imaginary, composite girlfried the best. Kidding, I never read his fiction. Believe what you want to believe.
Click to expand...

I look forward to the list of hoes in your bio.
 
Shooshmoo said:
No. The story is not true. The guy either was not "as liberal as you can be" or he did not say what you claim he said to your surgeon friend. Either way, the story is not true. And the last sentence was absolutely necessary.
Click to expand...

wondering why all the animosity Shooshmoo. what's up w/all that
 
ArlingtonDeac said:
Good lord, seriously? You think Romney is going to make a 8 point move in the popular vote over the next 70 days? You think he can win by 6 freaking percentage points? No offense, but that's crazy. I'm not saying Romney can't win, but he's a clear and consistent trailer right now. He not winning anything but an absolute, up-til-4am squeaker. What makes you think candidate Mitt Romney will suddenly make what would likely be the largest late surge in a general election in the last 50 years? Obama would have to drown a puppy on live TV to lose that badly. Maybe not even then.
Click to expand...

I can see your points and understand that certainly Romney could lose 53-47 or 54-46 and it not be a shocker. But, I can also see Romney winning by the same margins, especially pre-convention. If this was October 1, of course it would be much more difficult. Obama has outspent Romney $325 mill to $165 mill, and yet hasn't put the election away by any means. I keep bringing up the enthusiasm gap because it is the determining factor in "base" elections, which this has turned into, in my opinion. I've been on both sides and saw the voter enthusiasm for Obama in 2008, and there is nowhere near that excitement for Obama now. That's just reality. The record black voter turnout just isn't going to be repeated. If Romney keeps the 53-45 edge among seniors nationwide, cuts into the Jewish and youth vote slightly, wins back a lot of the Reagan Democrats in the Midwest, it will be a long night for Dems. It's not a stretch by any means if you really study the demographics closely.
 
WakeandBake said:
Obama's electability and his connectability, and his ability to bring in votes for other Dem candidates, made him a better candidate.

You are entitled to argue that he was not the better man or better leader or better legislator or better American, but he was the better candidate as the results show.
Click to expand...

Obama was a much better candidate than McCain. A lot of who wins is who they are contrasted with, just like Wake's D vs. Liberty should look good (hopefully), but the same D against Clemson will look a lot different. Dole vs. Clinton was over when Republicans chose Dole.

So, fast forward to this election. One of the more interesting things is both candidates are articulate, reasonably intelligent, goodlooking, neither is short haha, and so we will see a very unusual election where the candidates contrast about equally to each other in those regards.
 
ArlingtonDeac said:
Most people find Obama's backstory fairly impressive, and the man himself even more so. You hate him. I get that. But stop acting like the president was a do-nothing prior to winning the office.
Click to expand...

First, no reason to get snippy. It's certainly a fair question, especially when you're contrasting him ("not even close") to a guy who did years getting tortured as a POW. Understatement-Guy says that McCain had a backstory of his own. Don't post down to your tag reputation.

Second, you have to concede that there IS a do-nothing case to be made. You may not want to hear it, but lashing out at me won't change the facts. Bush 43 was a two term governor of one the largest states in the country; Ditto for Reagan. Bush 41 might have been the most qualified person to ever run for President in your lifetime. Clinton was at least a Governor, even if it was over a scar of a State. It's been a long time since our Country elected a person as in experienced as the current President. Again, it's okay to say that his appeal and place in history is itself a reason to vote for him.
 
jhmd2000 said:
First, no reason to get snippy. It's certainly a fair question, especially when you're contrasting him ("not even close") to a guy who did years getting tortured as a POW. Understatement-Guy says that McCain had a backstory of his own. Don't post down to your tag reputation.

Second, you have to concede that there IS a do-nothing case to be made. You may not want to hear it, but lashing out at me won't change the facts. Bush 43 was a two term governor of one the largest states in the country; Ditto for Reagan. Bush 41 might have been the most qualified person to ever run for President in your lifetime. Clinton was at least a Governor, even if it was over a scar of a State. It's been a long time since our Country elected a person as in experienced as the current President. Again, it's okay to say that his appeal and place in history is itself a reason to vote for him.
Click to expand...

Who cares? He's the President. He's your President. Deal with it.

I will add that evidently experience matters little. Bush 43.
 
jhmd2000 said:
First, no reason to get snippy. It's certainly a fair question, especially when you're contrasting him ("not even close") to a guy who did years getting tortured as a POW. Understatement-Guy says that McCain had a backstory of his own. Don't post down to your tag reputation.

Second, you have to concede that there IS a do-nothing case to be made. You may not want to hear it, but lashing out at me won't change the facts. Bush 43 was a two term governor of one the largest states in the country; Ditto for Reagan. Bush 41 might have been the most qualified person to ever run for President in your lifetime. Clinton was at least a Governor, even if it was over a scar of a State. It's been a long time since our Country elected a person as in experienced as the current President. Again, it's okay to say that his appeal and place in history is itself a reason to vote for him.
Click to expand...

My "tag reputation"? That's hilarious. You should trademark that weird sentiment. "Don't be the insults that anonymous people -- and perhaps me -- post in hiding about you." Got it. I'll worry about that one.

Being a POW, while certainly to be respected, is not a qualification for the presidency. And I never said McCain didn't have a backstory, I said Obama has a pretty impressive one, too. Regardless, taking in all factors, McCain was quite clearly the second best man for the job in a two man race. Which is why he got soundly beaten. Sometimes talent is spotted earlier rather than later. Obama is an example of that.

Did you really feel that John McCain would have made a good president? In 2008? He was a mess, all campaign.
 
ArlingtonDeac said:
My "tag reputation"? That's hilarious. You should trademark that weird sentiment. "Don't be the insults that anonymous people -- and perhaps me -- post in hiding about you." Got it. I'll worry about that one.

Being a POW, while certainly to be respected, is not a qualification for the presidency. And I never said McCain didn't have a backstory, I said Obama has a pretty impressive one, too. Regardless, taking in all factors, McCain was quite clearly the second best man for the job in a two man race. Which is why he got soundly beaten. Sometimes talent is spotted earlier rather than later. Obama is an example of that.

Did you really feel that John McCain would have made a good president? In 2008? He was a mess, all campaign.
Click to expand...

I asked you what made Obama qualified to be President (I didn't seriously think you could support the "not even close aspect"; I was curious what specific thing you could point to that you like about the Emperor's New Clothes, since I suspect many voters (not just you) got sucked into the vortez of audacious hype/hope.). You said 2008 McCain was crazy and O had a nice backstory. Neither of those things is an affirmative qualification for Obama*. If the best we've got is an amorphous reference to early onset "talent", that's fine as long as we both acknowledge that only means "I agreed with his ideas, and wait for it...



...he's suddenly the supremely qualified candidate in the race! Why, he agrees with me! He's a savant! Hoo-ray!"

The truth, as I see it, is that President Obama has done so fine things internationally (and exceeded my low expectations in that regard), but he fails to pass even his own test domestically, to wit:



* Pay attention to this acclimation-by-default effect, since we're seeing part deux now. Let's assume the millions Romney paid in taxes in 2007 doesn't meet the subjective standards of the people who claim to be voting against him b/c he doesn't pay his "fair share" (many of whose lifetime aggregated tax contributions will fail to match what he paid in any single quarterly estimate for any arbitrarily selected quarter in any arbitrarily selected year during the so-called offensive period). Let's just induldge that talking point as if it isn't caricatured exaggeration...that "fact/opinion" doesn't mean that President Obama deserves a second term logically any more than it proves Ron Artest deserves a first. The President deserves---or not---a second term if his record supports it. I think many people willing to look at his first term on its merits see that he has failed to deliver his own worst case scenario for unemployment on the ill-fated stimulus misadventures (and the naieve, bravado that went with them), crammed through the square peg of health care reform into the round hole of public skeptism (single-handedly costing his party control of the legislature, which he now blames for everything he can't tack back to Bush) and ultimately can see that two summers in the wake of the so-called "Summer of Recovery", he still doesn't have the confidence of the business community. Damnit, the more I think about the madder it makes me: why didn't you guys just pick Hillary when you had the chance? No way she would have gotten outsmarted by the likes of Boehner and McConnell.

P.S.S. And to answer your specific question, NO, I do not think the Barack Obama was the most qualified person to run for President in 2008; I don't even think he was the second most qualified person. Then again, I don't agree with his policies so perhaps some of his qualifications are lost on me.
 
Last edited:
Every candidate gets a bump when they pick their vp. It lasts for a few weeks. I am a dem who likes Ryan. I know he is an ayn rand republican and his budget would be a huge suck but he's sincere and all that

That said he willhave to answer to quite a number of his votes during a debate or two and it will show he's a career politician. Nothing wrong with that but I think seniors will run from him

He's positioned himself nicely for 2016 though. Hope Christie wrestles the party from him. Regardless reps have some stars in the house. Dems have dimmer bulbs in the closet right now

Republicans have probably been all in netanyahu's shit the last two weeks. Do not bomb Iran until after the election or Romney Ryan look extraordinarily weak on national security
 
jaybone said:
Every candidate gets a bump when they pick their vp. It lasts for a few weeks. I am a dem who likes Ryan. I know he is an ayn rand republican and his budget would be a huge suck but he's sincere and all that

That said he willhave to answer to quite a number of his votes during a debate or two and it will show he's a career politician. Nothing wrong with that but I think seniors will run from him

He's positioned himself nicely for 2016 though. Hope Christie wrestles the party from him. Regardless reps have some stars in the house. Dems have dimmer bulbs in the closet right now

Republicans have probably been all in netanyahu's shit the last two weeks. Do not bomb Iran until after the election or Romney Ryan look extraordinarily weak on national security
Click to expand...

So many innane things in this post I wouldn't know where to begin.
 
jaybone said:
Every candidate gets a bump when they pick their vp. It lasts for a few weeks. I am a dem who likes Ryan. I know he is an ayn rand republican and his budget would be a huge suck but he's sincere and all that

That said he willhave to answer to quite a number of his votes during a debate or two and it will show he's a career politician. Nothing wrong with that but I think seniors will run from him

He's positioned himself nicely for 2016 though. Hope Christie wrestles the party from him. Regardless reps have some stars in the house. Dems have dimmer bulbs in the closet right now

Republicans have probably been all in netanyahu's shit the last two weeks. Do not bomb Iran until after the election or Romney Ryan look extraordinarily weak on national security
Click to expand...

Can't see Ryan moving up enough weight classes for this to happen.
 
8% body fat v. 60% body fat. Christie has more body fat in his ears than Ryan has over his whole body.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top