Previous 21 - 30 Next
The public does not "loathe" a shutdown. Where do these writers get these stupid notions. If they "loathed" it then they would not have given the GOP the Senate. The GOP as a party, has low numbers because it's base can't stand the House and GOP leadership, period. McDonnell and Boehner won't accept this so they project.
tspears, how many ways does it have to be explained? Reagan never lost a general election. Romney did. To put it in your vernacular, the entire country dumped Romney once he got the nomination. Big difference.
I erred in my summary, JQ Adams and Harrison were the only presidents to come back from an uncontested loss.
You're dishonestly comparing apples to oranges. Neither Reagan nor GHWB ever lost a general election. So there's no point in trying to use them as an example. In fact, if you want to try to make your point you'd have to go back to the Nixon/Kennedy contest in 1960 to find a losing general election candidate who came back to later win the presidency. And of course, in Nixon's case, Kennedy arguable stole that election and Nixon decided not to contest it. Even so, he still had to wait until after LBJ to win the office. Prior to Nixon, only 3 candidates who lost their first general ever came back to win the presidency: John Q Adams lost to James Monroe (1820) Andrew Jackson lost in a contested race to John Q Adams (1824) William Henry Harrison lost to Van Buren (1836) If you set aside Nixon and Jackson's general election losses due to potential funny business where one could argue that both actually won, that only leaves Jackson and Harrison who have ever come back from an uncontested loss to win the presidency. So yes, it is possible to lose the general and then later win the presidency, but by my reckoning, only two men have ever done it outright and none in the modern era. Romney does not have the gravitas to come back and win the presidency after his embarrassing loss in 2012. And I say embarrassing because like McCain before him, in retrospect, it looks like he purposefully threw the election. Either that or he proved he is unable to seriously fight for a win. What makes you think he would fight this time?
In response to:

America, You’ve Been Grubered!

Beeblebrox Wrote: Nov 24, 2014 7:58 AM
Absolutely correct. Unfortunately, even though Republicans hold a majority of state houses, there are spineless Republicans there too.
The House may be able to impeach but the Senate won't convict. Instead, they should shut Obama down. This nomination process is a good one and of course, defunding Obama's regime would be the obvious solution.
The two big parties do nothing to stop you from voting for a third party. If even 30% of the electorate voted Libertarian, IT would be one of the big parties. The issue is that you can't have any more than 2 teams on the field. That's the way most games work. If you want a replacement, you either have to take over one of the parties or start a new one with some power. The Libertarian party doesn't have the gravitas to command the voter base it needs. The base of the GOP is in the best position to take over that party. Join us in doing that.
I think that Obama was swept into office the first time by a combo of low info and low IQ voters. A fair number of the low info voters have since educated themselves leaving a predominance of the room temp IQ types behind to continue wreaking havoc. Nevertheless, the real problem now is that the GOP is not reaching out ON THE ISSUES of border and national security where most Americans are. All surveys show that on these two issues plus Obamacare, the vast majority are against the Dems. If this keeps going the way it Has been with the GOPe enabling the evil behavior of Obama and his comrads, then the Republican Party will go the way of the Whigs. All it will take is for a few major conservative media and political leaders to bolt the GOP one day, and it will be over for Boehner, Mcconnell, and Rove.
Yes, there may be a few Obama drones who no longer believe his lies but 35% of the public still think the guy is okay. That means that despite the worst performance by any US president in history, Obama still holds onto his core of low IQ supporters. I used to think that eventually the drones would start moving in the direction of their own self interest and abandon Obama in favor of someone who would at least protect them from war, disease, and terrorist acts. But no, the average Obama supporter has less sense than a dog who refuses to get in out of the rain.
It's not "legal" if it violates the Constitution. The 1st amendment is the supreme law of the land. Meanwhile, people in over a dozen states directly voted by an overwhelming majority to establish traditional marriage as the only way to be married. But those laws were overturned by activist Leftist judges in contravention of the Constitution.
In response to:

Poll: 42% Expressing Buyer's Remorse?

Beeblebrox Wrote: Sep 26, 2014 5:53 PM
Lack of executive experience is not what makes Obama terrible. If he had some he'drobably be even worse. PRINCIPLES first, exec experience second. Cruz has more consevative principles in his left pinky finger than Romney will ever have in his whole "severe" consevative body.
Previous 21 - 30 Next